iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Phineas Baxandall

Phineas Baxandall

Posted: February 9, 2010 11:10 AM

Last month the nation learned that 31 states will receive one-time high-speed rail stimulus grants totaling $8 billion.

But what happens next?

The last time our country sought to achieve a national infrastructure vision was in the 1950s. Roadways between cities at the time were haphazard and largely mud or gravel. President Dwight D. Eisenhower had seen the future in the German autobahn and set out to construct a national network of limited-access highways connecting major American cities. It took over three decades of sustained investment to complete that vision. The result was "the greatest public works project in history," according to the Federal Highway Administration.

Constructing high-speed rail will take no less of a commitment.

In a new report released today, the U.S. Public Interest Research Group is calling for another great public works project - one that will connect, by high-speed bullet trains, all of America's major cities which are between 100 to 500 miles from each other.

A high-speed rail network that competes with intercity commuter air travel would have huge benefits for our economic, energy, and environmental problems. It will create up to 1.6 million construction jobs, provide thousands with jobs related to the new lines, cut our energy consumption, improve travel and assist in the resurgence of American manufacturing. Replacing short-haul airplane flights will also free up precious air space at our crowded airports, and let airlines concentrate on the cross-country trips where they make sense.

The first step in building the network is to set a national goal with an ambitious time frame, just like we did for the Interstate Highway System or getting to the moon. We can link all our major cities by 2050, if we set our minds to it.

Ten other principles should guide state, national and local leaders as they roll up their sleeves to get the job done:

  1. Invest enough to succeed - America must reverse the half-century-long trend of underinvestment in passenger rail by creating a reliable funding source and channeling the necessary resources.
  2. Maximize "bang for the buck" by investing in lines with the greatest ridership potential and using incremental, short-term improvements in passenger rail to help lay the groundwork for eventual faster high-speed service.
  3. Balance private investment with public safeguards - Harnessing private investment can help to deliver high-speed rail improvements, but only if the public retains control over planning and key decisions, and only if private deals operate with their books fully open to the public. Wherever possible, new rail lines should be built on publicly owned right of way.
  4. Invest to achieve full benefits by refusing to cut corners in new rail investments, particularly with regard to investments that can improve energy security, environmental performance, and safety.
  5. Build stations in the right places, where passengers have access to local public transit networks for completing their trip and where passenger rail can provide a catalyst for transit-oriented development.
  6. Assure transparency in all aspects of the decision-making process over passenger rail, including the expenditure of funds and contracting.
  7. Manage for performance by collecting and publicizing data on ridership, energy consumption, safety and other aspects of rail service, and setting concrete goals for achieving specific targets in each of these areas.
  8. Encourage domestic manufacturing to supply the equipment needed for the build-out of the nation's passenger rail system and make America a leader.
  9. Set standards for high-speed rail equipment so that the nation can benefit from economies of scale. Integrated networks need standards.
  10. Encourage cooperation among states, and between states and the federal government.

We know that Americans will increasingly use high-speed rail to commute between cities, if it exists. But we won't get there if Congress treats these stimulus grants as the final destination rather than the first leg of the journey.

We can't let that happen. We need a new, great public works project that is in the public interest. We need to make sure high-speed rail is not left at the station.

Click here to read an executive summary of the report, and to download the entire PDF.

 

Follow Phineas Baxandall on Twitter: www.twitter.com/uspirg

 
 
  • Comments
  • 7
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
01:29 PM on 02/10/2010
While I certainly concur with the author's points about the need for high-speed rail, I am concerned he may actually damage the passenger-rail cause by carelessly flaunting his ignorance of U.S. transportation history. Mr. Baxandall claims that prior to President Eisenhower's Interstate highway program of 1956, "Roadways between cities at that time were haphazard and largely mud and gravel."[!]

The fact is that Ike was not the nation's first big road-builder. Woodrow Wilson was. His 1916 Federal Aid Highway Act appropriated $75 million to be shared 50/50 with the states on a program to create paved highways. Between 1919 and 1953 this federal-state partnership built 3.5 million miles of paved intercity highways. Ike's Interstate program was a response to the safety and congestion problems that had developed on the successful 2-lane highway system, not an effort to overcome primitive road-construction methods.

In 1952, six months before Ike was elected, I traveled with my family from Wisconsin to Florida by automobile, and we never saw a dirt road anywhere. We followed U.S. 41 all the way, deviating occasionally over excellent state highways to visit en route attractions. Mr. Baxandall would be a more credible spokesman for America's transportation future if he had a better grasp of its transportation past.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
thinklib
I will not mince words.
01:26 PM on 02/10/2010
High speed rail is a huge waste of money.

If it wasn't, the government wouldn't be getting involved.
12:03 PM on 02/10/2010
Sounds like a great idea .. some of the American rail plans leave a little to be desired, I found: http://unexpectedtraveller.wordpress.com/2009/10/01/in-train-ing/

The Unexpected Traveller
03:15 AM on 02/10/2010
If high speed rail is so viable, then why do we need 90% government support for it?

This will turn into another Amtrak scenario - or just as bad, end up being like the airlines where trillions in tax dollars go for airports, security, traffic control etc - with the airlines being heavily subsidized by all that and still losing money.

And nowhere have I seen the biggest problem mentioned about high speed rail - the trillions it will cost to get right-of-ways and fight thousands of lawsuits against the NIMBY folks.
05:41 PM on 02/09/2010
I have a hard time seeing how the SF to LA train becomes much more than a bigger, more expensive AMTRAK.

Sometimes I fly from SF to Orange County, sometimes to Burbank or Ontario, others to LA itself. It works very well, and isn't terribly expensive ... and pretty cheap if planned ahead of time...which I rarely can do. A train is likely to go fast from SJ to LA...and then it will be pretty slow getting to Burbank from there.

We might save more oil by improving the highway system to reduce gridlock (all those idling cars) at least until more cars are electric, hybrid or have start-stop modes.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BannedNBoston
Is hemp legal yet?
05:19 PM on 02/09/2010
Power that bullet train with HEMP DIESEL
It would be faster and smell better than petroleum disel.
01:52 PM on 02/09/2010
Very interesting.
Here's a short film we just completed on the HSR plan to run from San Francisco to LA.
The piece includes experts from international urban design to tunneling.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVz7YQ_Zto4

Dan g - GG Films