Highway Trust Fund woes, models for industry nationalization, lessons from Europe, and more in this week’s roundup of rail-related reports and ruminations.
As worries mount that Highway Trust Fund, the main source of federal outlays for road and transit construction & maintenance, is on pace to run out of cash this summer, lawmakers are scrambling to find other ways to plug the hole, running into political obstacles at every turn. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood rejects the idea of increasing the gas tax, or introducing any new system of charging highway users (such as a vehicle miles traveled tax) during the recession. LaHood is concerned about the impact of such taxes on low-income populations, despite that some of the revenue can be used to give rebates to those most impacted.
Meanwhile, the Congressional Democratic leadership’s push for increased transit use and to reduce miles traveled by car (endorsed by NARP) has a key highway lobby worried. Balanced transportation advocates counter by pointing out that there isn’t, nor should there be, an either-or choice between improved roads and world-class rail and transit networks. Existing roads need to be kept in shape, but decisions about building new roads or adding lanes ought to be judged in the context of the greater public expense they necessitate in the long run, both in terms of maintenance and in terms of the impacts of increased congestion, pollution, sprawl, etc. Highway users should certainly be included in the discussion as we chart a future of improved mobility for all, but they shouldn’t expect to maintain their position in the center of the transportation universe.
From Burlington, Iowa’s daily newspaper, The Hawk Eye, comes a forceful pro-passenger rail op-ed. Mike Sweet writes, “At a minimum, the mere idea of exploring possibilities like fast, efficient and environmentally sound train travel is provoking what America badly needs—a lasting economic, political and intellectual renaissance.” That’s the kind of thinking NARP is working to encourage: thinking that generates an image of an America renewed by greater mobility at a low cost to the planet and our quality of life.
As Americans wonder what impending nationalization of banks and auto companies may mean for their future, some are pointing to Amtrak as an example of a once-private operation that has endured after major government intervention. While Congress’s historically poor treatment of Amtrak makes it an unlikely model for future nationalizations, it has resulted in the continued provision of an essential service upon which more and more Americans are depending, despite that it is not profitable (and should not be expected to be). The government-led reorganization of the freight railroads in the 1970s is also instructive, as it resulted in the return of the freight business to the private sector and to profitability. In that same vein, a New York Times piece warns of the pitfalls of privatizing transportation infrastructure.
The recession has slowed new car sales, following the pattern that most retail sectors are experiencing. While some expect sales to bounce back when the economy rebounds, many observers say the decline in auto sales could be a lasting trend as people rethink their lifestyles and transportation needs. Greater numbers of Americans are downsizing, moving closer to city centers, and trading multiple cars for shared rides and public transit. As we commented last week, shouldn’t the Administration pay attention to these shifts when debating further giveaways to auto companies? (Thanks to NARP Vice Chair Jim Churchill for the tip)
You’ve read our report on Secretary LaHood’s trip to Europe and his roundtable discussion with Vice President Biden and several governors and state DOT heads (Hotline #607); now you can get it straight from the horse’s mouth. On his blog, LaHood shares his reflections on riding France and Spain’s high-speed systems and enumerates the public benefits of rail and transit. Meanwhile, The Transport Politic questions Biden’s analogy of Obama’s HSR vision to Eisenhower’s jumpstarting the Interstate Highway System. Inaccurate as it may be, the comparison is still a useful rhetorical tool to describe the kind of commitment that is needed, if not the actual policy as it is. Remember, it’s only a down payment.
LCL: Michigan’s Governor talks of converting auto plants to makers of rail equipment (thanks to former NARP Communications Director Matt Melzer for the tip); our partners at Transportation for America gear up to push national Complete Streets legislation; a policy analyst says in order to promote economic development, government should invest in strategic transportation planning instead of subsidizing automakers; advocates push for experimental Amtrak route Chicago to Green Bay, Wis.; the Union of Concerned Scientists claims buses are the greenest travel mode, with trains being a close second (without factoring in rail’s unparalleled ability to foster condensed, walkable development around stations); the world’s largest public transportation organization convenes in Vienna to take advantage of the moment; the US editor at-large of a major British newspaper reflects [VIDEO] on the fact that the Beatles got to Washington from New York in 1964 faster than the Acela makes the same trip today (thanks to Michigan NARP member Dietrich Bergmann for the tip); and Disney is set to launch 6-month national train tour to promote a new 3D movie version of A Christmas Carol.
Today was the deadline for filing your income taxes. If you’ve ever wondered exactly where your money went, you’ll be interested in a new tool available online.
Where Did My Tax Dollars Go? helps you to get an exact breakdown of how your taxes are spent by providing information extrapolated based on your net income. Since there is a lag in the budgetary process, the website can only tell you how your money was spent last year. But it’s certainly a helpful tool for passenger train advocates, given the furor over the “large” amount of money that has been invested in high-speed rail.
For instance, if you made $50,000 in 2009, over fiscal year 2010 you would have contribute about $222 to transportation. Of that figure, you would have spent:
$102 Federal-aid Highways
$6 Capital Assistance for High Speed Rail Corridors and Intercity Passenger Rail Service, Recovery Act
$2 Capital and Debt Service Grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)
That’s only $8 spent on modern trains! And with the zeroing out of the high- and higher-speed intercity passenger train program in FY 2011, that figure will drop to about $2.
This figure is somewhat complicated by the fact that the majority of highway money comes from a tax on gasoline rather than income. However, given the almost $35 billion in general treasury funds spent since 2007 to cover the highway trust fund deficit, and the looming deficit predicted at the end of 2012, it’s worth comparing and contrasting.
So ask yourself… is a modern, high- and higher-speed passenger train system worth the price of a single day’s lunch?
“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%.
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.
