It would be up to the State whether certain GPS information about individuals would be available to police.  In the case of catching felons on the loose, I think it would be a great way to put the smack down on illegal activity...stolen vehicles, violent offenders, etc.

 

I'd rather that we place less burden on our police force so that they can concentrate on other areas more fruitfully.

Part of Oregon's plan was that it only taxed miles driven within the state.  If you tax based on odometer readings rather than GPS data, you will have to tax all miles driven.  Is that an issue?

 

I don't think so, because with current gas taxes, if you buy gas in Ohio and drive into Kentucky, you are using Kentucky's roads but paying taxes to Ohio.  Maybe there should be a comprimise with some tax on gas and some tax on mileage?  That would also encourage higher fuel efficiency because your total tax paid would be lower with a more efficient car (i.e., same mileage but less gas).

^Well, that's a good point.  How *do* you track in-state miles driven without a GPS system?

But it's true that the irrationality of Americans will have to be addressed if this idea will take hold nationwide.

:roll:

^Well, that's a good point. How *do* you track in-state miles driven without a GPS system?

 

You don't have to.  If mileage is to be taxed at all, it seems reasonable for a state to tax all mileage on cars registered there, whereever that mileage takes place.  This arrangement would be most helpful for states that include non-core sections of large metro areas, like New Jersey or Indiana.  Cars registered in those states may do a large portion of their driving elsewhere.  Not so true for Ohio, but it may still be advantageous due to lower administrative expenses.  The measuring system is reliable and it already exists.

EagleFan, you need to travel overseas sometime. We Americans think we're something special. I've even heard some claim we're God's chosen people. But America is just another nice address, that's all, where some of the stuff we do is so irrational it defies explanation.

I have a real problem with the state knowing where I am at every moment.

Here ya' go. Here's information on a study that will be conducted in cities across the country, including San Diego, Calif.; Austin, Texas; Baltimore, Md.; Boise, Idaho, the Research Triangle in North Carolina; and eastern Iowa. Participants are being recruited now, and researchers ask that those interested in taking part call 866-363-1975 or visit www.roaduserstudy.org.

 

From the study group's website......

 

The motor fuel tax has funded America’s roads for over 70 years. It has served its purpose well and has many positive features, the most important being that it is easy to pay (many people may not even be aware that their total at the gas pump includes this tax).

 

However, the gas tax may need updating. Reasons for this include:

 

 

Current trends are threatening the ability of the tax to continue to pay for our roads. As hybrids and hydrogen-fueled vehicles become more common, funds generated will steadily decline. Even higher fuel efficiency means we may no longer be able to afford the quality transportation services that we have become accustomed to.

 

 

The jurisdiction in which fuel is purchased often is not the one in which travel actually takes place. Therefore, sometimes drivers do not pay for the construction and maintenance of the roads on which they drive.

I like their argument that gas taxes encourage more fuel-efficient vehicles, while mileage taxes don't.  Wouldn't it be a lot easier if we just made the gas tax a percentage of the price of sale price, or indexed it to inflation?

Indexing the gas tax to the rate of inflation is also an idea that is being seriously considered by the Transportation Task Force.  It was also a recommendation of the National Surface Transportation Policy Commission.  But with gasoline consumption trending down, the question has also come up whether raising the gasoline tax and/or indexing it is even a worthwhile exercise.

A widespread carbon tax might actually more useful than a focused tax on gasoline.

I just came from the Columbus Metropolitan Club, where Gary Hemminger, Marathon Oil exec VP, talked about alternative energy, but mostly unconventional extraction of conventional fossil fuels (oil from Canadian sand and shale). I asked him if, as vehicles become more energy efficient and use non-oil fuels (and transit use grows), Marathon supported increased fuel taxes to pay for the highways his customers depend on. He responded by talking about the need for greater infrastructure spending all over the country, but dodged a specific answer to whether increased gas tax should be the source of some of that spending.

Aww, I just want to give him a hug.  Thanks for the article freethink.  He should post the jobs somewhere...I'd be happy to go out and lay some tracks this summer.

APTA PR......

 

December 8, 2008

Transit ridership keeps climbing as gas prices fall

 

The American Public Transportation Association (APTA) Monday said Americans continue to ride public transportation at record levels even though gas prices have declined. APTA said more than 2.8 billion trips were taken on public transportation in the third quarter of 2008, up 6.5% from the third quarter of 2007 and the largest quarterly increase in public transportation ridership in 25 years.

 

APTA noted that, by contrast, vehicle miles of travel (VMT) on the nation's highways declined in the same period by 4.6%, according to the Federal Highway Administration.

 

For rail modes, light rail (modern streetcars, trolleys, and heritage trolleys) had the highest percentage of ridership increase among all modes,up 8.5% during quarter compared with the comparable period last year. Light rail systems showed double-digit increases in the following areas: Baltimore (19.6%); Minneapolis (18.3%); Sacramento (16.5%); New Jersey (15.9%); Los Angeles (15.3%); Dallas (15.2%); Denver (15%); Buffalo (13.4%); and Memphis (13.3%).

 

"The record increase in public transportation trips demonstrates the exceptional value of public transportation in today’s economy," said APTA President William W. Millar. "The fact that public transit ridership surged while gas prices and highway travel declined, shows a growing demand for more bus and rail services."

 

Regional rail ridership grew by 6.3%. Regional and commuter systems with double-digit ridership growth included: Albuquerque (35.8%); Pompano Beach, Fla. (32.9%); New Haven, Conn. (32.2%); Portland, Maine (29.6%); Oakland (26.1%); Stockton, Calif., (22.5%); Seattle (22.4%); Harrisburg/Philadelphia (21.7%); Dallas (18.8%); Los Angeles (17%); and San Carlos, Calif. (16.4%).

 

Heavy rail (subways and elevated trains) ridership increased by 5.2%, led by Los Angeles (14.1%), San Juan (13.5%), Lindenwold, N.J. (13.3%), Miami (12.2%). and Atlanta (11.3%).

 

Bus ridership posted the second largest ridership increase at 7.2%, and riderrship in communities with a population of less than 100,000 had an 11.6% increase.

 

APTA's ridership report is available at the association's website at www.apta.com/research/stats/ridership.

from the American Public Transportation Association.......

 

December 11, 2008

 

Economic Stimulus Package Remains Under Consideration

 

President-elect Barack Obama this week renewed his call for a large economic stimulus package that would provide record-breaking levels of investment in U.S. transportation infrastructure.  While the 110th Congress plans to continue its "lame duck" session this week to consider aid for domestic automakers, the House and Senate are not expected to move on a new stimulus bill this month.  Democratic leaders will likely wait until the 111th Congress convenes in January to present a new stimulus package or a series of stimulus bills to spur economic activity.  With the health of the U.S. economy deteriorating significantly in the past two months, both Congressional leaders and President-elect Obama have called for a much higher level of overall spending in any new stimulus bills than the $61 billion package passed by the U.S. House of Representatives earlier this year.  The previously House-passed stimulus bill would have provided $4.6 billion for new public transportation investment and a smaller bill considered in the Senate would have provided $2 billion for transit. 

 

Earlier today, APTA President William Millar sent letters to President-elect Obama and key Members of Congress urging them to provide no less than $47.8 billion for public transportation in any forthcoming stimulus legislation.  A newly updated survey of APTA members has identified $12.2 billion of "ready-to-go" transit projects that could be advanced within 90 days, and a recent transit needs estimate shows that $47.8 billion in supplemental transit capital projects could be initiated within the next 2 years.  If $47.8 billion were invested in public transportation immediately, more than 1.3 million new green jobs could be created.  To ensure that new capital investment can be utilized quickly, APTA has urged Congress to waive any local match requirements. 

 

APTA has also urged the President-elect and Congress to include funding to transit systems which are trying to cope with dramatic reductions in state and local tax revenues for transit related to the economic slowdown at the same time that they are trying to serve record-breaking growth in ridership on U.S. transit systems.  APTA announced this week that more than 2.8 billion trips were taken on public transportation in the third quarter of 2008 -- an increase of 6.5 percent over the third quarter of 2007 and the largest quarterly increase in public transportation ridership in 25 years.  Transit agencies want to provide good service to these new customers and do not want to discourage them from using transit with service cuts or increased fares that are needed to meet operating costs.  To view the letter, click here...  http://www.apta.com/government_affairs/letters/081211_pelosi.cfm

 

While the details of forthcoming stimulus bill or bills are not available, it is likely that some or all new transit funding will be distributed under existing SAFETEA-LU formulas, such as the urban and rural formula programs.  Examples of "ready-to-go" projects such as the APTA Economic Stimulus survey have been very valuable in demonstrating the ability of transit investment to quickly spur economic activity, but it is unlikely that stimulus legislation will fund individual projects, with the possible exception of projects currently under evaluation in the New Starts/Small Starts program. 

 

APTA members need to contact their Members of Congress immediately and urge support for transit investment in stimulus legislation.  APTA staff will continue to discuss stimulus proposals with Congressional staff and transition officials for the incoming Administration in the coming weeks. More details will be provided as they become available. 

 

ACTION ALERT

 

+ Call your Senators and Representatives and urge them to support public transportation investment in stimulus legislation. 

+ Point out that if $47.8 billion were invested in public transportation immediately, more than 1.3 million green jobs could be supported in the next two years. 

+ Discuss your transit system's needs for assistance. Explain how shortfalls in state and local transit revenues affect your ability to serve your riders and remind them about ridership gains at both the local and national level.

+ Cite specific examples of "ready-to-go" transit projects in your area. 

http://money.cnn.com/2008/12/12/news/economy/driving_decline/index.htm

 

U.S. driving on the decline

Americans continue to avoid the open roads, even as gas prices continue to fall, says the Department of Transportation.

By Aaron Smith, CNNMoney.com staff writer

December 12, 2008: 12:44 PM ET

 

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Driving in America has undergone its most dramatic continuous decline in history, the Department of Transportation said Friday.

 

Americans drove 100 billion fewer miles during the 12-month period between November 2007 and October 2008 compared with the prior year, according to the DOT's most recent data.

 

U.S. Transportation Secretary Mary Peters noted that driving continued to decline even as gas prices came off their summertime peaks.

 

"The fact that the trend persists even as gas prices are dropping confirms that America's travel habits are fundamentally changing," she said in a statement.

 

........

Maybe a sign of things to come....one could hope at least.

 

Obama to arrive in Washington by train

Pre-inauguration trek will include a stop to pickup Biden and family

 

WASHINGTON - President-elect Barack Obama will kick off his inaugural celebration on Jan. 17 the weekend before his swearing in as the country's 44th president by traveling on a train to the nation's capital.

 

He and his family will start their daylong journey with an event in Philadelphia before boarding the train and picking up Vice President-elect Joe Biden and his family in Wilmington, Del. The president-elect and his group then will make a stop in Baltimore before making their way to Washington.

 

"We hope to include as many Americans as possible who wish to participate, but can't be in Washington," Emmett Beliveau, the executive director of the Presidential Inaugural Committee, said in a statement. "These events will allow us to do that while honoring the rich history and tradition of previous inaugural journeys."

 

.........

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28235124/

 

 

At this point, LaHood's nomination is being taken more with a wait-and-see response than with applause by urbanists, transit and rail advocates.....

_____________

 

http://progressillinois.com/2008/12/17/ray-lahood-really

 

Progress Illinois

December 17, 2008

 

"Ray LaHood? Really?" (UPDATED)

 

by Adam Doster

 

I think I just ruined Jacky Grimshaw’s morning.

 

“Ray Lahood? Really?!?” That was the reaction from the transportation

and community development coordinator at the Chicago-based Center for

Neighborhood Technology when I relayed the news that the retiring

seven-term Republican congressman from Peoria was being considered

as Secretary of Transportation in the incoming Obama administration.

“You’ve left me totally dumbfounded. Ray LaHood?”

 

 

.........

 

 

=PTP=================================================

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/17/lahood-continues-traditio_n_151867.html

 

Huffington Post

December 17, 2008

 

LaHood Continues Tradition Of Stuffing 'Across The Aisle' Pick At

Transportation

 

Jason Linkins

 

Hey, everyone! Remember Norm Mineta? Probably not, actually. But

when George W. Bush needed to honor a promise to find a home in his

Cabinet for a token Democrat, he tapped Mineta at Transportation and no

one ever talked about it again. He served six years -- which made him the

longest-serving Transportation Secretary ever -- and was succeeded in

2006 by Mary Peters, of whom you've also probably never heard.

 

........

 

 

=PTP===============================================

 

-----------------------------------------------

PTP NOTE: The following are selected sections that may impact on Ray

LaHood's record regarding transportation-related inssue.

-----------------------------------------------

 

http://www.ontheissues.org/IL/Ray_LaHood.htm

 

OnTheIssues.org

Dec. 2008

 

Illinois House

 

Ray LaHood

(Republican (Retiring 2008), district 18)

 

Ray LaHood on Budget & Economy

Click here for 5 full quotes on Budget & Economy OR background on

Budget & Economy.

Voted NO on defining "energy emergency" on federal gas prices. (Jun

2008)

Voted YES on revitalizing severely distressed public housing. (Jan 2008)

Voted YES on regulating the subprime mortgage industry. (Nov 2007)

Voted YES on restricting bankruptcy rules. (Jan 2004)

Maintain & enforce existing spending caps in the future. (Sep 1998)

 

Ray LaHood on Energy & Oil

Click here for 15 full quotes on Energy & Oil OR background on Energy &

Oil.

Voted YES on tax incentives for energy production and conservation.

(May 2008)

Voted YES on tax incentives for renewable energy. (Feb 2008)

Voted YES on criminalizing oil cartels like OPEC. (May 2007)

Voted YES on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies. (Jan 2007)

Voted NO on keeping moratorium on drilling for oil offshore. (Jun 2006)

Voted YES on scheduling permitting for new oil refinieries. (Jun 2006)

Voted NO on authorizing construction of new oil refineries. (Oct 2005)

Voted YES on passage of the Bush Administration national energy policy.

(Jun 2004)

Voted YES on implementing Bush-Cheney national energy policy. (Nov

2003)

Voted YES on raising CAFE standards; incentives for alternative fuels.

(Aug 2001)

Voted YES on prohibiting oil drilling & development in ANWR. (Aug 2001)

Voted YES on starting implementation of Kyoto Protocol. (Jun 2000)

Rated 33% by CAF, indicating a mixed record on energy independence.

(Dec 2006)

Set goal of 25% renewable energy by 2025. (Jan 2007)

Supports immediate reductions in greenhouse gases. (Sep 1998)

 

Ray LaHood on Environment

Click here for 11 full quotes on Environment OR background on

Environment.

Voted YES on $9.7B for Amtrak improvements and operation thru 2013.

(Jun 2008)

Voted YES on increasing AMTRAK funding by adding $214M to $900M.

(Jun 2006)

Voted NO on barring website promoting Yucca Mountain nuclear waste

dump. (May 2006)

Voted NO on deauthorizing "critical habitat" for endangered species. (Sep

2005)

Voted YES on speeding up approval of forest thinning projects. (Nov

2003)

Supports grants for brownfields remediation. (May 2002)

Make EPA into a Cabinet department. (May 2002)

Rated 20% by the LCV, indicating anti-environment votes. (Dec 2003)

Sponsored bill for tax credit to remove lead-based paint. (Nov 2005)

Strengthen prohibitions against animal fighting. (Jan 2007)

Focus on results, not regulation. (Sep 1998)

 

Ray LaHood on Environment

Republican Representative (IL-18)

 

Voted YES on $9.7B for Amtrak improvements and operation thru 2013.

Congressional Summary:

Authorizes appropriations for FY2009-FY2013 for Amtrak capital and

operating grants; Amtrak repayment of long-term debt and capital leases;

and the rail cooperative research program.

Authorizes grants for th Indeed, these achievements are occurring when

there is a greater need than ever for alternatives to our congested

highways and skies. To alleviate this congestion and strengthen our

energy security, we need to invest in intercity passenger rail.

Other

 

Reference: Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act; Bill HR6003

; vote number 2008-400 on Jun 11, 2008

 

Voted YES on increasing AMTRAK funding by adding $214M to $900M.

Voting YES on this amendment would restore $214 million in funding for

AMTRAK, bringing the total annual expenditure for AMTRAK to $1.114

billion. The chairman of the Railroad Subcommittee explained the

increase as follows:

Unlike aviation, highways and transit, there is no dedicated funding for

investing in our Nation's passenger rail service. This amendment restores

$214 million to the Amtrak account, taking it to $1.114 billion, which is still

about $300 million less than we had during the course of last year's

discussion.

Last year the President sent up a budget of zero for Amtrak. We had an

amendment process that we went through this time. This time we are up

to $900 million in the bill [without this amendment].

But if you look at that $900 million, there is only $500 million for capital

expenditures, out of which has to come a debt service of $280 million,

which only leaves $220 million for the capital needs of this country for

Amtrak, for passenger rail.

There is nothing for operation, and I know that the response to that is

going to be that there are some incentive grants in the bill.

Opponents of the amendment say that it would increase funding for

Amtrak by gutting and eliminating critical programs, including safety

programs, resulting in reductions in force at several agencies.

Reference: Department of Transportation appropriations; Bill HR 5576

Amendment 1008 ; vote number 2006-263 on Jun 13, 2006

 

Voted NO on barring website promoting Yucca Mountain nuclear waste

dump.

An amendment to prohibit funding the "Yucca Mountain Youth Zone"

website. Voting YES indicates opposition to using Yucca Mountain as the

national nuclear waste repository. The amendment's sponsor says:

I would like to introduce the American people to the newest member of

the Bush administration's energy policy team. His name is Yucca

Mountain Johnny. He is the star of the Energy Department's Yucca

Mountain Youth Zone Web site devoted to brainwashing school children

into believing that burying the Nation's nuclear garbage 90 miles from Los

Vegas is safe.

The Web site features games and activities to make high level nuclear

waste fun. High level nuclear waste is not fun. It is dangerous, and the

Department of Energy should not be using taxpayer money for a

propaganda tool.

I would probably not be as upset with Joe Camel, excuse me, Yucca

Mountain Johnny, if there was a more balanced approach on this Web

site. It doesn't talk about the potential of accidents or being an inviting

target for terrorists. It doesn't talk about the fact that Yucca Mountain is in

a volcanic and seismic zone area. It doesn't say anything about the

existence of safer and cheaper alternatives.

Among Yucca Mountain Johnny's witty sayings, he says, "The worst

mistake is never making one." Well, Yucca Mountain is a mistake. This

Web site is a mistake. Yucca Mountain Johnny is a mistake, and to

promote the proposed nuclear waste repository to our children under the

guise of education is a big mistake.

The amendment's opponents respond:

To my knowledge, nobody has questioned the accuracy or truth of what is

on the Web site. My guess is that most of the children that access this

website use it for term papers and papers in their classrooms that they

have to do on nuclear power.

Whether you oppose or support the repository, we should at least want

the facts out to our children and adults who wish to use that same Web

site about just what exactly it is.

Reference: Energy and water development appropriations bill; Bill HR

5427 Amendment 919 ; vote number 2006-200 on May 24, 2006

 

Ray LaHood on Homeland Security

Click here for 14 full quotes on Homeland Security OR background on

Homeland Security.

Voted NO on Veto override: Congressional oversight of CIA

interrogations. (Mar 2008)

Voted YES on restricting no-bid defense contracts. (Mar 2007)

Voted YES on allowing electronic surveillance without a warrant. (Sep

2006)

Voted YES on continuing intelligence gathering without civil oversight.

(Apr 2006)

Voted YES on federalizing rules for driver licenses to hinder terrorists.

(Feb 2005)

Voted YES on continuing military recruitment on college campuses. (Feb

2005)

Voted NO on supporting new position of Director of National Intelligence.

(Dec 2004)

Voted NO on adopting the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.

(Oct 2004)

Voted YES on emergency $78B for war in Iraq & Afghanistan. (Apr 2003)

Voted YES on permitting commercial airline pilots to carry guns. (Jul

2002)

Voted YES on $266 billion Defense Appropriations bill. (Jul 1999)

Voted YES on deploying SDI. (Mar 1999)

End the use of anti-personnel mines. (Mar 2001)

Rated 11% by SANE, indicating a pro-military voting record. (Dec 2003)

Another viewpoint, this time by the editors at Railway Track and Structures Magazine which borrowed heavily on wording from the America2050 coalition....

 

http://www.rtands.com/breaking_news.shtml#Feature3-12-18

 

December 16, 2008

Call to new administration: Invest wisely

 

As America is in the midst of a financial crisis and on the brink of making the “largest investment in infrastructure since the National Highway System,” to stimulate new economic activity, it is essential that the country invest these dollars wisely in projects that will stimulate economic growth and ensure that America’s infrastructure remains competitive, according to America 2050. This means it cannot be spending as usual. A new approach is needed that establishes a new level of accountability, transparency, and economic and environmental performance for how this country invests in infrastructure projects.

 

When it comes to infrastructure, America has been flying blind, lacking a national investment plan to make the country competitive in the 21st century. Now is the time for change. The country should only invest in projects that achieve job creation in the short run while creating the foundation for long-term economic success and energy independence.

 

...........

 

America 2050 is a national initiative to develop an infrastructure strategy for America’s future growth, competitiveness and sustainability. The organization is comprised of civic, environmental and transportation organizations, as well as elected officials and business leaders. For more information, go to www.America2050.org.

 

####

If we use higher gas tax to offset FICA, and then people drive less because of the high price, how will we pay for roads and bridges?

 

I'm generally in favor of a higher gas tax to keep the price in line with the true cost. But a gas tax is not a panacea. We don't want this to be like the cigarette tax, in which we become dependent on taxes generated by something we want to reduce.

 

We need to revamp the way we look at and plan for transportation in this country. But that also must include totally revamping how we pay for transportation infrastructure.

http://www.railwayage.com/breaking_news.shtml#Feature1-12-19

 

December 18, 2008

Obama picks centrist Republican to head DOT

 

President-elect Obama has selected seven-term Congressman Ray LaHood, a centrist Republican from Illinois, to become Secretary of Transportation—a key job in an administration that plans to spend billions rebuilding the nation’s infrastructure as part of an economic recovery program.

 

LaHood, whose district includes Peoria and Springfield, has a voting record that will please many in the transportation industry. He voted this year for the Passenger Rail Investment Act as well as the Saving Energy Through Public Transportation Act.

 

The 63-year-old representative, who decided not to run for reelection this year, has become known for his bi-partisan views, and is reported to be close both to the president-elect and to the new White House chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel.

http://minnesotaindependent.com/20547/transportation-secretary-illinois-republican-lahood

 

As Transportation Secretary, Republican LaHood Travels Well

Minnesota Independent

Andy Birkey 12/18/08 7:44 AM

 

President-elect Barack Obama made good on his promise to include the opposition in his cabinet. Democratic and Republican insiders confirmed on Wednesday afternoon that Republican Rep. Ray LaHood will be nominated as the next Secretary of Transportation. While LaHood is seen as a moderate Republican with a strong bipartisan record, his record on transportation issues is scant.

 

I cast the first ballot of my life for the Republican congressman, a native of my hometown, Peoria, Ill., 10 years ago; he was then and still is a very popular Republican. The reaction of some of his former constituents residents of Central Illinois was positive as news spreads of his new job. Progressive and conservative political junkies agreed: LaHood is pragmatic and generally well liked.

 

 

......

 

Hed rather build bridges than die for ideology.

 

For Immediate Release   

 

December 19, 2008

 

Midwest High Speed Rail Association

4765 N. Lincoln Ave.

Chicago, IL 60625

773-334-6758

 

Contact:

Rick Harnish

Executive Director

Cell: 312-339-0116

www.midwesthsr.org

 

High-Speed Rail Advocates Applaud Choice for DOT Secretary

 

Rick Harnish, Executive Director of the Midwest High Speed Rail Association, had the following comments following the announcement by President-Elect Barack Obama that he was naming U.S. Representative Ray LaHood (R-Peoria) as Obama's choice for the position of U.S. Secretary of Transportation.

 

"We are pleased that President-elect Obama has selected Ray LaHood as his Secretary of Transportation -- designate.

 

"The next Secretary of Transportation will face many challenges as Americans are forced to rethink our transportation systems.  LaHood's history in the House of Representatives has demonstrates his ability to forge consensus for real solutions.

 

"His work has shown him to be a supporter of passenger trains and transit.

 

"We've had excellent dealings with Representative LaHood.  He has frequently shown his support for passenger trains. We are very pleased that he specifically noted the importance of Amtrak and transit at the news conference where his appointment was announced earlier today (Friday).

 

"We look forward to working with Transportation Secretary-designate LaHood and his staff in the future so that the Midwest and the nation can make fast, frequent and dependable trains a reality."

Monday, December 22, 2008 3:38 PM

 

Transit Riders' Alliance

{Action Alert} Update on stimulus package

 

Work continues on a massive stimulus package that President-Elect Obama hopes to sign in January. 

 

There is a curious paradox in the discussions. President-Elect Obama has said that the stimulus should be used to retool our economy to be more fuel efficient and greener.  And yet, the criteria being used to judge transportation spending will prioritize highway construction.

 

That is why it is critical that transit supporters make their voices heard in the next couple of weeks. Join us in pushing for real change in Washington by asking your representatives to invest at least $48 billion on transit and $5 billion spent on high speed trains. These figures are aggressive but realistic.

 

There are transit and high-speed rail projects that fit the current criteria of  being 'ready-to-go'. Nationwide, the American Public Transit Association has complied a list of $48 billion in projects that are ready to go.

 

In Chicago, the Regional Transportation Authority has $675 million in ready-to-go proejcts including 259 new buses, 500 new paratransit vehicles and replacing bridges on the Union Pacific North Line . 

 

The Midwest Interstate Passenger Rail Commission has published a list of ready-to-go intercity rail projects in the Midwest totaling $815 million.

 

Click here for several news articles and other background materials...

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2228/t/7419/content.jsp?content_KEY=5052

 

Click here to tell your Members of Congress to invest $48 billion in transit and $5 billion in high-speed and intercity rail...

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2228/t/6204/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=26369

I knew it... I said before, his plan would do nothing but enhance 'the same'.

 

 

KJP - I'm going to muster up something later. I want to make sure it's articulate, with good facts figures and logic. Really, in this economy, it's time for innovation. Congress should know that!

 

I want to argue for inter-city rail. If you have any research materials on the gov't subsidizing regional flights and how it's inefficient or anything else I could use in that defense, it would be appreciated. Maybe there's already info in those links. I'll have to check it out.

If you're going to fire off an e-mail to Congress... keep it direct, polite and simple.  Don't overload them with information and back ground, because it's probably some low-level staffer that reads it first and then decides whether to pass it up the chain. 

 

Just say why passenger rail is important to you.  Put what it means in personal terms and let your Rep. know what having an option to driving would mean to you and your family.  And then let them know that their response is important to how you will vote the next time they run. 

What about saying that more pavement, by definition, is not green? Emphasize the rail/transit alternatives and the private investment they are known to attract. That would seem to be a much more strategic federal investment.

That's a good, concise point to bring up.

Noozer is correct. Your facts and figures aren't going to sway a Congressperson. If they want facts and figures, they will commission a study from the Congressional Budget Office or ask a "think tank" they trust or empanel a task force or special committee to look into the matter.

 

What can the public do to sway a Congressperson? Generate a meaningful volume of mail/calls/e-mail regarding a particular issue. You could write the most convincing letter in history, but if your viewpoint is dramatically outnumbered by a large amount of letters (even if they're all written in Crayon by drooling morons) which take a view opposing yours, guess who the Congressperson listens to? That's especially true if the morons vote.

 

If you want to convince someone, convince prospective letter writers. This is why I work for an advocacy organization like All Aboard Ohio.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/24/opinion/24friedman.html?th&emc=th

 

December 24, 2008

Op-Ed Columnist

Time to Reboot America

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

 

I had a bad day last Friday, but it was an all-too-typical day for America.

 

It actually started well, on Kau Sai Chau, an island off Hong Kong, where I stood on a rocky hilltop overlooking the South China Sea and talked to my wife back in Maryland, static-free, using a friends Chinese cellphone. A few hours later, I took off from Hong Kongs ultramodern airport after riding out there from downtown on a sleek high-speed train with wireless connectivity that was so good I was able to surf the Web the whole way on my laptop.

 

Landing at Kennedy Airport from Hong Kong was, as Ive argued before, like going from the Jetsons to the Flintstones. The ugly, low-ceilinged arrival hall was cramped, and using a luggage cart cost $3. (Couldnt we at least supply foreign visitors with a free luggage cart, like other major airports in the world?) As I looked around at this dingy room, it reminded of somewhere I had been before. Then I remembered: It was the luggage hall in the old Hong Kong Kai Tak Airport. It closed in 1998.

 

The next day I went to Penn Station, where the escalators down to the tracks are so narrow that they seem to have been designed before suitcases were invented. The disgusting track-side platforms apparently have not been cleaned since World War II. I took the Acela, Americas sorry excuse for a bullet train, from New York to Washington. Along the way, I tried to use my cellphone to conduct an interview and my conversation was interrupted by three dropped calls within one 15-minute span.

 

All I could think to myself was: If were so smart, why are other people living so much better than us? What has become of our infrastructure, which is so crucial to productivity? Back home, I was greeted by the news that General Motors was being bailed out thats the G.M. that Fortune magazine just noted lost more than $72 billion in the past four years, and yet you can count on one hand the number of executives who have been reassigned or lost their job.

 

My fellow Americans, we cant continue in this mode of Dumb as we wanna be. Weve indulged ourselves for too long with tax cuts that we cant afford, bailouts of auto companies that have become giant wealth-destruction machines, energy prices that do not encourage investment in 21st-century renewable power systems or efficient cars, public schools with no national standards to prevent illiterates from graduating and immigration policies that have our colleges educating the worlds best scientists and engineers and then, when these foreigners graduate, instead of stapling green cards to their diplomas, we order them to go home and start companies to compete against ours.

 

To top it off, weve fallen into a trend of diverting and rewarding the best of our

 

 

.......

 

 

www.Bloomberg.com

 

Rail Takes Back Seat as States Target Obama Stimulus for Roads

By Heidi Przybyla

Dec. 24 (Bloomberg) -- Missouris plan to spend $750 million in federal money on highways and nothing on mass transit in St. Louis doesnt square with President-elect Barack Obamas vision for a revolutionary re-engineering of the nations infrastructure.

 

Utah would pour 87 percent of the funds it may receive in a new economic stimulus bill into new road capacity. Arizona would spend $869 million of its $1.2 billion wish list on highways.

 

While many states are keeping their project lists secret, plans that have surfaced show why environmentalists and some development experts say much of the stimulus spending may promote urban sprawl while scrimping on more green-friendly rail and mass transit.

 

........

 

An interesting write-up from the Train Riders Association of California....

 

 

TRAC E-Bulletin #08-38

Type: RAIL FUNDING PROPOSAL INFO

Source: AMTRAK WEST

 

 

TRAC Members & Associates--

 

 

ITEM 1:  TRAC Board wants to wish everyone a Happy, Safe and Prosperous New Year.  We appreciate your support and look forward to a more active role for TRAC in the legislature this coming year.

 

 

ITEM 2: REBUILD AMERICA PROPOSALS RAIL SECTION

 

 

Infrastructure Needs:  Demand for intercity passenger rail has increased and Amtrak ridership is higher than at any point in its history. 

 

In 2007, the Passenger Rail Working Group of the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission reported that the total capital cost for re-establishing the national  intercity passenger rail network between now and 2050 is $357.2 billion, or an annualized cost of $8.1 billion. 

 

With respect to freight rail, DOT estimates that the demand for rail freight transportation -- measured in tonnage - will increase 88 percent by 2035.  A study conducted by Cambridge  Systematics, Inc. estimates that an investment of $148 billion (in 2007 dollars) for rail infrastructure expansion over the next 28 years is required to keep pace with economic growth and meet DOT9s forecast demand.  Of this amount, the short line and regional freight railroads9 share is projected to be $13 billion, which includes $320 million for line expansion; $5 billion for major improvements to tunnels, bridges, and clearances; and $7.23 billion for branch line upgrades. 

 

Ready-to-Go Projects:  Amtrak has identified at least $500 million in ready-to-go projects, including car overhauls, replacement of aging equipment, fire and life safety improvements,  improvements to track, structures, electric traction, and communications and signals, and customer and information technology enhancements, if additional funding is made available.  Amtrak has identified a total of $3.8 billion of projects that are ready to go to construction within two years. Similarly, a December 2008 survey of 427 cities by the U.S. Conference of Mayors identified 41 Amtrak projects at a total cost of $1.1 billion that are ready to go to construction in 2009.  In addition, the States for Passenger Rail Coalition has identified $1.4 billion in ready-to-go intercity passenger rail capital projects, including corridor development projects, station and terminal improvements, improvements to track, siding, signal, and grade crossings, and the purchase of new equipment.  The States for Passenger Rail Coalition has identified a total of $9.4 billion of projects that are ready to go to construction within two years.  Similarly, the Midwest Interstate Passenger Rail Commission has identified more than $815 million of high-speed and intercity passenger rail projects that are ready to go to construction within 120 days. 

 

The American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association has identified $511 million in ready-to-

go projects, including upgrades to rail and roadbed, bridges, tunnels, and intermodal terminals,

overhaul and replacement of existing locomotives to 3green technology2, expansion of rail yards,

and grade crossing improvements.

 

Proposal: 

 

1. Provide $1.5 billion for capital grants to Amtrak;

 

2. Provide $3.4 billion for high-speed and intercity passenger rail capital grants to

States; and

 

3. Provide $100 million for capital grants to short line and regional railroads.   

 

Source:  Appropriate funds from the General Fund.

 

 

Bob Reynolds

TRAC Volunteer and Board Secretary

I've been so worried this would happen.  Given the choice, what state legislature would favor pro-urban transit projects over anti-urban highways?  None, particularly not states that have been red for a while and whose district boundaries favor exurban and rural interests.  Unfortunately the Change we're looking for needs to come top-down from Washington.  What Obama needs to address-- directly and aggressively-- is the tendency of state legislatures to neglect urban development.  Block grants for "infrastructure" will only reinforce bad trends. 

The U.S. Department of Transportation has identified 220 bottlenecks that significantly increase the number of vehicles idling in traffic. “If you can eliminate the congestion, you can dramatically reduce greenhouse-gas emissions,” said Jeff Solsby, a spokesman for the Washington-based American Road and Transportation Builders Association.

 

Problem is, you cannot eliminate congestion. This has been THE BIG TRANSPORTATION LIE of the last 100 years. Making highways wider to reduce congestion is like letting our your belt to reduce obesity, except that highwaymen's political power and influence is hurting my health, and that of my nation and the planet....

 

** It continues a lifestyle in which we try to manage demand by increasing supply (letting out the belt) and keeping out price as a demand mitigation factor. The absence of price in the supply-demand equation regarding highway use underscores the absence of free market here. Combined with the absence of equal government support for trains and transit, and thus their inavailability as a real travel option to driving, makes it impossible to measure how Americans actually prefer to travel.

 

** It continues a lifestyle of sprawl which creates duplicative older, existing infrastructures (sewers, schools, governments, etc) for which we all must pay more and more taxes to support. And sprawl does nothing but make traffic worse, not better.

 

** It intensifies a lifestyle of increasingly lower population densities where everyone must drive and incur the massive costs of auto use/ownership to reach jobs that pay less with respect to costs of living than those of our parents and grandparents. That virtually locks more people into perpetually lower standards of living.

 

** It worsens a lifestyle which assumes we can continue consuming oil like we did before 1970 when America was able to produce enough oil to satisfy all of its own needs, not like today where our oil fields are 40 percent depleted and we must import two-thirds of our supply to remain as the world's biggest oil glutton. The ready availability of oil is rapidly diminishing globally, yet America continues to act as if it's still 1969.

 

** It worsens a lifestyle in which carbon emissions have jumped six-fold since since 1950 and seven-fold since the industrial revolution began 300 years ago, risking serious impacts to our health, our atmosphere and our climate.

 

If the road builders want to consume themselves to death, that's their choice. But don't dare try to take me, my country and my planet down with you.

This is what we get when we do things without forethought. All we get is a reflex action that defaults to "highways uber-alles." It's a knee-jerk reaction that does nothing to address today's needs.

 

This country is a far different place that it was 30 years ago, when a lot of the "plans" were drawn up. Times have changed. Any stimulus plan should take that into account and if the Obama Administration has any sense, they'll wake up.

http://www.narprail.org/cms/index.php/resources/more/obama_stimulus/

 

December 31, 2008

“Now we need to remake our transportation system for the 21st Century.”

 

Dear President-Elect Obama:

 

Thank you for your clear statement recognizing the need for a change in the U.S. approach to transportation investment.  Thank you also for selecting a transportation secretary supportive of Amtrak, and for noting at your December 17 news conference that Rep. La Hood, “throughout his career, has fought to improve mass transit.” We were equally pleased at his prominent reference to Amtrak at the same conference: “We have a task before us to rebuild America.  As a nation, we need to continue to be the world leader in infrastructure development: Amtrak, mass transit, light rail, air travel...”

 

Your statements and your voting records encourage us to believe that you share the view that travel choices which are attractive, convenient, safe and affordable should be available to all Americans - be they of modest means or middle class, individuals or families, urban or rural, young or old, able bodied or with disabilities.

 

The National Association of Railroad passengers is the largest citizen based public interest organization representing the millions of Americans who use trains and transit today and the millions more who would use it tomorrow if they had the choice.  Our work is carried out on a volunteer basis by our 24,000 individual members, supported by a small Washington-based staff of five.

 

Our vision – which will improve the lives of all Americans—is for a next generation transportation system that provides Americans those important travel choices.  It is a vision for a multi-modal transportation system that will make travel easier for all Americans wherever they live; and make high quality mobility affordable and available.  The system will place greater emphasis on rail for transporting passengers and freight, and on convenient linkages among all forms of transportation.  The system will be energy efficient and environmentally benign and will drastically reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil and interests.

 

It is important that the stimulus package you are preparing begin to move our nation closer to this vision. We urge you to allocate at least $20 billion of total stimulus spending to projects that will improve and expand passenger train service throughout the country.  The attached appendix lists some projects that should be undertaken with these funds.

 

Experience this year demonstrated how this choice helped many Americans adapt to high oil prices.  Vehicle miles traveled dropped, highway and airport congestion eased and oil consumption fell as millions shifted from cars and planes to trains and transit.  Millions more would have made the same shift, and the impact would have been far more positive, if they had had the choice.  Even years before the recent peak in gasoline prices, polls showed that 70% of Americans want better train service.  Overwhelming House and Senate votes for recent passage of the rail safety and Amtrak reauthorization bill shows that Congress agrees. The time to begin is now.

 

We understand that change will not be easy; entrenched interests—including many state highway departments—will fight to preserve the status quo.  However, the current dip in oil prices does not weaken environmental arguments for a greater emphasis on energy-efficient transportation, nor does it eliminate the need to prepare America for the time when oil once again becomes scarce and expensive.

 

We stand ready to help you and your administration in any way we can to prepare America for a better future.  We ask that you designate a person in your administration with whom we can work on transportation issues.  We are in touch with the issues and can provide ideas and information that will be useful to you and your staff.  We think that these issues are important to you - because they are important to the American people.  We would appreciate an opportunity to meet personally with one of your staff.

 

Respectfully,

 

George L. Chilson

Chairman of the Board

 

Ross B. Capon

President and CEO

 

CC: Vice President-Elect Joseph Biden

Rep. Ray LaHood, DOT Secretary Designate

The Honorable John D. Rockefeller

The Honorable Kay Bailey Hutchison

The Honorable Jim Oberstar

The Honorable John Mica

 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/05/opinion/05mon2.html?_r=1&th&emc=th

January 5, 2009

Editorial

New York Times

A Pitch for Mass Transit

 

 

Unlike President Bush, Barack Obama is going to enter office with a clear appreciation of the urgent problems of climate change and Americas growing dependency on foreign oil and a strong commitment to address both.

 

 

.......

From the American Public Transportation Association:

 

January 7, 2009

 

New Congress and President-elect Obama Begin Negotiations on Economic Recovery Legislation; Oberstar Proposes $12 billion for Public Transportation and $3.4 billion for High-speed Rail

 

The 111th Congress convened this week, and President-elect Barack Obama met with House and Senate leaders on Monday to discuss options for economic recovery legislation. The President-elect continues to express support for infrastructure investment in a stimulus bill, but this week Obama also emphasized tax cuts as a means to help the U.S. economy. The incoming Administration is reportedly considering a stimulus plan valued at approximately $775 billion, a considerably larger package than the $61 billion stimulus bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives in September. With regard to infrastructure, the President-elect released a preliminary plan that calls for $25 billion in immediate investment in a variety of infrastructure activities and $60 billion in new transportation investment under a proposed National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank, an element of the Obama-Biden campaign platform.

 

The Obama principles will likely be reworked significantly as Congress develops legislative proposals, and specific funding levels for public transportation are expected to be included. APTA has identified $47.8 billion in transit needs that could be met in a two-year stimulus bill, and the APTA economic stimulus survey has indentified more than $12 billion of "ready-to-go" projects that could be advanced in fewer than 90 days. According to U.S. Department of Transportation estimates, if $47.8 billion were invested in public transportation immediately, more than 1.3 million green jobs could be supported in the next two years. The President-elect and several key members of Congress have stated that infrastructure spending will not be earmarked, indicating that formula funding will likely be a large component of any public transportation or highway spending in a stimulus bill, but some proposals have included funding for new starts/small starts and it is not yet clear how those funds would be distributed.

 

In anticipation of the next stimulus bill, Chairman James L. Oberstar of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee unveiled an $85 billion infrastructure proposal on December 18. Under the Chairman's proposal funding would be made available for "ready-to-go" projects at the following levels: $12.5 billion for public transportation, $30.5 billion for highway infrastructure, $3.4 billion for high-speed and intercity rail, $1.5 billion for Amtrak, and remaining funds would be provided for aviation, federal buildings, projects of the Army Corps of Engineers and other infrastructure investment. While limited details are available, grant recipients would be needed to obligate funds or execute contracts very quickly with some of the new funding and funds could be reapportioned if they are not spent within certain timeframes. Chairman Oberstar has stated that the Federal Transit Administration and the other U.S. DOT modal administrations would be asked to expedite the grant making process to facilitate quick investments.

 

For public transportation investment, Chairman Oberstar's proposal bears strong resemblance to the stimulus bill, H.R. 7110 that passed the House in the last Congress, but which was not inacted into law. $7.5 billion would be available for capital grants under the urban and rural formula programs and $2 billion would be available for transit energy grants to assist transit systems with operating and capital expenses related to increased fuel costs, service expansion and the prevention of fare increases. Chairman Oberstar has also proposed $2.5 billion in supplemental funding for the New Starts and Small Starts programs, an element not included in the prior House stimulus bill. The proposal also has a new recommendation of $3.4 billion for competitive high-speed rail grants under a program authorized by the Amtrak/Rail Safety legislation (Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, Division B of P.L. 110-432).

 

While the Oberstar proposal would provide valuable new investment, the final version of stimulus legislation could be more or less favorable to transit as House and Senate Democratic leaders and the incoming Obama administration begin to formulate legislative details. At present, funding levels have not been set by Congressional leaders for either a Senate or House proposal. It is essential that APTA members continue to contact their Representatives and Senators to make the case for transit investment in economic recovery legislation. APTA staff will continue to discuss stimulus proposals with Congressional staff and transition officials for the incoming Administration in the coming weeks. Congressional leaders now expect a stimulus bill to be completed before the President's Day recess which is scheduled to begin on Friday, February 13. Final action on the unfinished Fiscal Year 2009 appropriations bills, including the Transportation Appropriations bill, could be delayed until late February or March until economic recovery legislation is enacted.

 

 

 

ACTION ALERT

 

+ Call your Senators and Representatives and urge them to support public transportation investment in stimulus legislation.

 

+ Point out that if $47.8 billion were invested in public transportation immediately, more than 1.3 million green jobs could be supported in the next two years.

 

+ Discuss your transit system's needs for assistance. Explain how shortfalls in state and local transit revenues affect your ability to serve your riders and remind them about ridership gains at both the local and national level.

 

+ Cite specific examples of "ready-to-go" transit projects in your area.

 

+ Explain that public transportation and all forms of intercity rail are integral elements of our nation's surface transportation system and that they can advance national goals and help produce "green" jobs.

So what are the "ready-to-go" mass transit projects in Ohio? Is there anywhere that lists these projects, if there are any?

Most of what I hear is that the stimulus money is going to be targeted at projects that are "shovel-ready" - i.e. ready for actual construction.  Unfortunately, major transportation projects (transit and highway) aren't typically advanced to final design stages if there is no identified funding (for good reason).  So, if "shovel-ready" is the criteria, I don't think you're going to see many transit projects identified in the stimulus.  See Conference of Mayors list of projects for Cincy:

 

http://www.usmayors.org/mainstreeteconomicrecovery/stimulussurveyparticipantsdata.asp?City=Cincinnati&State=OH

 

The potential benefits to these projects come from the trickle-down effect of freeing up other capital funds that may have been programmed in future years for projects that are now being expedited through the stimulus package.  So there is reason to be optimistic about the stimulus package's potential effect on transit, but I think it's going to require a little patience.

True, and most of the transit/rail projects are being submitted under the long-term phase of the federal stimulus (such as 3-C Corridor, West Shore Corridor, or BRT extensions on East 55th, Buckeye and Clifton in Cleveland).

 

Cleveland RTA does have about $62 million worth of transit projects ready to go under the short-term (120 days or less) phase of the federal stimulus. All but $7 million of RTA's request is for rail projects (ie: station renovations/replacements, track work, electrical substations, bridges, etc). The only project that's not rail is for the East Side Transit Center (at CSU).

The New Republic

Not Doing Enough by John B. Judis

Why I worry that Obama doesn't realize just how bad things are.

Post Date Friday, January 09, 2009

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=611d21dd-edb6-45f8-802c-568e35493234

 

[The following is an excerpt from a larger article found at the above link.]

There's much to like in Obama's plan. But there are two important ways he may have to go further. Most economists agree that what finally pulled the U.S. out of the Great Depression was military spending for World War II. Some liberals argue that if the Roosevelt administration had not abandoned a Keynesian stimulus strategy in 1937-38, the U.S. might have gotten out of the depression without a war. But in 1936, unemployment was still at 16.9 percent; by 1942, after two years of war spending, it was 4.7 percent, strongly indicating that it was war spending that did it. I am not suggesting that the United States start a world war in order to solve the world's economic problem. But I am suggesting a strategy that could be called the fiscal equivalent of war.

 

......

More about the "shovel-ready" requirement...

 

"These need to be projects that are ready to go, that you've already done the environmental studies, you've done all of the engineering work, you're ready to start hiring people next month," said Dave Young, a member of the Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of Governments.

 

http://www.wlwt.com/news/18442999/detail.html

Builders say layoffs loom without aid of stimulus

Saturday, January 10, 2009 3:04 AM

By Stephen Manning

 

WASHINGTON -- Construction companies that build roads, commercial buildings and public-works projects could lay off up to 30 percent of their workers next year because of an anticipated downturn in construction activity, an industry group said this week as it pushed for big infrastructure spending in President-elect Barack Obama's economic-stimulus plan.

 

About two-thirds of the nation's nonresidential-construction companies plan layoffs this year, and most expect declines in business next year, according to estimates by the Associated General Contractors of America, which represents about 33,000 companies. The industry employs 4.1 million people, meaning about 1.25 million jobs could be lost if the dire forecast comes true.

 

But the group also estimated that a stimulus plan that includes broad spending on state and federal public-works and infrastructure projects could reverse the decline for construction companies. The overall construction work force could grow by up to 25 percent, according to the forecast.

 

.........

 

http://dispatch.com/live/content/business/stories/2009/01/10/construction.ART_ART_01-10-09_C8_QBCGB93.html?sid=101

There is no doubt that an infrastructure investment based stimulus is needed.  U-6 unemployment (closest US calculation to how the EU calculates unemployment, and a more comprehensive reflection of problems in the labor market-- like the number of people working part time who want to be working full time but can't find full time work) was 13.5 percent in Dec 2008.  Another 1.25 million jobs would be a huge blow.

 

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t12.htm

New billions for passenger rail?

Rail and other transit systems are in line for a vast infusion of new capital improvement dollarsnot in spite of, but because of, the troubled economy.

By Luther S. Miller, Senior Editorial Consultant

Railway Age

 

Rail passenger systems rolled into the New Year with trainloads of problems requiring urgent attention. Many have seen their local finding sources shrink or even dry up and are raising fares and slashing service just to pay operating bills. The resulting headlines in local newspapers picture an industry in profound trouble.

 

That is not, fortunately, the case. Help is on the way, in a very big way.

 

Working with both sides of the aisle in Congress, President-elect Barack Obama and his transition team late in December were putting together a bipartisan economic stimulus package estimated to cost $850 billion to $1 trillion. The goal is to put three million people to work, fast, and at the same time build projects of lasting value to the country.

 

 

........

 

http://www.railwayage.com/A/feature2.html

I don't disagree with what the blogger says. We are all concerned that transit and passenger rail will not receive a decent share of the stimulus. My contention is that with peak oil, carbon emissions, and the cost of owning/operating a car consuming an increasingly larger share of household budgets is not a smart move. To perpetuate the folly of over-dependence on driving is to continue to put this nation at risk of further economic hardship, not to protect this nation from it.

http://www.daytondailynews.com/o/content/oh/story/opinions/editorial/2009/01/14/ddn011409railxxmg.html

 

EDITORIAL

 

Columbus' bid a preview of stimulus game?

By Dayton Daily News

 

Wednesday, January 14, 2009

 

The mayor of Columbus has long wanted to bring rail transportation to his city, for intra-city travel. He says Columbus is the biggest city in the country without a rail system. He specifically has had his sights on High Street, leading from downtown through the Ohio State University neighborhood, via the convention district and the Short North entertainment area. He sees it as perfect for streetcars.

 

But he's had trouble moving the proposal ahead. Costs. Skepticism about whether people would actually use the streetcars. The usual.

 

But now the idea has resurfaced. It's in a letter Mayor Michael Coleman sent to President-elect Barack Obama about a project the city would like to fund using money from the pending federal "stimulus" package.

.....

OneRail Coalition unites rail freight, passenger interests

January 15, 2009

 

Anticipating a return to U.S. rail expansion under an Obama Administration, numerous rail industry groups Thursday announced their formation of the OneRail Coalition, which they claim brings passenger and freight rail stakeholder together for the first time.

 

The coalition "will encourage public policies recognizing rail as a critical element of the national transportation system and an essential part of the future economic growth and environmental well-being of the nation," it said in a statement.

 

The initial membership list, providing a blend of freight, passenger, infrastructure, and environmental/energy interests, includes: the American Public Transit Association (APTA); Amtrak, the American Short Line & Regional Railroad Association (ASLRRA); the Association of American Railroads (AAR); Building Americas Future; the National Association of Railroad Passengers (NARP); the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) ; the Railway Supply Institute (RSI); the States for Passenger Rail Coalition (SPRC) ; and the Surface Transportation Policy Partnership (STPP).

 

 

...........

 

The group says its OneRail Principles are available for review at www.transact.org.

 

http://www.railwayage.com/breaking_news.shtml

An author interviewed on NPR's "Fresh Air" tonight (<a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=99375553">link</a>) said that since on average across the country buses are no more efficient than driving, a better solution may be personalized paratransit where jitneys pick you up at home a drop you off at your destination. He felt that information technology could help coordinate this to the point that it would be efficient enough to be worthwhile. I don't want to dismiss this out of hand, but I'm a little skeptical that it would work, given that I heard somewhere, either on this UO site or on WCPN, that RTA paratransit works out to $40 per ride. Thoughts?