Amtrak: Maybe Now?
With increasing train ridership and more people shying away from the gas pump, Neal Peirce asks whether now might be Amtrak's time to shine.
"America's train advocates are mildly optimistic. And for some good reasons. Amtrak is reporting impressive ridership gains. Oil is pushing $100 a barrel, throwing a long shadow over affordability of travel on already congested highways. Airport delays hit an all-time high last summer. Global climate concerns are mounting."
"Rail freight demands, meanwhile, are rising fast, suggesting joint improvements with passenger rail. Worries are rising about mobility gaps hindering the ability of America's 'megaregions' -- the Northeast, Great Lakes, California and others – to match the performance of competitive regions worldwide."
"Also positive for Amtrak: signs of a much friendlier reception in Congress. Add to that an array of states anxious to expand rail service, especially if they can get a federal "match" comparable to the 80 percent-20 percent federal-to-state match for highways."
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
Related News Stories
Is A Prius Greener Than Light Rail? - May 12, 2008
Americans Turn To Transit For Gas Price Relief - May 12, 2008
Taking The Politics Out Of Parking - May 12, 2008
Transit Systems Going Green - May 09, 2008
$3.50 Gasoline Is Changing The Nation's Vehicle Fleet - May 05, 2008
80/20 Matches
Great idea. I don't imagine the existing user funded balance in the Rail Trust Fund would go very far however. The WaPo is to be commended for putting "match" in quotes. Highway Trust Fund distributions are allocated in part by the gatekkeeping process of States willingness to contribute. For rail that is an interesting concept. Surely there is no HSR advocate in this nation that suggests we switch to a user funded capital projects model.
Look up in the sky
Rail certainly has a proven track record in America even if most people here have never been on a train before. Unfortunately, this article uttely fails to even mention that it's not just cars vs. trains but trains are also in direct competition with airline routes in many cases.
Integrated regional rail
And this is precisely why our rail network needs to connect directly to our major airports with limited stop service for smaller cities along the way. We've already decided that air is the preferred mode of travel for cross country trips, so we need to build a rail system that integrates into the air system. Our airports are clogged with commuter flights to small cities that could be better served by rail. An integrated regional rail network could help alleviate this air traffic congestion while providing regular commuter service between major cities. Currently, long-haul, cross-country rail routes are draining money away from regional ones, making this difficult to achieve.
High-Speed Rail
"Our airports are clogged with commuter flights to small cities that could be better served by rail."
And high-speed rail could also replace many flights between large cities. Eg, if California ever gets around to building high-speed rail between San Francisco and Los Angeles, it is expected to replace most flights between those two cities.
Europe is way ahead of the US. High-speed rail has already replaced virtually all the flights between Paris and London.
Charles Siegel