EMAIL DETAILS

also the comments section online have some interesting feedback from
readers: http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2011/04/21/opinion/21thu1.html


NY TIMES Editorial
How Not to Plan for the Future
Published: April 20, 2011

The agreement between Congress and the White House to virtually
eliminate money for high-speed rail is harebrained. France, China,
Brazil, even Russia, understand that high-speed rail is central to
future development. Not Washington.

The budget package eliminated about $1 billion that President Obama
had wanted to add to the current budget, and it rescinded $400 million
of $2.4 billion that was already designated for high-speed rail this
year.

That money was supposed to go to Florida, but it’s now up for grabs
after Gov. Rick Scott mindlessly rejected a plan to build the first
high-speed rail corridor between Orlando and Tampa. Despite the vast
support of business, Governor Scott claimed it would be too costly for
the state government. It turns out that a lot of other governors —
including 11 of Mr. Scott’s Republican colleagues — would love that
money.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has to choose among 90 proposals
from 24 states, the District of Columbia and Amtrak — $10 billion
worth in all. The real scandal is that Washington won’t pay most of
them.

Two areas stand out on that list: the Northeast corridor from Boston
to Washington; and California, which has ambitions to build a
high-speed rail system from San Francisco and Sacramento to San Diego.
California voters have approved almost $10 billion in bonds for the
project (which has an ultimate price tag of some $45 billion), but the
state wants the $2 billion for an extension.

That is a promising project, for later. The overall price is not
practical now, and the Northeast already has the fastest train in the
country, the Acela, which is running on tracks that do not allow it to
reach its full speed.

Amtrak, backed by regional governors, is asking for $1.3 billion that
would help speed up Acela trains. Some would go to signal, electrical
and track improvements to boost the Acela’s speed from 135 miles per
hour to 160 m.p.h. in a long stretch between Philadelphia and New York
City. New York has another request to clear a path for Acela through
an overloaded exchange near New York City’s Pennsylvania Station.
Right now more than 750 Long Island Rail Road, Amtrak and New Jersey
Transit trains pass through there daily.

Other requests in the Northeast proposal include money for Amtrak to
start work on two tunnels under the Hudson River. Those tunnels, vital
to rail and road travel through the region, would replace a project
that New Jersey’s governor, Chris Christie, canceled last year,
costing his state $3 billion in federal funds.

After making that terrible mistake, Mr. Christie now says he wants
$570 million in funds to replace another choke point for the Acela —
the 100-year-old Portal Bridge across the Hackensack River. He is even
willing to put up $150 million of state money, since the bridge is
also used by New Jersey commuter trains. In his letter asking for
federal funds, he lamented that the bridge, which swings open for
river traffic, is “beyond its useful life” and delays trains. That’s
rich coming from the man who canceled a project that was vital to
ending train delays in the future.

There are many requests, even one from Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin,
a Republican who earlier rejected $810 million of these funds. Now he
wants $150 million for a modest rail project between Milwaukee and
Chicago.

President Obama originally proposed spending more than $50 billion
over the next six years to make America’s passenger rails compete with
other industrialized nations. He wants 80 percent of the nation to
have access to high-speed rail in 25 years. That’s not likely to
happen with this Congress. Perhaps Governors Christie and Walker, and
other Republicans who have a sudden fervor for high-speed rail, can
help make his case.