The right way to build high-speed rail

By Paul Weinstein Jr.
Boston Globe, 10/3/2001

SINCE SEPT. 11, Americans have dramatically changed the way they think about
air travel. With new security requirements, layoffs and route cutbacks at
most major airlines, and increased passenger anxiety, policy makers are no
longer focusing on airport expansions but bailout plans to save the industry
from financial ruin.

Meanwhile, Amtrak, which just weeks ago announced the mortgaging of Penn
Station to ensure its short-term financial survivability, is receiving
renewed interest from Congress and the administration, which see high-speed
passenger rail as a practical alternative to air travel. But while a
national investment in high-speed rail is long overdue, simply handing
billions of dollars to Amtrak to do the job would be throwing good money
after bad.

Amtrak has a host of problems. Its debt has tripled in the last few years.
Unlike most airlines, Amtrak lacks a real-time computerized reservation
system - sometimes customers are told a train is booked even when seats are
available. And until recently, national rail ridership since the early 1990s
has remained nearly flat while airline and intercity bus riderships have
grown significantly.

Meanwhile, Amtrak's foray into high-speed rail has been less than exemplary.
The Acela trains that run between Boston and Washington can reach a top
speed of 150 mph, yet it still takes three-and-one-half hours to get from
Boston to New York, only 20 minutes faster than by car.

To get the maximum performance out of Acela, the Northeast Corridor needs
$20 billion in improvements over the next 25 years. But instead of turning
the Northeast Corridor into a state-of-the-art high-speed rail system,
Amtrak is spending its limited political and financial capital on a plan to
build 11 new high-speed rail systems in 33 states. While a few of these
routes make sense, others that serve sparsely populated areas such as
Mississippi seem to have been chosen for political reasons (Senate Minority
Leader Trent Lott is a supporter of Amtrak).

We need to make a national investment in rail where it makes sense - densely
populated corridors where trains can reach speeds of at least 150 mph - and
take the politics out of rail. Like highways and airports, rail needs a
national trust fund to provide a regular source of capital investment. A
rail trust fund controlled by the government would make investments based in
part on a formula and in part through a competitive process. Funds from the
RTF would be made in the form of grants, loans, and bonding authority and
would be matched by state and local governments.

The trust fund would be financed by a variety of user fees, including a
minimal tax on all passenger commuter and regional rail tickets (not
including transit), the portion of the gas tax paid by commercial freight
and passenger rail systems, and higher fees on freight and commuter trains
that operate on the rail tracks owned by the trust fund.

Congress should appropriate an initial $6 billion to capitalize the rail
trust fund. In addition, the fund would be allowed to issue bonds up to $15
billion to help build high-speed rail corridors.

While the trust fund would own the infrastructure, the high-speed rail
systems would be operated by a number of entities: regional,
government-sponsored corporations, state and local cooperatives, and, in
some cases, private companies. By separating responsibility for
infrastructure from operations, like we do with buses and airlines, and by
adding some competition into the mix, we can dramatically improve passenger
rail service.

Bidders would compete to acquire the rights to the franchises that serve a
particular route. Where the service can be expected to operate at a profit,
the bidder offering the highest price would acquire the rights to the
concession. And like other countries, we should recognize that even the most
highly traveled rail corridors sometimes need operating subsidies. However,
the amount of subsidy available from the rail trust fund would be capped,
eliminating the operation of financially failing overnight trains.

Once the regional system is in place, the trust fund would invest dollars to
turn these networks into true high-speed rail systems. Tracks would be
modernized and electrified, allowing for speeds ranging from 125 to 180 mph.
Where the tracks are not owned by the federal government, the trust fund
would either build new tracks or receive user fees for any improvements it
makes in freight rail lines that improve freight rail transportation.

If we choose to live in the past and keep propping up Amtrak, passenger rail
will just keep creaking along. But if we take a regional approach to rail,
high-speed trains can serve an important transportation role in the new
economy.

Paul Weinstein Jr., a senior policy adviser to former Vice President Al Gore
and chief of staff of the White House Domestic Policy Council, teaches at
Columbia University and is a senior fellow at the Progressive Policy
Institute.

This story ran on page A18 of the Boston Globe on 10/3/2001.
© Copyright 2001 Globe Newspaper Company.
==========
**NOTICE: In accordance with 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.**
==========