Many of my classmates have already talked about the need for
investment in a national High Speed Rail (HSR)
system. It is a much-discussed topic in urban planning and transportation classrooms.
HSR even has a cheerleader at the very top level, in US Department of Transportation Secretary, Ray
LaHood. "This is what the American people want. If you build it, they
will come," LaHood
declared (Chapman, 2011)." So what will
it take to convince our legislators that the time to invest in HSR projects is
long overdue?
Opponents say that no amount of ridership will cover the initial
cost of creating the infrastructure, nor the continued cost of operations and maintenance.
“No mass transit system in the country charges riders enough to offset the
expenses of running trains—much less the cost of capital. Amtrak loses hundreds
of millions a year,” says
author Steve Chapman (Chapman, 2011). It’s true, trains
are expensive business. They fail to acknowledge, however, the fact that every
other mode of transportation in this country enjoys subsidies of one kind or
another. Though President Obama did pledge to spend $13 billion in federal
stimulus funds over five years to seed America’s first HSR projects, the
federal government hasn’t spent that little on highways in one year since 1958 (Selcraig, 2010). Auto subsidies are simply
a prevailing fact of our culture, with federally-funded road maintenance as
well as mandated
parking spaces taking up precious urban real estate. And we all remember when
the entire national
auto industry had to be bailed out on the public’s dime. Locally, much-need
improvements in bike infrastructure was able to be funded by pairing the work
with storm water management
projects. Meanwhile,
the government has provided $4.64 billion in taxpayer funds to the airline
industry for cash grants and $1.65 billion in loan guarantees (Surjaputra, 2008). Yet none of these
modes of transport can equal the benefits that HSR can bring.
