Posted on Friday July 31st by The Infrastructurist | 215
.
- In general news: Following the House’s lead, the Senate passed a $7 billion measure to bail out the nearly-broke Highway Trust Fund. Obama is expected to sign it. (WaPo)
- From Canada, a study finds that a high speed link between Edmonton and Calgary costing of $3+ billion would produce more than $30 billion in economic benefits. Predicted: The average home would increase in value by $450 in both cities. (Edmonton Sun)
- A transportation spend bill passed earlier this week in the House provides $4 billion for HSR–the Senate was feeling less bountiful though: their version provides only $1.2 billion. (Streetsblog DC)
- Improving the rail link between New Haven and Springfield, Mass., is a key part of the New England governors’ rail plan. CT Senator Chris Dodd, head of the Banking Committee, thinks there’s a “solid chance” this project will get funded with stimulus bucks. We’d bet on it. (Courant)
- Oregon’s governor is hopeful that a project to upgrade train service between Portland and Eugene will see some stimulus love. The state asked for $2 billion to upgrade tracks and crossings, allowing trains to top out at 110 mph. (Oregonian)
- Doubters corner: Let’s try “overhauling our antique public transportation system” before spending “untold billions” on this wacky HSR thing, says a Chicago columnist. He would particularly like quicker trips between Evanston and Comiskey Park. (Chicago Trib)
- “Ohio would be a prime example of a state that would benefit from” HSR, says Obama. “You could link a whole bunch of cities there. The same is true between states, linking Chicago to Detroit to Cleveland.” Well, we know what he means anyway… (Gannett)
July 31st, 2009 at 12:02 pm
Speaking as a Chicagoan: the doubter brings up some great points. The thing about going from Evanston to Comiskey (or the Cell, in the parlance of our times) is that the entire journey is completely solely on the Red line, with no transfers.
The CTA is plagued with some ridiculous percentage of its transit system (maybe as much as 10%) running through “slow zones,” which are regions of rail either so degraded that trains can’t excede 5 mph or else under construction to replace the degraded track.
While I do not agree with his skeptical attitude towards HSR, I think he makes a great point about HSR taking federal funds from repairing and improving existing infrastructure networks that a million Americans use every day and applying them to create an entirely new system with no core ridership group. Three million Chicagoans, as well as the additional 5 million served in the metro area, would see an immediate improvement in their daily lives with an improved and expanded L.
That said, I really wish I could eat my cake and have it too: an improved L and an efficient national HSR network.
July 31st, 2009 at 1:35 pm
The $7B for the Highway Trust Fund is in addition to the $8B transferred last September. This will continue to occur as long as spending outstrips revenue ($28B in 2006), so it’s a bit breathtaking that the stopgap transportation spending bill is $43B for 2010. That’s bigger than planned spending for any of the SAFETEA-LU years (and that’s before FHWA recissions occurred). I haven’t seen the figures for what was actually spent on highways & transit in 2008, but I think it’s safe to say that a substantial portion of the spending of the 2010 is “more of the same” and I would not be surprised to learn that HSR & increased transit funding was just piled on top instead of representing a substantive shift in priorities.
August 1st, 2009 at 12:22 pm
The Trib writer brings up some good points. While a national HSR network would be awesome, downtown to downtown service isn’t worth as much if you can’t get to downtown quickly via public transport or have to drive in a car. Millions of people around the country use public transit systems, and the problems within and around these systems are well-documented; I’m not familiar with the check writing procedures of the DOT or the Federal Government in general, but couldn’t it be as simple as saying ‘$5 billion (a random number) to the State of Illinois to be used exclusively for repair and maintenance of public transit in the Greater Chicago area.’
Oh I’ve made a fool of myself; that would actually make sense, and I don’t think we can count on a politician doing anything close to that anytime soon.
August 1st, 2009 at 1:34 pm
its good that it is now completely clear for all to see that the highway industry is completely propped up by the government and is the anti-free market, not that it wasnt before but now it couldnt be anymore obvious. all within the last year… multiple highway trust fund bail outs, cash for clunkers free money giveaway, tens of billions given to detroit automakers. and nevermind the free, extensive, expensive to maintain government owned and operated road system for the last 90 years. plus the dependence on an expensive long lasting government run military campaign in the middle east to provide cheap abundant fuel to keep the highway industry running.