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."