Obama’s High-Speed Disaster

[Geee]

Front Page Magazine:

The most bizarre part of President Obama’s pre-election gasp to attract votes for November is the idea of high speed rail systems. It was one of the items in his new $50 billion spending proposal, as reported Sept. 7 by The Reason Foundation and others. Obama pulled from his political hat, at a Labor Day rally in Milwaukee, a desperate initiative to fix 150,000 miles of roads, lay or rebuild 4,000 miles of railroad tracks and redo 150 miles of airport runways. “Putting high-speed rail on a par with highways for federal transportation funds is an incredibly bad idea—a system they hope people will be willing to change their lifestyles in order to use,” said the Reason Foundation article. It’s “one of the most expensive forms of transportation that a nation could choose,” Heritage Foundation Scholar Ronald Utt wrote in a backgrounder earlier this year.
In January, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) of the Department of Transportation awarded $8 billion of the stimulus package for high-speed rail (HSR). This was to meet Obama’ plan to fling the money at 13 high-speed rail projects nationwide, the Christian Science Monitor reported. An additional $5 billion was promised over the next five years. Besides the billions in capital costs federal and state governments will incur, “domestic and international experience indicates” the President is committing the nation “to providing a perpetual stream of substantial subsidies to offset the difference between fare revenues and operating costs of HSR and passenger rail in general,” Utt wrote. As a result, HSR could rival some other entitlement programs in what will add to out-of-control deficits. In the U.S., even the traditional passenger railroad (Amtrak), which Joe Biden road back and forth to Washington as a Senator, is the most heavily subsidized passenger travel mode in the country. It needs a subsidy of $238 per 1,000 passenger miles. That compares with $4.23 for commercial airline travel and $1.50 for intercity buses. An HSR line would cost much more to build and operate, points out Ronald Utt, to provide “a secure roadbed constructed to precise standards and tolerances….”

[clearvision]

Austin just finished a light rail system. It is getting about 1/10 the ridership needed to break even. They are now launching ad campaigns based on the premise people are "afraid" to ride the train. They are also trying to cancel several money making express buses (some of the few) that run from transit stops along the train route into town. Some of these bus riders showed up to protest and said although they use the bus, they would go back to cars versus ride the train as it takes 1/2 hour more for the same trip and costs twice as much.

[Geee]

They(Dems) have been pushing to put a high speed train from Milwaukee to Madison for 20 years that I know of and no one wanted it, so the idea went no where. Now that they have gotten a hand out for it from Washington it looks like it will be built---no one will use it.

[SrWoodchuck]

This is just another thing that needs to be,"shot-down-turned-around" with any new Congress.

 

At one time, rail was an economical way to transport people & things, and had a romantic cachet; but how can anyone argue $238.00 versus $4.23 or $1.50?

 

This is another of Obama's personal romantic visions of Euro-poli-culture.

 

We have a fledgling light rail system here in Denver/Metro. It has had problems with ridership, but after an increase in fares & a discount in monthly passes, it seems to be working okay. There are large parking areas for riders, and if I worked downtown, I would consider taking it. My son used to use it with his friends, to go drinking downtown. They had a cutoff time for the last rail car, before last call at the bars, so they'd all chip in and take a cab home. It was a good thing having a cabbie that liked you and would drop other fares to pick you up after concerts & ball games..... they tipped him really well.