WASHINGTON — At first glance, the dream of trains zipping riders between U.S. cities would appear to be stuck in the station, USA Today reports.
Amtrak is in disarray. The nation’s passenger railroad faces a projected $1.1 billion deficit this fiscal year — its biggest ever. A congressional panel has called for its liquidation. Its president has resigned; a new leader won’t come aboard until later this month.
But state officials around the country, instead of waiting for Washington to resolve the Amtrak mess, are moving ahead with their own plans — and money — for faster intercity rail service.
And for the first time, Congress is considering legislation that would bypass Amtrak to send significant rail construction money to the states. Rep. Don Young, chairman of the House committee on transportation, says Amtrak’s problems are aiding the states’ cause. “The political climate is right for the states,” says Young, R-Alaska.
The key to faster passenger trains is better and more reliable tracks, signals and switching equipment. In the past five years, legislatures have appropriated about $2 billion on improvements to raise train speeds by building new or rehabilitating old track. Looking ahead, states have completed the engineering and environmental studies for projects totaling more than $40 billion over the next two decades.
These projects all have the same aim: to raise the train speed so that a 300-mile trip between cities will take three hours or less. These routes, such as Seattle-Portland and Chicago-Detroit, already exist; all are operated by Amtrak under contract with the states. Time-consuming security measures at airports have created a demand for travel alternatives to flights of 300 miles or less. Among the projects:
North Carolina is spending $25 million in partnership with Norfolk Southern Corp. to upgrade a state-owned rail route linking Charlotte, Greensboro and Raleigh. When the work is done next fall, the trip will take 3 hours and 10 minutes. That’s 20 minutes shorter than it now takes, an attractive alternative to the traffic jams on U.S. 85.
California has appropriated $1.2 billion on rail improvements since 1996 with the goal of eventually raising train speeds, which now vary from 50 to 79 mph, to 110 mph on three routes: Los Angeles-San Diego, San Jose-Oakland and Oakland-Sacramento. Ridership on the Oakland-Sacramento route increased 20% last year after the trip was trimmed 20 minutes to 2 hours, 40 minutes.
The Midwest Regional Rail Initiative, a coalition of nine Midwestern states, is coordinating construction projects to raise the speed of passenger trains in the region from an average of 50 mph to 110 mph. The goal is a network of three-hour routes connecting Detroit, Milwaukee and St. Louis to a central hub in Chicago.
David King, deputy secretary of North Carolina Department of Transportation, says the work will move ahead no matter what Congress and President Bush decide to do about Amtrak, whose charter is up for reauthorization this fall. “The states have been hard at work developing the infrastructure,” he says. “If Amtrak were to go away tomorrow, we would find a way.”
Less expensive alternative
This determination is borne of necessity. Improved train service is seen as an important alternative to crowded highways and delayed flights. The cost of construction and land to build highways, especially near urban areas, can make such projects unfeasible.
On the other hand, rail routes already exist. The cost of improving them can be less than a quarter of the $50 million-per-mile price tag for highway construction.
Little federal funding has been available for state rail projects. Amtrak received most of the money, which was often gobbled up by operating deficits. What little money Amtrak had left over was spent on its Northeast Corridor from Boston to Washington. Almost all other passenger routes run on tracks owned by private freight railroads. Those railroads have been reluctant to spend money to make the improvements needed to raise speed limits.
So state officials are lobbying Congress to fund rail improvement projects the way it paid for the interstate highway system. The Federal Highway Administration provides about 80% of the money to build roads. The states pay the rest.
In the past 10 years, the government has spent about $50 billion on highway construction.
Some in Congress say there is more willingness to fund rail projects through the states. Young is sponsoring a bill that would back $90 billion in state rail construction bonds with federal tax credits during the next 15 years. A Senate bill sponsored by Sen. Fritz Hollings, D-S.C., calls for billions in direct federal aid for state projects.
What the nation needs
Washington state officials say the federal money would be put to good use.
In the early 1990s, when traffic studies predicted the Puget Sound area would soon face the second worst traffic congestion in the country, the state Legislature approved a $2 billion, 20-year plan to speed rail service from Vancouver to Portland. Additionally, a $140 million investment in new trains and track improvements is designed to cut what was originally a four-hour trip between Seattle and Portland down to three hours, 10 minutes by the fall.
Ken Uznanski, manager of the Washington state rail office, says he wants to trim 20 more minutes off the run. How quickly that happens depends on the federal government. “It’s going to take a much longer time to see these projects through without a federal partnership,” Uznanski says.
These local efforts do not mean that state officials want Amtrak to fade away. Thirteen states rely on Amtrak to operate trains that run within or through their borders. The states paid $122 million last year to subsidize those routes.
The Amtrak Reform Council, appointed by Congress to monitor the railroad, has suggested that Amtrak’s routes be put up for bid to private companies. But state officials say that would be premature without establishing a comprehensive national rail policy.
“We really need a continuation of the present services until we have time to sit down and say what we, as a nation, want in terms of a good, fast, interconnected rail service,” says Joe Boardman, commissioner of the New York State Transportation Department.
George Warrington, who leaves his post as Amtrak president later this month, agrees it is time to come up with a new plan for national rail service. “It’s inevitable that public policy makers will choose to invest in the development of the railroads,” he says. “When it happens, whether it is five or 10 or 20 years, it will be a partnership between federal government and states. It’s a necessity for this country.”