High-Speed Rail in the Stimulus
Good news for people who like fast trains as it seems a significant amount of high speed rail funds made it into the stimulus:
And while many initiatives were scaled back as Congress and the White House sought to cut the overall cost, there were some surprise increases, including a quadrupling of money for high-speed rail projects to $8 billion.
The White House pushed for the added money in the final rapid-fire negotiations, seeing it as a tangible way to create jobs and benefit different parts of the country. It also added a futuristic element to legislation that has been criticized as lacking forward vision.
I’m glad to see this happen, though it’s still the case that my first, second, and third preferences for transportation funding in the stimulus would have been money for mass transit system operating costs. The really good news about this is that my understanding is that the President took a personal interest in this provision, which is crucial because building-out an HSR network in such a big country would require a lot of followthrough.
Meanwhile, it seems that Harry Reid was talking about this provision and mentioned the idea that a high-speed rail corridor from Los Angeles to Las Vegas might be eligible for some of the money. That’s true. It’s also, I think, a pretty good idea. But some conservatives have decided to portray this as Reid sneaking a special “high speed rail to Las Vegas” provision into the stimulus package. There is no such provision and he did no such thing. The United States has many metropolitan areas and no true high-speed rail corridors. Consequently there are a lot of plausible city pairs and corridors that could benefit from these measures. My guess would be that the folks best-positioned to take advantage of this would be in California where they’ve already got the HSR ball rolling. Pennsylvania also has an actively ongoing initiative to upgrade service to Pittsburgh and Ed Rendell puts a high priority on this sort of thing and Arlen Specter was a pivotal Senator in pulling the deal together, so they might benefit.
44 Responses to “High-Speed Rail in the Stimulus”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
February 13th, 2009 at 9:37 am
Yes, there is a plan to extend HSR to Pittsburgh along the Keystone Corridor, but I would hardly call it shovel ready. But I can dream can’t I?
Actually, I bet a good chunk of that project is as shovel ready as anything else is these days. There was a good bit of wheeling and dealing back in 2006 that seemingly got nowhere but you never know. Hmmm.
February 13th, 2009 at 9:38 am
Re “Pennsylvania also has an actively ongoing initiative to upgrade service to Pittsburgh”
————
Southwest only charges $60 for a direct flight from Philly to Pittsburgh — by bonusing off the follow-on Traffic to Las Vegas. Same for flights from Pitt to Philly. So Amtrak has a steep hill to climb.
Oddly enough, the 1 hour flight might not be all that faster after you deduct times for security processing and taxi ride from Pitt airport out in the hinterlands to downtown.
My guess is the train would be far more fuel efficient than the airplane so significantly rising fuel costs could give Amtrak the edge. On the other hand, you can buy airliners in increments and deploy them around the US — you don’t have to make the huge upfront investment in a railline and hope that it makes a profit that you get with Amtrak.
Yes, there is already a railline from Philly to Pitt -but I doubt it can handle high speed trains without major upgrades.
February 13th, 2009 at 9:42 am
“it’s still the case that my first, second, and third preferences for transportation funding in the stimulus would have been money for mass transit system operating costs.”
Correctamundo.
February 13th, 2009 at 9:51 am
to add to all of Don’s observations, there are currently flights on Southwest from any of 4 LA basin airports to Las Vegas (where the airport is conveniently located relative to the Strip) one way for $60 or less (web only fares, but that’s no big deal).
February 13th, 2009 at 9:51 am
Good job not being too bothered by the GOP’s absurd struggle to claim that this bill’s full of pork. Of course, if it had no money appropriated for specific projects it would be criticized for for lacking accountability.
Thankfully the AP’s Calvin Woodward is on the case to make shit up about pork: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090210/ap_on_go_pr_wh/fact_check_obama
February 13th, 2009 at 10:03 am
one cruicial factor in the viability of HSR to Vegas will be the casinos involvement.
A new weekend rail service from NYC to Atlantic City debuted last week. It’s largely (entirely?) funded by the casinos. $50 one way for a ‘club’ level ticket, $75 for first class.
While that exact service model used for this AC service I don’t believe is necessarily right for all cases, it shows that leveraging the business interests that benefit from such transit modes is useful.
February 13th, 2009 at 10:41 am
I think the Republicans just can’t get their heads around the fact that the Democrats don’t earmark the way they did. They claimed there was a Pelosi’s mouse earmark related program activity and now a Big Reid’s train earmark related program activity.
Also pork. They claimed there was a huge amount of pork in the bill. Stands to reason — it was a huge bill and the pork proportion was never low when they were in power. Then what could they come up with ? Money for sod for the national mall (let’s remind people how the old grass got trampled) and money for contraceptives (let’s offend women (including Carly Fiorina) and explain why we want poor women to have more unwanted childred since unwanted children of poor women are just what the country needs).
My guess is that the congress people denounced pork and earmarks without looking at the bill. Then told their aids to find the pork and earmarks.
February 13th, 2009 at 10:45 am
So what if Reid sneaked this into the bill – I wouldn’t care less because, I despise Vegas, and wouldn’t be caught on the strip if you paid me.
But being practical (which I sometimes try to be . . . ) A high speed rail link between L.A. and Vegas is a splendid idea. The distance is relatively short – (I can’t recall exactly how far, mainly because I’ll never use the damn thing), and much of it is basically in the desert, which means it’s flat and deserted, and probably has few right-of-way issues. It’s almost perfect for this kind of project.
February 13th, 2009 at 10:54 am
to add to all of Don’s observations, there are currently flights on Southwest from any of 4 LA basin airports to Las Vegas (where the airport is conveniently located relative to the Strip) one way for $60 or less (web only fares, but that’s no big deal).
That’s actually not that great — you can take Amtrak from Los Angeles to San Jose (a slightly longer distance) for $49 one way. It’s potentially more of a time commitment to take the train since it’s an 8 to 10 hour ride, but between traffic and airport security, it might not be a huge time savings.
I’m going to a conference in San Jose and came very close to taking the train, but the real deal-breaker was the length of the trip and the single departure time. If the train could have gotten me there in, say, 4 hours instead of 8 hours, I would have gone with the train.
And, c’mon, is there any more guaranteed money-maker than a train between Los Angeles and Las Vegas? It would probably make money even if it were a normal-speed train. People wait in traffic for 10 hours to drive out on Friday nights — why wouldn’t they take a reasonably-priced train if they’re already willing to take the slow route?
February 13th, 2009 at 10:57 am
The HSR link between LV and LA should’ve happened a long time ago. In fact it almost did. There was a plan in the mid 70s which got all the way to the bidding phase. Then a scandal erupted from the–surprise–Las Vegas side. The bids turned out to be rigged, mob involvement alleged, project scrapped, this being the era depicted in the movie ‘Casino’ when mob power was at its zenith. At that time Reid was a local politician about to make a name for himself on the Nevada Gaming Control Board if I remember the hazy history correctly.
February 13th, 2009 at 11:09 am
The project does sound interesting. Unfortunately the trains will be electric and not steam.
February 13th, 2009 at 11:15 am
HSR in California seems like a good idea. However, what about developing REAL HSR in the Northeast Corridor, where the demand is already quite high, and the Acela is underwhelming. There’s no reason the trip from Boston to D.C. should be 8 hours when the time from Paris to Marseille (same distance) is 3. If I could make it from Boston to New York in under 2 hours, I may actually take the train instead of the bus (which for far less money, gets me to New York about 45 minutes later than the train).
February 13th, 2009 at 11:25 am
but between traffic and airport security, it might not be a huge time savings.
Right, the train to Las Vegas will stop at everyone’s house to pick them up on the way.
February 13th, 2009 at 11:26 am
Deserted, yes (although you’ll have to miss that stop in Baker). Flat, no so much. Maybe there’s a route that’s feasible, but right now, the main traffic flow from SoCal to Vegas goes through the Cajon Pass, which isn’t what one would consider “flat” (unless you lived in the Himalays, maybe).
Now, maybe modern technology and materials have made train travel through that area safer, but there have been problems with derailments in that area in the past, most notably in 1989. I have no expertise in this area, so if this sounds alarmist for no reason, maybe someone can set me straight.
February 13th, 2009 at 11:51 am
My guess would be that the folks best-positioned to take advantage of this would be in California where they’ve already got the HSR ball rolling.
The $8 billion is for the whole country. California needs $30 billion just for the first phase of its HSR line. And it can’t start construction until it’s secured all the funding. It needs to sell $10 billion in bonds. It hasn’t sold any. It needs another $10 billion from private investors. It doesn’t have any. And it needs $10 billion from the feds.
Don’t hold your breath.
February 13th, 2009 at 12:38 pm
@12 – agreed
bos-wash seems like a more urgent need. 3 cities with way more people connecting for business and entertainment vs. 2 cities connecting mostly for entertainment – i think i know which one wins.
in conclusion, i look forward to the day that i can get on a hsr train here in raleigh/durham and get off in washington or ny.
i also look forward to the day i can do the same with sf and la ^^
February 13th, 2009 at 12:41 pm
You know, I love HSR. Loved riding those trains in Europe. Consider them vastly superior to airplanes. In fact, have had MAGLEV fantasies that confess to here.
But it seems to me that just rebuilding early 20th-century rail as an alternative to the automobile and transport trucks, and laying down long-distance DC electrical transmission lines in those corridors, is the better investment.
Planes and the value of the time premium will die out on their own. Not because you or I do or do not wish it. But because a collapsing global financial/fuel/climate infrastructure will not be able to maintain the energy/technology investments these require.
February 13th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
My only object to this is that they’re spending only $8 billion for high-speed rail. HSR, IMO, is one of those infrastructure investments that could pay for itself over time.
February 13th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
Planes and the value of the time premium will die out on their own.
Really? No more planes, huh? How much longer do you give them? And people will stop caring about the value of their time? Uh huh.
The sheer level of delusion here is amazing.
February 13th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
Most people don’t realize that in order to continue those short flights we’ll need to subsidize hundreds of billions of airport construction and air traffic control. And ’subsidize’ is the operative word here- the airlines don’t want to pay landing fees for half-hour and one-hour flights.
And new airports are hard to build, especially in built-up areas where people don’t like planes taking off over their houses (or dropping from the sky on their houses, as will happen occasionally). So airports tend to get built far from city centers.
Long distance air travel will continue, of course, until we realize we need to cut that back severely in order to save the earth we live on. Give it another 25 years.
February 13th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
The federal government defines High Speed Rail as any train with a top speed greater than 90 mph. Forget about shiny new bullet trains. Most of this money will be spent simply making existing Amtrak services run a bit faster. That’s good news for rail, but it’s not America’s version of the TGV.
February 13th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
The trip from LA to LV is one of the most dangerous stretches of road this side of the country.
The amount of drunk-drivers on that road is intense, and noted by the vast amount of white-crosses and floral arrangements dotting the road-side almost the entire stretch.
The cajon pass is something to think about, although the architects and designers of the current HSR project in california, addresses the pass pretty efficiently.
February 13th, 2009 at 1:46 pm
One reason a high speed LA-Vegas route hasn’t happened is that (in the short view) there’s no upside for the Greater Los Angeles area governments… they’d be helping finance a one-way money pipeline to Nevada.
In the longer view, if it helped provide a first step to a bigger system, great. Too bad the next logical stop is all the way out in Utah, or that the Strip isn’t between LA and the Bay.
February 13th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
Is anyone aware of a map of all the proposed HSR lines, a la the “Good Roads Everywhere” maps of old? How many lines are we talking about here? Where?
February 13th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
It may surprise you to hear this, but I have at least two train stations that are on the same line that are closer to me than the closest airport. If we’re going to go down to the international airport (LAX) and not just the regional one, there’s probably at least 5 or 6 places I could get on a train before I reach the airport.
Trains go a lot of places that airplanes don’t.
February 13th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
well in CA, the routes that we voted to fund via bond are here:
http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/map.htm
i actually wasn’t totally aware of the leg out to Riverside before it goes down to SD, but given that, a leg to LV is a no-brainer. even if you hate Vegas and/or hate trains, it will at least reduce congestion at the LA World airports (4 LA basin airports ref’ed above) and leave gates & runways freed up to handle longer haul flights. every time i go to LAX half the flights departing around me are to LV, SJ, SF, Oakland… that’s nuts.
February 13th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
serail catowner, do you ever worry about giving the impression that you’re living in a fantasy world?
February 13th, 2009 at 4:07 pm
the high speed rail proposal from LA-Vegas is an actual boondoggle, and this is coming from a HSR proponent. I’m actually all for some HSR from LA-Vegas but the existing proposal is a maglev style train which is both completely unnecessary and way too costly. if they, for example, used a fraction of the money, restored the previously abandoned rail service with speed upgrades (~115 mph) I might change my tune. there are much more worth projects than LA-LV
February 13th, 2009 at 4:11 pm
and for Dave (@ 12), speaking as a native of New Jersey, it is obvious to me that the Right-Of-Way issues thru all those towns & states will make real Boston-DC HSR next to impossible in the near term. All the CA projects (out to LV included) have far fewer hurdles re: ROW, etc, and I think it makes a lot of sense to prove to skeptical voters that this can work by attacking somewhat more bite-sized morsels, esp in CA where people are much more willing to experiment with large public infrastructure.
waiting for NJ and Conn residents to wake up one day and realize there beloved quiet bedroom (car-centric) communities may not be serving the greater good will be a long wait indeed.
February 13th, 2009 at 6:46 pm
The specific proposal is bad, but the idea of having a train from LA to Las Vegas is a good one. It would be like printing money for Amtrak and could even — gasp! — eventually pay for itself. Which is why Republicans refuse to build something that there’s a clear market for.
February 13th, 2009 at 11:01 pm
HSR from LA to LV is a no-brainer, however I agree with @29. There’s no need to a maglev whosywhatsit. Upgraded Amtrak on existing lines would have an immediate market. LV business should foot the bill for part of it since they would derive most of the benefit.
The drive is 4 1/2 hours from most of LA and it is the most god-awful boring drive in the world. (How bad is it when hte ‘city’ of Baker is a highlight?) I refuse to fly if I can help it and I would gladly pay $50 each way.
PS The second leg could go to Phoenix…
February 14th, 2009 at 12:22 am
The drive is 4 1/2 hours from most of LA and it is the most god-awful boring drive in the world.
Indeed, this article identifies it as the deadliest stretch of highway in the country:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,490940,00.html
February 14th, 2009 at 9:45 am
Since someone asked about a map w/HSR corridors on it, I’ll link you all to The Transport Politic’s post with just that map:
http://thetransportpolitic.com/2009/01/30/envisioning-a-future-interstate-rail-network/
Notice the network centered on Chicago; according to the Midwest HSR Initiative, it would take $4.1 billion in 2006 dollars to complete that network for 110mph trains, which isn’t too shabby.
February 17th, 2009 at 3:46 am
There needs to be a spiderweb network of HSR across the States. Ask yourselves, how long will air travel be viable? How long will fuel costs stay low? We need the alternatives and then we’ll have better HSR and air travel systems. They’ll have to compete for customers.
As far as the Cajon Pass is concerned, it is a sticky issue, but what about tunnel-boring technology? We have it in 2009 don’t we? Just cut right through the Pass.
February 19th, 2009 at 1:20 am
A relatively moderate investment in infrastructure would permit trains between Chicago and Springfield operate at 150 MPH along much of the right of way. And perhaps all the way to St. Louis.
March 2nd, 2009 at 5:13 am
levitraIncredible site!
March 14th, 2009 at 5:21 am
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
xanax
March 17th, 2009 at 2:27 am
I want to say – thank you for this!
tramadol
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:14 am
tramadol
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
March 22nd, 2009 at 10:27 am
buy viagra online
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:20 am
It is the coolest site,keep so!
buy cheap viagra
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:12 am
Great site. Good info
cheap brand pfizer viagra
April 9th, 2009 at 6:05 am
I bookmarked this site, Thank you for good job! viagra
April 19th, 2009 at 8:53 am
hprquK vipgmjleprgk, [url=http://emghzqaozhai.com/]emghzqaozhai[/url], [link=http://bupcoehhooaa.com/]bupcoehhooaa[/link], http://rwgtkmprtbpc.com/