Posted on 10/30/2009 6:26:47 AM PDT by Willie Green
Eight billion dollars isn’t enough — not nearly enough.
It’s not often you’ll hear this newspaper make a statement like that. Usually we are urging fiscal restraint.
But if this country truly wants high-speed rail, we’re going to have to get serious about the effort. Eight billion dollars won’t get us there.
That’s the amount of federal stimulus money promised by the Obama administration for high-speed rail.
Already the administration has received requests from 24 states for projects amounting to $50 billion in high-speed projects.
It also has received $7 billion in requests from states wanting to improve rail travel at less than bullet-train speeds. Virginia is among them, seeking money for faster passenger service from Petersburg to Washington.
Projects such as this to increase train speeds to 90 mph may be useful. But they do not catapult this country into achieving high-speed rail. Bullet trains can achieve 220 mph.
A dedicated, never-say-die effort to build a high-speed rail network would revolutionize this nation. It would bring distant portions of this sprawling land closer together. It would knit communities and commerce.
Rail service on this scale would achieve the goals that many mass-transit advocates say they want: Saving money and reducing pollution.
Rail service at the efficiency and speed of bullet trains would indeed lure people away from automobiles and onto trains. Many mass-transit proposals of the current age fail to do that because the traveler’s savings in time or money aren’t sufficient to overcome the flexibility and freedom offered by the auto.
In fact, there is a plan for true high-speed rail.
The U.S. High Speed Rail Association envisions a vast network of 17,000 miles of track accommodating 220 mph bullet trains. Full buildout would occur by 2030. By 2020, Virginia would have its high-speed link from Raleigh, N.C., to Washington, D.C., via Richmond. (Our tweak to the plan: Add a corridor from Richmond to St. Louis paralleling Interstate 64.)
Could we do it?
To paraphrase the Obama campaign, yes we could.
We could have done it with federal stimulus money already approved, if we had dedicated the funding.
Total approved federal stimulus funding: $787 billion.
Total estimate for the high-speed network: $600 billion.
And, remember, the $600 billion is a 20-year cost. The rail association thinks only $150 billion would be needed to start the project.
Imagine if President Obama had used his political capital upon taking office to declare that this nation would embark on the greatest public works project since the interstate highway system was built.
Suppose he had persuaded Congress to put its muscle behind this vision. Suppose he had inspired American citizens and won the support of businesses with the dream of true high-speed rail.
Suppose he had channeled stimulus money toward one, great, job-generating program, instead of many smaller ones. We might already be on our way.
No, $8 billion isn’t nearly enough. But commit enough money, and we will position ourselves at the start of a grand new national venture … and adventure.
“No different than taking a plane, only much less hassle with reservations/security and trains make more convenient stops along the way. For trips less than 500 miles, high-speed rail is much faster than taking a plane.”
And cars destroy them at that distance.
A real rail system once flourished in this country. And, although it may never be rebuilt, that will be due more to a failure of vision than some number crunching budgeteers.
Light rail goes in fixed limited locations. Buses are flexible and can be rerouted as transit patterns change.
hmmm...something just doesn't seem to fit together too well here...
Light rail goes in fixed limited locations. Buses are flexible and can be rerouted as transit patterns change.
Yes, light rail is best suited for those high-volume local commuter routes that don't change.
Buses are best suited to less popular routes where ridership is more unpredictable.
they=there
I can well imagine and if possible would not of built the system.
The highway system modeled on socialist Adolph Hitler, capitalized and pulled the economic rug out of the cities, which were repositories of hundreds of years of free market investment.
It, highways, caused by government force massive economic misallocation.
Big thing in North NJ was the Light Rail System. They pass empty half the time. Huge waste of money;
I’ve considered and rejected the idea of joining the Libertarian Party several times. At the local and state level I have voted for individual libertarians when I felt the Republican was too liberal, but the party as a whole supports some things I don’t agree with. On the other hand the same is becoming true of the Repubicans. I’ll have to see what happens in 2010.
US Population densities remain far below Europe’s, and that’s why you can;t look to hem as the model. Bos-Wash works because you have major cities lined up one after the other (as in Europe).
And in the US, the cities themselves are radically sprawled (extrme example is metropolitan LA, which has 5 airports for a reason).
Another reason is the distance: 3 times as much distance requires three times as much railbed to lay and maintain. costs costs costs.
Koln to Frankfurt is more like Chicago to Gary Indiana than it is like Chicago to Pittsburgh.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.