Rail Passengers Dumbfounded at Exclusion of Rail from Congestion Strategy

Release #06-09—June 23, 2006

Contact NARP

Washington, D.C.—Today, the Bush Administration announced Transportation Secretary Mineta’s resignation, effective July 7. Separately, DOT General Counsel Jeffrey Rosen, who has represented Mineta on the Amtrak Board, leaves DOT July 3, to join the Office of Management and Budget.

NARP President George Chilson wrote to U.S. Transportation Sec. Norman Mineta on June 13, asking why the Department’s recently released white paper on reducing transportation congestion did not cite either freight or passenger rail as possible solutions. The letter, which was sent to reporters on the 13th, is here on our website

In the letter, Chilson wrote, “While you are right to target congestion as a serious and growing national problem, we are dumbfounded that you failed even to mention rail in National Strategy to Reduce Congestion on America’s Transportation Network…Neglect of rail—both by federal policy and the state policies that it encourages—is the primary reason that our nation continues to spend enormous amounts on transportation infrastructure without satisfactory results…”
Chilson’s letter opened an issue that has troubled many transportation experts: the continuing reluctance of the federal government to include railroad infrastructure development in its transportation plans or budgets. Although rail is the most economically efficient form of transportation to operate and build, and the nation’s key rail rights-of-way hold much undeveloped capacity, too few of the nation’s travelers and too little of its freight are using rail because, without federal infrastructure assistance, private capital cannot afford the heavy bill for creation of the needed rail capacity.

Highways, airports, the FAA’s Air Traffic Control System, and the Inland Waterway System are publicly owned and funded, but the private railroads have been considered off-limits to federal policy except for safety regulation.
Chilson said NARP believes the time has come for that policy to change.  “Private ownership of the nation’s rail infrastructure does not render it less valuable to the American people, place it beyond the purview of federal transportation policy or make in ineligible for public funding,” he wrote to Mineta. 
Chilson cited the successful rail program in Mineta’s home state of California, where state investments in track, signals, bridges, stations and passenger rolling stock have led to a popular and fast-growing network of 60 daily passenger trains that carry more than 4 million passengers a year on a three-route, 800-mile network.  Besides making passenger trains useful and appealing, state funding for double-tracking, signaling and grade-separation projects also has benefited freight operations. 
“California has proven that a dollar spent developing a railroad will buy us four or five times as much freight- and passenger-hauling capacity as a dollar spent on airports or highways,” Chilson said. 
“California also has proven that government can use its funds to develop a railroad’s property without interfering with the shareholder’s rights to use their property for profitable freight hauling,” he said.  “Government development of railroad infrastructure clearly is a win/win/win situation, and there’s no reason why a federal government that claims to be concerned about air and highway congestion should not adopt it.”
Chilson’s letter to Mineta noted a “growing consensus” for rail development.  He cited two reports issued in 2003 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). The reports, Intercity Passenger Rail Transportation and Freight-Rail Bottom Line Report, said failure to develop rail capacity would confront even the best-developed highway system with enough excess traffic to throw key segments into permanent gridlock. The freight report cited a $53 billion gap between investment needed to maintain rail’s existing market share and what the railroads are likely to invest without government help.
Chilson also noted that Joseph Boardman, who chaired AASHTO’s Standing Committee on Rail Transportation when the reports were issued, is now Federal Railroad Administrator.
“The availability of so much experience and judgment at USDOT makes it all the more puzzling and disappointing that the Department has failed to acknowledge rail development as a key element in any strategy intended to solve the nation’s congestion problems,” Chilson said.  “At NARP, we are looking forward to answers and seeking a fruitful dialogue.”