Voices

Introduction: Grow Rail to Grow America

The following is the text of the testimony Of William W. Millar, President, American Public

Transportation Association, before the Subcommittee On Railroads of the House

Committee On Transportation And Infrastructure On The U.S. Rail Capacity Shortage,

April 26 2006. NCI especially recommends it to new visitors to this site, and to its readers

who are editors and journalists, because it is one of the best descriptions of the current

transportation crisis in America --- and what to do about it --- that we have read. APTA

President Bill Millar integrates the rail discussion into the total transportation debate,

and that is how it should be. NCI strongly believes that America must learn to fund,

design, and build transportation as a system, not as a collection of modes. – Ed.

Chairman LaTourette, Ranking Member Brown, and members of the House Railroads

Subcommittee, on behalf of the American Public Transportation Association (APTA), we

thank you for this opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the U.S. Rail

Capacity Crunch. We very much appreciate that the Subcommittee is taking a

comprehensive view, considering both passenger and freight issues. While goods

movement is critical, the emergence of America’s service economy has heightened the

importance of on-time movement of people as well.

America long has enjoyed the most extensive and efficient transportation system in the

world. Today, other countries are catching up. Policies that support the growth of

railroads - passenger and freight - are critical to America’s mobility and our ability to

compete in a global economy.

The critical capacity issues affecting railroads - passenger and freight - are a part of an

overall crisis in transportation system capacity that also affects our airports, roadways,

port facilities, and public transportation infrastructure. Such congestion is putting severe

stress on America’s transportation and logistics network, which historically has given

America its economic edge.

Positioning for a rail renaissance

The past twenty-five years has been a period of significant change for the American

railroad industry. While the Staggers Act of 1980 is rightfully credited with helping the

once threatened railroad industry become profitable again, it has also led to significant

consolidation and downsizing of America’s railroad network. Rail freight traffic has grown

in many places to the limits of capacity. What has been rational and profitable from a

railroad shareholder viewpoint, has also resulted in a downscaling of America’s overall

rail network.

Meanwhile, over this same 25 year period commuter railroads have blossomed, and

have also been a major success story. Last year, passengers took 423 million trips on

our commuter railroads, a nationwide ridership increase of 2.8 percent from the year

2004. Ridership increases are being experienced by every commuter railroad in

America. The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act - A Legacy

for Users (SAFETEA-LU), enacted in summer 2005, includes significant funding to

expand rail systems and build new rail systems. This year, new commuter rail systems

will open in Nashville and Albuquerque. New systems are in advanced stages of

development in Minneapolis, Salt Lake City, Portland, Charlotte, Raleigh, and Denver.

Other communities are not far behind, among them Phoenix, Ann Arbor, Austin, Atlanta,

Harrisburg, Pittsburgh and Orlando. These projects will help reduce congestion and

provide mobility options, integrate regional economies, and provide one of the quickest

ways for individuals and families to beat the high cost of gasoline.

Looking to the future, railroads - passenger and freight - are poised to play an even

greater role in enabling commerce and economic growth. Earlier this year America

surpassed the 300 million mark in population. In 30 more years we are projected to

reach 400 million. Most of the population will be living in metropolitan areas, making our

use of land and transportation corridors all the more important. A look at the Los

Angeles region’s Metrolink commuter rail system provides a projection of demand

anticipated for commuter rail services. Freight and passenger rail traffic in the L.A. /

Orange County / Riverside corridor is expected to leap from 172 trains today to a total of

265 trains by 2010, and to a projected 390 trains per day in 2025.

While America needs a transportation policy balanced on the strengths and synergies of

roads, ports and rails, overall there should be a higher reliance on rail modes, which are

much more efficient in terms of land and energy. Indeed, adding rail capacity is

imperative also for its positive impact on parallel freeways already clogged with traffic.

These urban/suburban areas have roads that are not only hopelessly congested, but

roads that have already been expanded to close to their maximum capacity. Adding

highway capacity in these areas is enormously expensive. For a fraction of the cost of

such road construction/expansion, existing railroad rights-of-way can be reactivated /

expanded / improved to accommodate traffic and reduce highway congestion for both

freight and passenger movements.

Tight capacity has affected commuter railroads and their riders

Overcrowded trains, stations and park-and-ride lots, not to mention queues of trains

waiting to pull into stations, are visible signs that existing rail infrastructure is being

overburdened. Facilities that were designed for a certain level of service are now seeing

passenger volumes that exceed these limits. In addition, as more trains are added to the

same amount of track, scheduling and on-time performance becomes a greater

challenge. Longer freight trains - as long as 21/2 miles - also make sidings hard to

utilize, and makes on-time performance and shared operations more difficult.

Commuter railroads have sought to maximize throughput by lengthening trains and

converting fleets to double-deck cars. Systems such as CalTrain’s have also looked to

creative scheduling to maximize the use of available capacity. Strategic scheduling of

The Baby Bullet trains serving the San Francisco Bay Area have been a major success

in this regard, increasing system ridership by over 20 percent and significantly

increasing fare revenues.

Confronting system bottlenecks is another key. For example, during rush hour each day,

several commuter trains per minute - carrying hundreds of thousands of passengers -

pass through the Northeast Corridor tunnel linking New Jersey and New York. To

accomplish such an operational feat each day is a minor miracle. Planning for future

growth becomes another question.

On lines owned by freight railroads and shared with commuter lines, innovative ideas

have been applied to enhance the compatibility of shared-track operations. A tighter

scheduling of freight traffic, more compatible speeds, elevation of curves represent

some of the operating practices that have been negotiated. In many places public funds

have been used for capacity improvements in order to accommodate commuter rail

operations. In Virginia, an agreement is in place providing for incremental increases in

passenger train operating privileges as publicly financed capacity improvements are

constructed to relieve bottlenecks. Other places have reported that funds invested in

adding infrastructure capacity get eaten up by increased freight traffic.

It is possible that we can deal with rail freight bottlenecks at the same time we address

the needs for high-speed rail. Proposed high-speed rail systems such as Midwest

Regional Rail Initiative will benefit freight systems and will mitigate if not eliminate

bottlenecks that occur in Chicago, Milwaukee, Cleveland, Toledo, St. Paul, and St.

Louis. Conversely, inaction on the freight corridor capacity issue will prolong indefinitely

the process of implementing new or improved corridor services. Examples include the

lengthy discussion surrounding the initial commuter line proposed for Atlanta, the multi-

year investments made in the Seattle-Portland route, and many other routes that are

ripe for passenger service.

Strategic importance of rail corridors in built-up urban areas

Historically, America’s rail corridors have been used for both freight and passenger

purposes. Many corridors go back to the time when federal land-grants were awarded

as incentives for railroad companies to build in developing sections of America. For a

long period of time both passenger and freight services were operated by the private

sector under laws governing public utilities. As passenger operations were abandoned

by private railroads, services were often taken over and/or supported financially by

public entities.

Today, over 90 percent of commuter rail trips are on lines that are publicly owned. This

includes large, long-established systems such as New York’s Long Island Rail Road and

Metro North Rail Road, NJ Transit, the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation

Authority, and the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority. Newer systems such as

Florida’s Tri-Rail, the Trinity Railway Express in Texas, and soon-to-open systems in

Albuquerque and Salt Lake City have opted to acquire their own rights-of-way. Chicago’

s Metra system and the Metrolink system in Los Angeles own some of their lines, while

using other lines owned by freight railroads. Systems including the Virginia Railway

Express, Seattle’s Sounder, the Altamont Commuter Express and Nashville’s Music City

Star system operate entirely on tracks owned by freight railroads.

The cost and availability of suitable real estate in built-up urban environments means

that growth of rail passenger service will be highly dependent on access to existing

rights-of-way. It will often make sense to use existing railroad right-of-way for new

commuter rail projects. As a matter of community design and good public policy, this is

preferable to dislocating homeowners and businesses in the acquisition of new right-way-

way. Ironically, many transit agencies typically are able to exercise eminent domain to

acquire the property they need, except with railroads. When it comes to railroad right-of-

way, there is no requirement for any process for taking into consideration the public

interest.

In 2001 several bi-partisan bills were introduced that would have created a federal

process to protect the public interest and resolve disputes that arise when parties

cannot agree on terms and conditions for the use of railroad right-of-way. Freight

railroads would benefit from such a process. Simply put, when investments are made in

freight corridors, such investments in track, signals and infrastructure benefit everyone,

and also bring revenue to the railway owner.

The questions should be: 1) How can the freight railroad get a fair deal for the use of its

property, and 2) How can we deliver to the public critical rail passenger projects without

prolonged delay or consternation?

Passenger and freight railroads should grow together!

How will commuter railroads be able to achieve the expected rate of growth? Certainly, it

will require a partnership among communities, freight railroads and government

partners. Collectively, we need to figure out ways to grow to the challenge.

The American economy depends on the efficient movement of people and goods. Rail

freight systems operating at full capacity and providing maximum return to shareholders

is good for some, but it is not where America’s interest should stop. In Tennessee,

Virginia and many other states, a lack of rail freight capacity has resulted in more truck

traffic on the interstate highways causing congestion at near-crisis proportions. America

needs new policies that will enable economic growth rather than hinder it.

Certainly, infrastructure investment is a critical factor. While APTA and stakeholder

groups have celebrated SAFETEA-LU as a landmark in federal transportation policy, it

remains true that in the United States about 2 percent of GNP is invested in

transportation infrastructure, down from historical levels of about 21/2 percent.

Many of the ideas that have been put on the table have merit. The States for Passenger

Rail organization has been adamant and consistent in its call for a dedicated fund for

high-speed rail projects, to be supported through tax-exempt and tax-credit bonds, as is

proposed by this Committee’s Ride-21 legislation. APTA is supportive of this concept

and concurs that such a fund needs to be separate and distinct from the federal

Highway Trust Fund and Mass Transit Account. Continued funding and expansion of the

Swift High Speed Rail Act is another important tool that can enable growth of high speed

rail. The bottom line is that we need to create a favorable policy climate in which high

speed rail systems can evolve and serve the mobility needs of Americans.

Freight railroads have promoted the concept of investment tax credits as a partial offset

for amounts of private capital reinvested in private railroad infrastructure in instances

where there is a public benefit. We believe that a key public benefit should be the

accommodation of passenger trains. Difficulties in operating passenger service in a

freight-owned right-of-way have caused some systems to acquire their own right-of-way.

I contend, however, that the co-existence of freight and passenger rail services on

common trackage / rights-of-way can and must be sustained to make fully effective use

of these assets, and expanded federal investment in rail must be structured in a way

that ensures reasonable access at a fair price. Some rail passenger systems are

developing innovative ways to calculate the “public benefit” derived from freight railroads

cooperation in rail passenger services, and what the freight railroad partner should be

entitled to as a result. Perhaps this is something to build on! Passenger and freight

railroads should grow together!

Certain rail bottlenecks in the national railroad system may require a national level

effort. The CREATE and Alameda Corridor projects are examples. Consistent with

earlier discussion, an additional Trans-Hudson rail tunnel would be another example of a

project with critical national overtones. The Projects of National Significance program in

SAFETEA-LU needs to become a place where multi-modal railroad megaprojects judged

to have the most national merit can look to for appropriate funding. For this program to

be effective, the timing of the review process must be in step with the strategic dealings

of the project itself.

Other programs offer possible assistance for addressing capacity issues. The Railroad

Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF) program is a potential source of

important capital funding for both freight and passenger rail projects. Only a limited

number of loans have been released under this program since it was constituted in TEA

21, and APTA urges that any remaining administrative obstacles be cleared in order to

put this innovative program to use.

Certainly, technology can offer solutions as well. APTA appreciates the ability of positive

train control and similar technologies and its potential for enhancing safety while

enabling railroad to operate at a higher level of service.

An overarching issue will be to get projects done sooner. Projects that sit on the drawing

board an inordinate number of years do no good for the American economy. Project

sponsors who have gotten bogged down in the federal funding process or in

negotiations with freight railroads are beginning to consider whether the only way to get

projects done in a reasonable timeframe is to forego these partnerships. The process

should be better than that. A central theme of SAFETEA-LU was to expedite program

delivery. China is one country where they cannot seem to build new rail capacity fast

enough. Let’s do the same in America!

In regard to high-speed rail, while America watches, industrialized countries, and some

not so advanced countries, are rapidly seizing on high-speed rail systems to

complement their trans and intercontinental airlines and to interconnect and support

their metro area transit systems. This includes the new 7,000 - 12,000 mile high-speed

rail system now under construction in China. It is a plan to connect all provinces and the

30 largest cities in a national grid system that will share corridors with freight operations

but have dedicated tracks for high-speed rail in dense corridors. Annual investment in

Chinese high-speed passenger rail construction will be $16 to $20 billion. New signaling

technology and centralized traffic control will also improve Chinese railroad capacity.

High-speed rail is also making advances in Japan, France, Germany, Sweden, Italy,

Spain, South Korea and Taiwan and is being adopted in Mexico and other emerging

economies. On the business side, non-American firms are the primary beneficiaries of

this expansion in high-speed rail capacity. German, Japanese, French and Canadian

railway equipment and signaling technology suppliers are seizing on new business

opportunities, while the U.S. continues to fall behind in what could be described as “The

Great Railroad Building Race.”

As Congress and the Administration pursue the policy goal of energy independence, our

transportation policy in many ways favors our petroleum-dependent modes and not our

energy efficient systems. In contrast, Europe and Japan have used high-speed rail

systems to replace short-hop airlines and a significant amount of inter-city auto travel in

those areas. Short-hop airlines are more petroleum intensive and polluting than a

person driving an SUV, on a seat-mile basis.

Finally, a key determinant in the growth of commuter and high speed rail relates to

liability insurance requirements and conditions. Acts of terrorism against transit in

Madrid in 2004 and in London in 2005 have raised the stakes on liability coverage.

Some freight railroads are now requiring coverage of $500 million - at times as much as

$700 million - a severe detriment for providing rail passenger service. One approach

would be to build on the Amtrak Reform and Accountability Act of 1997, which caps

passenger claims at $200 million. It would be an enormous boost to passenger rail

operation if this cap could be clarified to apply to all claims.

Conclusion

In conclusion, America needs to grow its railroads. While some may see passenger and

freight railroads as distinct and on different economic paths, I believe there are

synergies that can be captured through policies that look at railroads in an inclusive

way. We thank the Committee for advancing the dialogue on the future of our rail system

with today’s hearing.

With only a limited number of transportation corridors, strategies must include freight

and passenger rail interests working together. With the completion of the interstate

highway system, some have suggested that the national purpose of the federal surface

transportation program has been lost. As America competes in the global economy, it is

our transportation, logistics and education systems that will give us the advantage.

Energy independence and emergency response are among other strategic national

goals supported by an increased emphasis on rail.

Congressionally created commissions will soon begin looking at these issues in depth. I

look forward to working with these commissions, as well as with this Subcommittee. It is

our transportation network that can make the difference for America’s position in the

global economy

Viewpoint: Are we building highways to oblivion?

By Joe Baker, Senior Editor Back

Most Americans remain in denial or only somewhat aware of the reality of peak oil,

climate change and the fiction of unlimited growth. Government is doing little to dispel

those notions.

While the fact of finite resources is immutable, the politicians plan to build more and

bigger roads, pledging hundreds of billions of dollars to expanding the interstate

highway network.

These massive road plans assume unlimited cheap oil, a condition that is already past.

That is a trillion-dollar error that can co-opt the future of our post-carbon society.

The public is focused on and concerned about $3-a-gallon gasoline, but that fixation

has not resulted in any significant change in public policy. There is no political pressure

to tax windfall profits, create inter-city rail networks, install solar panels on homes or to

take other steps to alleviate the constriction of supplies of fossil fuels.

Instead, we are promoting more suburban sprawl, more roads and more

overdevelopment all dependent on cheap gasoline. An effective response to dwindling

supplies of oil will take cooperative efforts from the local level all the way to the global

level.

What if someone suggested you dig up that prize bluegrass lawn and plant lettuce,

radishes, onions and other food crops? How about if government decided to plow up the

golf courses to plant corn and other crops?

That’s not as nutty as it sounds. Food will be one of the primary issues of the peak oil

period, particularly for large cities that are some distance from farmlands. In the not-too-

distant future, those big trucks may not be rolling in at your local supermarket, and the

shelves may be rather bare.

We need a new transportation policy. Highway construction, which is a key part of our

car culture economy, links real estate speculators, developers, road construction firms,

sand and gravel mining companies, and lending institutions. Not surprisingly, in most

places, these people are the bankrollers of local politicians, who make the zoning and

planning decisions about building new highways and the associated development.

Considering the many campaign donations by developers, take a look at the local

County Board. How many members are in the real estate or legal professions or have

ties to developers?

Witness the strong political pressure to extend Perryville Road. Drive those cars.

Witness the Sunil Puri/Dyn Cannell, LLC’s request for a special-use permit to pursue a

123-acre subdivision in Rockton township—right next to the Nygren Wetland Preserve

(See related stories on page A1, A5 and B5). Beloit dumped sludge containing heavy

metals in the 1980s on the very land for this “Planned Community Development.” Drive

those cars.

Witness the huge subdivision that is being foisted on the Village of Caledonia under

questionable circumstances. Drive those cars.

Witness the costs and taxes Loves Park is trying to foist upon Rockford and farmers for

the extension of Riverside Boulevard. Drive those cars.

Witness what happened to the Ditzlers, their wetlands and a Native American historical

site for the Springfield-Harrison extension at the hands of the County Board. Drive those

cars.

In the 1950s, the country built the interstate highway system, inspired by Hitler’s

Autobahn network in Nazi Germany. That development largely happened because of a

conspiracy among General Motors, Firestone Tire and Standard Oil to eradicate public

transit systems in more than 100 cities. If you doubt that, go on the Internet and punch

in “streetcar conspiracy” and see what comes up. There are numerous articles

documenting these events.

Now, we are trying to rectify that mistake. We are spending billions on new light rail and

streetcar networks in cities across the country. Rockford and Winnebago County are

trying to obtain rail service for this area. Had we left the rails in place, we would not be

as dependent on cars and trucks today, and dealing with peak oil would be much easier.

Rail transport is much more fuel efficient than automobiles.

The interstate highways soon created huge areas of auto-dependent suburbs, which

ringed the inner cities with development, leaving the core of the city largely neglected. In

a speech in 1968, Martin Luther King Jr. said: “These 40 million [poor] people are

invisible because America is so affluent, so rich; because our expressways carry us

away from the ghetto, we don’t see the poor.”

A number of cities, including Chicago, have had campaigns to stop the construction of
highways. Freeway opposition was common in the 1960s, and few new roadways were
proposed.

But a resurgence of such plans occurred in the 1990s, with several upgrades of the interstate
system, proposed to aid in implementing the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
These plans called for new and expanded north-south truck routes to expedite traffic between
Canada and Mexico, plus many other projects to benefit the highway lobby, big companies like
Wal-Mart, and ever-growing suburban sprawl. That was President George H. Bush’s highway
law.

Mark Rabinowitz of permatopia.com, said laws were added to expand the program during the
Bill Clinton administration and now in the second George W. Bush administration. The public,
he said, has paid little attention, even the very groups that do not want more roads.

He notes many environmental groups were fooled into focusing on proposed bike paths to
accompany these highways while ignoring the majority of the funding was going for the roads.
A Washington, D.C.-area bicycle group, for example, is urging its members to demand
inclusion of a bicycle path with the $3 billion Inter County Connector superhighway in
Maryland. This flies in the face of other environmental groups there who have spent years
fighting this highly destructive project.

Hopefully, the Larry Morrissey administration’s good move of planning to connect the area’s
disconnected bike paths and putting bike lanes on some streets will not take the same route as
Maryland’s debacle.

In Portland, Ore. Interstate 84 carries six lanes of freeway traffic plus a light rail line. The traffic
on the roadway, Rabinowitz said, is helping to melt the polar ice caps. but commuters have
transportation options. The electricity to run the train is provided by a mix of coal, natural gas,
hydropower, nuclear power and wind.

We need a strong environmental challenge to centralized energy conglomerates’ plans to
revive nuclear power, “clean” coal, oil drilling in wilderness areas and turning farmland and
forests into production of biofuels. These things are unlikely to stop until we explode the myth
that we can have unlimited, endless growth in a finite world.

Sustainability refers to practices that can be continued generation after generation. We have a
long way to go. Walk. Bike. Buy hybrid and E-85 vehicles. Live close to work or in the central
city, and fight development that robs us of our nature and farmland. Don’t drive those cars.

Editor and Publisher Frank Schier contributed to this editorial.

From the May 31-June 6, 2006, issue

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright 2002-2006 - The Rock River Times

Copyright © 2002-2006 - The Rock River Times

"There's no real reason that the public should like rail over rubber tires, but they

do, and developers do, and it's a fact of life."

Keith Jones

Executive Director

Central Arkansas Transit Authority

http://www.tulsaworld.com/EmailStoryDisplay.asp?ID=060521_Bu_E1_Commu11039

Commuter rail idea deserves fresh look

TULSA WORLD

By RUSSELL RAY Energy writer

5/21/2006

When I think of Tulsa's future, I see commuter trains hauling people from all directions to

a downtown district brimming with storefronts and featuring a major arena.

The arena is under construction, and city leaders are pushing plans to turn downtown

into a thriving retail and entertainment center.

What no one is talking about, however, is a commuter rail system serving Tulsa and the

growing communities around it.

No single project could improve the quality of life more in the Tulsa area than a

comprehensive system of commuter rails.

The following cities have recognized the need for better mass transit and are developing

commuter rail systems for their growing populations: Charlotte, N.C.; Albuquerque, N.M.;

Ogden, Utah; Nashville, Tenn.; Harrisburg, Pa.; and Austin, Texas.

Tulsa County, home to more than 572,000 people, should get on board.

Commuter rail, light rail and rapid bus transit are gaining support in communities

nationwide.

Maybe it's the deepening realization that $3 gasoline could be a permanent part of

America's future. Or perhaps it's the fact that a mile of rail is cheaper to build and

maintain than a mile of freeway.

The benefits of a commuter rail system could be enormous.

Less air pollution, less traffic and less money spent on road repair. Best of all, it could

save you a lot of money.

Those who commute from Broken Arrow to downtown Tulsa probably spend about $40 a

week on gasoline. It would cost roughly $10 a week to take a train. That's a savings of

$30 a week, or $120 a month.

The Tulsa area has an advantage over other communities competing for federal funding

because tracks run through the entire county in all directions.

"There are tracks all over," said Bill Cartwright, general manager of Tulsa Transit. "It's

like a spider web. They all end up downtown."

Commuter rail for the Tulsa area was proposed in the 1980s, but the idea died after a

report indicated the population wasn't big enough to support the cost of operating such

a system. But a lot has changed since then.

Gasoline prices have nearly tripled, and the number of people living in Jenks, Broken

Arrow, Bixby and Owasso has skyrocketed.

Since 1990, the populations of Jenks and Bixby have nearly doubled. During the same

period, Owasso's population has more than doubled and Broken Arrow's has risen 45

percent.

Ridership on Tulsa Transit buses is up 29 percent from last year, Cartwright said.

"We haven't increased our service hours one bit," he said. "People just can't afford

these gas prices, and they're looking for options."

All classes of people are riding the bus today. White-collar workers and blue-collar

workers. Accountants and custodians. People who can afford to drive to work are opting

for mass transit, for either financial or moral reasons.

The idea that died in the '80s, I think, would flourish today.

But it will only work if people in Tulsa and the rapidly growing suburbs are willing to

embrace a new lifestyle that relies less on the automobile. It would require a drastic

cultural change that some say we're not ready for.

The only way to find out is to start the discussion. A bare-bones feasibility study,

Cartwright said, could be done for $75,000 to $100,000.

"We should be looking ahead," he said. "If we're not looking forward, we're going to get caught
with our shorts down."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Russell Ray 581-8380
russell.ray@tulsaworld.com

Related Photos & Graphics

View in Print (PDF) Format

Copyright © 2006, World Publishing Co. All rights reserved.

For Immediate Release, May 1, 2006

Midwest High Speed Rail Association

PO Box 805877

Chicago, IL 60680

Rick Harnish

Executive Director

Office: 773-334-6758

www.midwesthsr.org

Statement Regarding Amtrak’s 35th birthday

35 years ago today, Amtrak assumed operation of America's passenger

trains nationwide, with no clear mandate from Congress. Many believe

that the unspoken mandate was to provide political cover for the

elimination of all intercity passenger trains. If that is true, it

isn't surprising that America lost 60 percent of its passenger trains

on May 1, 1971.

The fuel crisis of 1973 made it difficult to kill the American

passenger train altogether, but that hasn't stopped people from trying

every year since. Despite the annual attacks, Amtrak has successfully

maintained a core network that will be increasingly important to our

economy in the years ahead.

With China and India driving up the demand for oil, we have entered a

much more severe and longer lasting fuel crisis. We can no longer

afford the annual Amtrak funding circus.

While America has dithered over pennies for Amtrak, our worldwide

competitors have invested billions of dollars in highly productive,

fuel-efficient railroad networks. Soon, in both Europe and China,

high-speed trains will link cities as far apart as Chicago and the East

Coast. As fuel costs go up, they will simply take more trips by train.

We will be stuck at home, unable to afford the trip.

And to make it worse, the highway trust fund is expected to be bankrupt

in three short years. Simply maintaining the existing highway network

will require a substantial tax increase. There will not be enough left

over to grow the system.

We must begin an aggressive program to expand the passenger train

network nationwide and we must do it soon. Railroads carry more people

at higher speeds for a fraction of the investment needed for highways.

Shortened travel times, more productive travel and reduced fuel

consumption come as part of the package.

By investing the cost of just two tanks of gas in faster trains today,

we can build a stronger economy and prepare for even higher gas prices

in the future.

The first step is to stop bickering about Amtrak and get to the hard

work ahead: Working with freight railroads to upgrade their tracks for

faster and more frequent trains, both passenger and freight. It is the

only affordable option.

________________________________________________________

The Midwest High Speed Rail Association is a member-supported

non-profit educational organization promoting the development of fast,

frequent and dependable train service connecting the entire Midwest.

Our members include business leaders, mayors and individuals that want

the option of traveling by train.

Rick Harnish

Midwest High Speed Rail Association

PO Box 805877

Chicago, IL 60680

773-334-6758

Join us at www.midwesthsr.org