High-speed debate

Old-school and new-school boosters of high-speed rail duke it out over best way to use stimulus funds.

By

Jessica A. Knoblauch

Tue, Nov 10 2009 at 1:30 PM

Related Topics:

Public Transportation, DIY

Photo: Associated Press

Groups are fighting each other for the potential to get a portion of the $8 billion in stimulus funds allotted to high-speed rail, according to a recent New York Times article.

It’s a classic case of new versus old.

Seasoned groups like the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) are urging supporters of high-speed rail to build off the tracks laid over the years by groups that began to push for high-speed rail before it was all the rage.

Meanwhile, newcomers to the high-speed rail scene like the U.S. High-Speed Rail Association, a startup that formed in June and held its first conference last month in Washington, D.C., are arguing that the patchwork scheme is no way to go, instead advocating for a new nationwide passenger rail network that spans 17,000 miles and would be completed by 2030.

"Many are saying that we can't do it, that ... we have to do this incremental approach first, and then years later do the rest," said Andy Kuntz, the executive director and founder of the U.S. High-Speed Rail Association. "Well, we're prepared to build it now."

These new lines would get up to an impressive 200 miles per hour, on par with France and Japan. The only catch is that the whole thing comes with a price tag of about $600 billion.

But Art Guzzetti, vice president of policy for the APTA, insists that plan is faulty in part because many states and regions have already spent years laying the foundation for proposals that seek federal funding.

"Not everything is going to be the 200 miles per hour U.S. High Speed Rail is advocating for," Guzzetti told the Times. "You can't tell people that have worked for years for consensus that their plans are wrong. Sometimes you will get to 200 [miles per hour] in incremental steps, sometimes you'll be perfectly well served at 110."

Rod Diridon, a board member at the California High-Speed Rail Authority and executive director of the congressionally created Mineta Transportation Institute, is also not a big fan of the newcomers, whom he termed “vultures” because he believes the new organizations are just in it for the money.

"We're seeing now organizations that have been created ... primarily for profit that are attempting to call themselves 'this high-speed rail' and 'this high-speed rail.' And that's something that costs energy,” he said.

In addition, Diridon argues that having too many groups with different plans for high-speed rail creates "confusion in Congress," and that it serves as a "distraction we cannot afford."

Though it’s still unclear who will be coming out on top in the high-speed rail debate, what is clear is that the new and old high-speed rail groups won’t be coming to a consensus anytime soon. As the Times reporter writes, “Nothing stirs passions for a massive public-works project like a wad of federal cash.”

You might also like:

Join the conversation

Comment: 1

jmj4trains Jan 10 2010 at 6:54 AM

I am late to reading this article, so maybe nobody will read these comments, but... as a High Speed Rail advocate, it is hard to know who to support. I think that the California High Speed Rail project is a well developed plan that can be an example for future rail lines, and I hope they get a big enough chunk of the federal money to be able to make it happen soon. I know for certain that there are a lot of advocates out there who have been pushing for HSR for years, and I really want to see their

.... More

dreams fulfilled. But I think incremental HSR is a terrible way to go. If the only thing we get out of this money is a bunch of trains that run on 30 mph faster on freight rail lines, no one will even notice... passenger trains will continue to limp along without the ridership that would allow them to run without government subsidy. Plus, it opens the door for the freight rail companies to weasel a free track upgrade out of the deal. I just have to wonder who is pulling Guzetti's strings if he is saying that people will be "perfectly well served" by 110mph trains. A truly High Speed Rail line will get people's attention! And if it is competitive it will change people's transportation habits. People will take the train rather than drive if the train can get them there in 1/3 of the time it would take them in their car. People will take the train rather than fly if it can get them there for half the cost. And people who still want to fly and drive will benefit from the train system because it will prevent further congestion of the highways and airports. I hope that the FRA and the DOT award funding to projects that are in the best interest of the future of American transportation, without allowing themselves to be swayed by vested interests.

Log in or register to post comments
Report This Post

MNN - Mother Nature Network

By

Related Topics:

You might also like:

Join the conversation

ADD YOUR COMMENT

TODAY'S MOST POPULAR ON

NEWSLETTER