Good news from Washington and Oregon, not-so-good news from New York and Florida, and more subsidies for automobile use, both explicit and disguised.
Good news: The Canadian customs agency has cleared the way for the long-awaited second daily Amtrak round-trip from Seattle to Vancouver, a route with high ridership potential.
Bad news: Due to New York State’s severe budget shortfall, Amtrak’s Adirondack, one of the most scenic routes in the US, may be in jeopardy. Despite Amtrak’s stated interest in maintaining the service, the state (which provides $5 million each year for its operation) has only guaranteed enough funds to operate the train until Sept. 30 of this year. The Adirondack represents a crucial link in the national system, connecting one of Canada’s largest cities to Albany and New York City, and by connection, to Boston, Chicago, Washington and other points. It also shows a great potential for higher ridership with modest trip-time improvements. If you live in New York State, be sure that your legislators and Governor Paterson’s office know that keeping the Adirondack running is a priority, even with limited resources.
Vermont journalist Caroline Abels would like to take the train from Vermont to Florida, but the schedules don’t quite work for her, a sad condition experienced by even the staunchest rail advocates. But she remains hopeful: “Vice President Joe Biden, who used to commute ... on Amtrak, could be a real advocate for trains in Congress. But so must we.” She calls on readers to become activists and organize for expanded service, which is precisely NARP’s raison d’etre.
The United States isn’t the first country to offer its residents incentives to trade in older cars for new ones. European and Asian predecessors to our “cash-for-clunkers” program have given a significant boost to car markets (French new-car registrations went up by 7.1% in June), and many are pushing their respective governments to continue the incentive. Meanwhile, the US car scrappage plans amounts to a very generous subsidy to automakers (and, by extension, to car travel) with very little impact on overall fuel economy and emissions, given that an improvement of as little as 2 miles per gallon qualifies a consumer for $3,500 in taxpayer money. At least some of the other countries with such schemes are balancing them with significant outlays for alternatives to the automobile.
Another, largely-unreported, auto-related general-taxpayer subsidy looms, according to “independent pension consultant” John Ralfe. GM’s restructuring has left in place pension plans for both hourly workers and salaried employees. Thus, the “new [GM] is still liable to fund the huge pension deficit, so its pension problems will continue,” Ralfe writes in the Financial Times. “As long as GM’s pension plans continue, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) remains on the hook to insure them.” He calls GM’s government-backed pension plans “a hidden transfer of $3.5 billion a year from the federal government, backing the PBGC, to GM’s 670,000 plan members.”
While we mourn the loss of the monorail engineer who died on Sunday, it’s a good time to think about what it means that the Walt Disney World monorail is the ninth most-used “rapid transit system” in the country and how experience with it shapes people’s expectations about public transportation.
LCL: Transportation for America (and NARP) applaud the completion of the first rail transit vehicle in decades to be assembled in the US by an American-owned company and hope that the continued growth of rail and transit networks keeps generating American jobs; British Prime Minister Gordon Brown makes electrifying rail lines a key point in his green initiative; the sale of Amtrak’s 30-year-old Turboliners is symbolic of the company’s handicapped condition; and as Amtrak moves towards paperless ticketing, a reminder to be careful with your tickets.
Anticipating an NPR series on high-speed rail, getting a beat on state applications for stimulus funds, countering Robert Samuelson’s flimsy anti-rail case, and more in this week’s roundup of revelations and ruminations along the line.
All Things Considered, National Public Radio’s evening newsmagazine, has begun a multi-part series on high-speed rail with a report this evening. You can find out when and where to listen in your area here.
For those following the spending of the Recovery Act’s $8 billion for passenger rail upgrades, now is when the wheels begin to hit the steel. States are starting to make known the nitty-gritty of their applications, among them Pennsylvania, Virginia and Oklahoma. See Friday’s Hotline for a more complete listing.
The St. Louis Urban Workshop does a spectacular rewrite of Robert J. Samuelson’s recent train-bashing Washington Postcolumn, turning his argument into a case against runaway highway spending. See also Paul Krugman’s pithy rebuke of Samuelson’s misconceived notion of US population density, and Ryan Avent’s critique.
While almost every state is facing a budget shortfall, Transportation for America’s nifty state fact sheets show that some are handling it better than others. Another revelation: there is high demand for expanded public transportation and for transit-accessible homes in nearly every state.
Secretary LaHood tours eastern Pennsylvania by rail, stopping in Elizabethtown to commemorate the stimulus-funded rehabilitation of the town’s Amtrak station. While certainly needed, the project was far from a major buildout, giving the station such necessities as an adequate platform, parking, and restrooms. That a station along such a well-traveled corridor was wanting such basics speaks to the subpar condition of funding for our passenger rail system.
A feature report (via YouTube) on CBS’s Sunday Morning casts US high-speed rail in a positive light, though it neglects to present the best arguments in its favor. Among the final points made is the illusory and beside-the-point claim that high-speed lines will be profitable, as opposed to “heavily-subsidized” Amtrak. Yet we seem to accept that the federally-subsidized airlines can’t make money.
Worth a read (or a listen): Trains for America sits down with Midwest High Speed Rail Association Executive Director (and NARP Council member) Rick Harnish to discuss the language he thinks rail advocates should be using. *** The Transport Politic recommends that the Federal Railroad Administration model the Federal Transit Administration’s “New Starts” funding mechanism for financing intercity rail improvements, so that money isn’t spent on projects that may not reach completion. *** A public radio interview with Smart Growth America CEO Geoff Anderson about why we need to fix our sights on rapid rail for the long haul. *** A new policy paper (summarized) envisions the creation of frequent interurban service to serve smaller communities and suburbs that would be bypassed by future high-speed and intercity passenger trains.
LCL: Georgia may miss out on federal funds already allocated for commuter rail from Atlanta to Griffin if there continues to be no sign of activity on its planning and construction. *** A Montgomery newspaper applauds Alabama’s initial overtures of interest in bringing back the Gulf Breeze, which connected Mobile, Montgomery and Birmingham until 1995. *** Studies of the effects of stimulus spending confirm that each job created on a road-building project comes at a higher price than each transit construction job. *** The politics behind Louisiana’s sudden about-face on requesting stimulus funds for a New Orleans-Baton Rouge link. *** When it comes to making smooth connections, Europeans are (not surprisingly) outdoing us. *** We can dream, can’t we? A fictional press release in 2051 from the Association of High-Speed American Railroads.
The auto subsidies roll on: GMAC, the financing arm of General Motors, is likely to get a $5.6 billion new capital injection from the US Treasury “in the form of preferred equity,” according to two unnamed sources. [Financial Times]
Columnist Dan Walters offers up reasons for his skepticism towards the viability of California’s planned new high-speed rail corridor. He shortsightedly limits his estimate of the line’s economic benefits to the direct construction and operation jobs created. The indirect boosts to the economies of the cities served by the route—as they are literally brought closer together—would be far greater than its direct impact on employment. The CAHSR Blog has a point-by-point rebuttal. Meanwhile, CAHSR’s list of backers is growing by the day.
Travel writer Rob Lovitt heralds recent expansions to the Amtrak network—including the Northeast Regional extension to Lynchburg and the addition of a Portland-Vancouver Cascades round trip—and the railroad’s second-highest yearly ridership total in its history, as signs that trains’ popularity is growing.
The Gulf States are set to spend over $100 billion on rail projects in the coming years—no, we’re not talking about Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida (though we wish we were!).
CQ’s transportation reporter Colby Itkowitz contrasts political attitudes towards transportation in the US with those in Germany, where highways and inter-city rail receive equivalent funding because the country’s leaders recognize that transportation is a “major basis of prosperity and quality of life.” It is up to the majority of Americans who know this to be true to press as hard as we can to translate our vision into better public policy. [Streetsblog DC]
Amtrak’s study of returning service to the North Coast Hiawatha route is generating anticipation along the line, as reflected in articles in the Bismarck Tribune and the Missoulian.
LCL: An Amtrak service milestone reminds residents of Port Huron, Michigan, of the train’s importance to the area’s economy and quality of life. *** Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood issues an ultimatum to the Florida legislature, saying the state will lose federal funds for a “shovel-ready” commuter rail line if it doesn’t pitch in its share. *** My hometown newspaper strongly endorses North Carolina’s bid for Recovery Act high-speed rail funds, calling the expansion of passenger rail capacity “a critical infrastructure investment.” *** The Idaho Statesmanexplains local rail advocates’ concerns—echoed by NARP and Sen. Michael Crapo (R-ID)—with Amtrak’s Pioneer restoration report. *** A slice of life at a typical stop on a long-distance train.
The Pew Charitable Trusts’ Subsidyscope project—which put out an misleading look at Amtrak’s finances a month ago [top story]—last week unveiled a report we can add to the volumes of literature that debunk the myth that U.S. roads “pay for themselves.” Over the past 25 years, they found, the percentage of highway costs funded by means other than user fees (gas taxes and tolls) doubled. They point to two leading factors influencing this trend: the lack of a change in the gas tax since 1993 (combined with inflation) and the increased reliance on bonds to pay for new highways. Sadly, I doubt this report will gain as much media attention as its predecessor.
Along similar lines, the Texas DOT posits that, in order to pay the full cost of a 15-mile stretch of Interstate highway ($1 billion), the statewide gas tax would have to be $2.22 per gallon—not including the price of the gas itself. Yet that highway was built and is being maintained, with general US and Texas taxpayers paying the lion’s share. That same $1 billion could have paid for the construction of 333 miles of railroad track, according to California estimates.
Another example of the consequences of chronic underinvestment: The New York Postlearns that a number of Amtrak-owned bridges in New York City are “in crumbling condition,” scoring “poor” or worse in internal inspections. Ironically, an effort to fix recent, delay-causing problems with the swing bridge carrying Amtrak’s Empire Corridor trains over the Harlem River wound up closing the bridge from Tuesday night until about 1:00 pm on the day before Thanksgiving. The Wednesday morning trains to Montreal and Toronto were combined and detoured via the Hell Gate Bridge, while passengers on the other trains had to use Metro-North’s Grand Central service for part of their journeys.
Fortune magazine documents recent high-speed rail advancements on the other side of the Atlantic, including the extension of TGV service from Paris to Strasbourg—and how trains are beating airlines on certain segments.
Office buildings in the Washington, DC area are sitting largely empty—except in the city center. In a region with the second-worst traffic congestion in the nation, employers are locating in areas more easily reached by transit. Downtown Washington’s offices are 10% vacant, while fringe area workspaces are around 30% empty.
“We are on the verge of jumpstarting ... [a] game-changing endeavor,” Secretary LaHood remarked, referring to the Recovery Act grant announcements coming within the next few months. LaHood is also throwing his weight behind making subway and light-rail safety a responsibility of his Department.
Two more newspaper columnists join the call for a passenger rail renaissance: the Philadelphia Inquirer‘s Tom Belden, American Reporter correspondent Rudolph Holhut.
LCL: More high-speed rail rumblings from the Middle East. * * * Political leaders want to spend more money on transportation infrastructure—but there’s none to spend. * * * The Midwest High Speed Rail Association gets good vibes from Thanksgiving travel numbers, including a 6.7% decrease in the number of air travelers.
“They have never faced this situation before, and they really don’t know what to do next.” This was a reference to the Egyptian generals, in a Nov. 22 news report. But it applies increasingly to most political leaders (and program advocates) in the US and many other countries. For train advocates, the supercommittee’s predictable failure leads to two key questions:
What will it take to get President Obama to defend passenger trains over the next year?
In the context of burgeoning federal deficits, do we need to broaden our horizons and look at questionable government expenditures (direct, tax and otherwise) outside transportation?
The supercommittee failure can be attributable to many things, including:
The anti-tax-increase pledge that Grover Norquist had extracted from Republican committee members.
The fact that the consequences (across-the-board budget cuts a.k.a. sequestration) technically don’t occur until January, 2013, unlike with the debt ceiling issue last summer, leaving some with the feeling that this was “not a real deadline” and that “something could be done” before January, 2013.
The leaks that seemed to come out of every full-supercommittee meeting and which ultimately blew up quiet back-channel talks between top Boehner and Reid aides.
And…by some accounts the super committee was a success because the language creating it enabled Congress to avoid a catastrophic default on U.S. debt in August.
Under the debt-ceiling law, domestic discretionary spending will be cut about 9.3%. This cut technically takes effect in January, 2013. However, if a continuing resolution is in effect on January 1, 2013, and Amtrak (and other programs) are still funded at 2012 levels, the cuts could be more dramatic. That’s because funding over the balance of the fiscal year would be even less than a 9.3% cut so that funding for the full year would wind up reduced 9.3%.
David C. had an interesting piece last month on Greater Greater Washington [Funding Amtrak is more cost-effective than subsidizing roads] that analyzed the price of transportation, and concluded that only looking at direct government subsidies fails to ascertain the true costs incurred by different modes.
Using the relative government transportation budgets as a jumping off point, David C. compares the relative efficiency of the $1.6 billion spent on Amtrak (FY 2010) and the $96.4 billion spent on highways (FY 2007):
Amtrak’s federal grant, constituting just 0.05% of federal spending in 2010, is once again under attack. Its critics perennially point to the railroad’s 24¢ per passenger mile (ppm) government subsidy, compare it to the 2¢ ppm direct subsidy for driving, and call Amtrak a waste.
Comparing these direct subsidies, though, tells only part of the story. When indirect subsidies are considered, Amtrak’s total subsidy comes out to a little less than 44¢ ppm, but motoring’s subsidy rises up to almost 5645¢ ppm.
By “indirect subsidies”, David C. is referring to costs not directly covered by drivers, such as air pollution, traffic congestion, and a certain percentage of the cost of car accidents (anything not covered by driver’s insurance policy)—to name a few of many.
Now, “externalities” are difficult to build an argument around. Rather than a simple bullet point, we’re asking undecided readers to let us deconstruct their world view and replace it with something more complicated and difficult to understand. It’s an easy task for critics of Amtrak to say “taxpayers subsidize each train ticket on X route by Y dollars.” It’s much harder to explain why policy dictating that every department store have X square feet of dedicated parking per Y square foot of retail space is making their purchases Z more expensive. Or figure out the dollars and cents cost to increased instances of asthma found in children who live near highways—and are thus exposed to higher concentrations of vehicle exhaust.
Still, it’s important that smart transportation advocates continue to build that case. That’s why I was particularly interested in this map produced by the Guardian, showing road fatalities between 2001 and 2009. While it’s not, strictly speaking, a measure of indirect financial subsidy, it’s a powerful tool for showing external costs to overreliance on automobiles.
You may register to post comments in response to NARP-generated postings on the Blog. By registering you agree 1) that all comments will be relevant to the respective posting and 2) not to post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, or that violate any laws. We reserve the right to permanently block postings from any user who does not abide by the above terms. NARP reserves the right to remove, edit, or move any messages for any reason.
