Subject: States won't be able to reroute high-speed rail funding
From: "Eric Schwerin" <[email-masked]>
To: "Hunter Biden" <[email-masked]>, "Michael Muldoon" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 08:51:09 -0500

*States won't be able to reroute high-speed rail funding*

By Michael D. Bolden
Tuesday, November 16, 2010; A25

The Obama administration plans to reallocate money designated for high-speed
rail if the states granted the funds reject them.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood made the announcement Monday night to
hundreds of politicians, businesspeople, urban planners and rail enthusiasts
gathered in New York City to assess the state of high-speed rail in the
United States during a three-day conference sponsored by the U.S. High Speed
Rail Association <http://www.ushsr.com/ushsr.html> (USHSR) trade group.

Critics have said that high-speed rail would not attract enough riders to
justify the multibillion-dollar price tag. They have also questioned
spending billions of dollars on infrastructure for the network when the
nation's economy is fragile and governments are struggling with deficits.

But rail advocates sketched a vision Monday for a 17,000-mile network
linking U.S. cities with electric trains capable of traveling at 220 mph.

USHSR President Andy Kunz said the transportation network would cost $600
billion over the next 20 years.

Two recently elected governors have announced plans to scuttle high-speed
projects in their states. Wisconsin Gov.-elect Scott Walker (R) wants to
kill a high-speed rail
project<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/09/AR2010110905362.html>
that
would link Madison and Milwaukee and said he would use the money to improve
roads. The state has been awarded $810 million for the project.

Ohio Gov.-elect John
Kasich<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/02/AR2010110208673.html>
(R)
asked the Obama administration for permission to repurpose $400 million in
high-speed rail funds for highway projects. Kasich says Ohio doesn't need
the project. But LaHood said Ohio would forfeit the money it doesn't use for
high-speed rail.

When the state funds are rejected, LaHood said Monday night, they will be
redistributed "in a professional way in places where the money can be well
spent."

There are "a lot of states that would like to have access to that money," he
said, and reallocation will be done quickly.

LaHood recently announced awards of $2.4 billion for high-speed rail
projects in 23 states, including $45.4 million for
Virginia<http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dr-gridlock/2010/10/virgina_gets_45_million_for_hi.html>
to
help fund studies and preliminary engineering in order to improve service
between Richmond and Washington. It was the second round of awards, as the
administration previously distributed $8 billion in stimulus money for
high-speed rail projects. California has received the bulk of the awards -
about $3 billion total.

"This is not your grandfather's train," Kunz said. Videos and displays of
sleek trains with colorful interiors were on view around the conference area
at the New Yorker Hotel, as companies that hope to profit - from Alstom to
Siemens to Kawasaki - advertised their technology.

The forum includes discussions on transforming the country's rail corridors,
insights from companies and government leaders that have worked on
high-speed rail in other countries, and presentations on financing,
construction and legal issues.

Rail advocates acknowledged that they have more work to do to win support
for transforming the nation's rails.

"The honeymoon is over," said Stuart Sirota, owner of Baltimore-based TND
Planning Group, an architecture and urban planning firm.

Sirota said advocates need to do a better job of explaining why high-speed
rail is needed.

"Train travel has been erased from our national DNA," he said. "Rail has
become a foreign concept to most Americans."

Bill Millar, president of the American Public Transportation Association
(APTA), said his group wants the federal government to pay for 90 percent of
the cost, using funding for the interstate highway system as a model.

High-speed rail advocates see the new network as a way to lessen the
country's dependence on foreign oil and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Former transportation secretary Norman Mineta told attendees that high-speed
rail would also boost the economy, create jobs and relieve congestion.

"The year ahead will be the defining one for transportation," Mineta said.

Outgoing California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) delivered a video message
to the conference saying that having trains travel at the same speeds they
did 100 years ago is "embarrassing."

New York Gov. David A. Paterson (D), who is also leaving office, said the
discussion of high-speed rail actually includes two types of improvements:
upgrading corridors to allow trains in some areas to increase their speeds
to 110 to 120 mph, which is proposed for the Richmond to Washington
corridor, and the so-called bullet trains that "we see in Japan." Such
trains would enable travel from New York City to Albany, about 140 miles, in
28 minutes, he said.

Amtrak unveiled a $117 billion, 30-year vision for high-speed rail on the
East Coast this fall that would reduce travel times in the Northeast,
Amtrak's busiest corridor.

Amtrak President Joseph Boardman has said the rail agency envisions a system
that would reduce the travel time between Washington and New York City from
162 minutes to 96.

Amtrak recently named its first vice president for high-speed rail, veteran
transportation professional Albrecht "Al" Engel, who serves on the APTA's
board of directors. Engel is to participate in a panel Tuesday that
addresses the feasibility of U.S. train travel in the Northeast mirroring
the speeds of bullet trains in Japan and Europe.

Currently Amtrak's Acela trains operate as fast as 150 mph, but south of New
York, the Acela runs at 135 mph because of curves, tunnels and station
stops.

But everyone - even LaHood - acknowledged that there's still a lot of work
to do. The transportation secretary was rushing back to Washington after a
reception - via airplane. He said he didn't know whether there was a 9 p.m.
train to Washington, but he knew there was a shuttle.
-- 
Eric D. Schwerin
Rosemont Seneca Partners
(202) 333-1880
[email-masked]