A Miracle for High-Speed Rail in America...

CNN released a news article on April 16th regarding High-Speed Rail for America. This is a miracle for the United States and this is the beginning of what surely will be a transformation in terms of the way we look at transportation in the future:

President Obama unveiled his administration's blueprint for a new national network of high-speed passenger rail lines Thursday, saying such an investment is necessary to reduce traffic congestion, cut dependence on foreign oil and improve the environment.

President Obama, with Vice President Joe Biden, called for clean efficient travel Thursday.

The president's plan identifies 10 potential high-speed intercity corridors for federal funding, including California, the Pacific Northwest, the Midwest, the Southeast, the Gulf Coast, Pennsylvania, Florida, New York and New England.

It also highlights potential improvements in the heavily traveled Northeast Corridor running from Washington to Boston, Massachusetts.

Each of the corridors identified by the president's report are between 100 and 600 miles long. The blueprint envisions some trains traveling at top speeds of over 150 mph.

Federal grants would also be directed toward separate individual rail projects that are deemed "ready to go," with preliminary engineering and environmental work already completed. Watch Obama talk about rail projects »

"My high-speed rail proposal will lead to innovations that change the way we travel in America. We must start developing clean, energy-efficient transportation that will define our regions for centuries to come," Obama said at an event near the White House.

The president cited the success of high-speed rail in European countries such as France and Spain as a positive example for the United States.

His plan would be funded in part through the recently passed $787 billion stimulus plan, which includes a total of $8 billion for improvements in rail service. Obama has also proposed a separate five-year, $5 billion investment in high-speed rail as part of the administration's suggested fiscal year 2010 budget.

"We're going to make travel in this country leaner and a whole lot cleaner," said Vice President Joe Biden, speaking before Obama.

The president spoke one day after the governors of eight Midwestern states sent a letter to Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood requesting stimulus funds for the construction of a regional network of faster passenger rail lines.

The city of Chicago, Illinois, would be the hub of the proposed Midwest Regional Rail System, which would stretch to Madison, Wisconsin, in the Northwest; St. Louis, Missouri, in the South; and Detroit, Michigan, in the East.

During the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama pledged to support a national network of faster passenger trains. The administration has already dedicated $1.3 billion in federal funding for Amtrak.

The money for the rail service, which carried almost 29 million passengers last year, will go primarily to infrastructure repair and improvement.

Oberstar’s Infrastructure Bill May Define the Transit Equation

This article I read on the Transport Politic is very important so I urge you all to read below. This seems to be one the most significant signs of progress on mass transit and rail expansion since...well...a very long time. Enjoy!

Congressman James Oberstar (D-MN), the House’s most influential member on transportation issues, spoke on the 7th to the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee about his vision for incorporating transportation funds into the economic stimulus bill (speech PDF). His fundamental argument was two-fold: too many of the nation’s construction workers are out of work in the sagging economy, and the country has massive infrastructure needs that must be met in the coming months and years. And so he suggested the renewed consideration of his own $85 billion transportation bill, the Rebuild America proposal.

In the period between Mr. Obama’s inauguration and the expected autumn renewal of SAFETEA-LU, the overall U.S. transportation bill, funding priorities must be established for how money will be spent on highways and transit, and that is Mr. Oberstar’s intention in this bill, whose $85 billion outlay would represent about a tenth of the Obama stimulus package.

Though the bill continues to fork over more money to highway projects than transit ones, the ratio is much improved from existing transportation legislation - while it proposes $30 billion for roads, it would allocate a large $12 billion to transit and $5 billion to intercity rail. The remainder of the money would go to aviation, environmental infrastructure, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and Federal building construction.

Importantly, unlike Mr. Obama thus far, Mr. Oberstar is willing to discuss providing funding for projects that are not yet ready for construction, but which are almost there. In other words, while much of the talk on the economic stimulus has revolved around getting projects started within 90 days, this bill will provide for projects that will begin construction in 90 days or 1 year. This is a significant factor in improving the climate for transit, because while many road projects literally could begin construction tomorrow (highway resurfacing is the most prominent example), there are far fewer transit projects that ready - but given a timeline extension of just a few months, they would be.

This longer-term view makes this bill far more palpable and encourages the development of projects that had been just beyond the means of municipalities. Such funding, for instance, could pay for renovation of dozens of New York City subway stations, in desperate need of repair, but which are not ready for construction in the 90-day timetable. But a 1-year timeline allows for planners to prioritize stations for reconstruction, design the improvements, assemble a team, and put the project together.

• And, in fact, $7.5 billion of the bill would go directly to similar projects, based on the predefined urban and rural formula grant system, which basically gives funding to municipalities in correlation to transit ridership and overall population. The bill would require half of those funds to be authorized for projects getting started in 90 days and the other half for projects beginning within the year. States would take the charge in deciding how the funds are used. $2 billion in addition would go to transit energy funding, which for the most part would be used for the purchase of hybrid buses, with the intention of cutting down on fuel use and pollution emissions. Here is the expected transit funding for the top ten states based on the existing formula grant system (you’ll see here that the formula prioritizes large, urban states):
  • California - $1.2 billion
  • New York - $1.1 billion
  • Illinois - $449 million
  • Texas - $424 million
  • New Jersey - $424 million
  • Florida - $364 million
  • Pennsylvania - $312 million
  • Massachusetts - $239 million
  • Washington (state) - $204 million
  • Ohio - $194 million

• Most interestingly perhaps is the bill’s inclusion of $2.5 billion in funds for new start projects, which are major transit investments, such as new rail lines and busways. More than 19 such projects are ready for more funding but so far have missed out in the FTA’s competitive new start process. Only 25% of the funding would have to go to 90-day commitments, while the rest could be awarded within a year of the bill’s passage. The FTA would approve which projects would be funded by this section of the bill, using existing criteria.

• Amtrak would receive $1.5 billion in the bill for the purchase of new equipment, improvements to track and catenary, and service expansion. States would get $3.4 billion for their own rail projects, some of which would probably go towards California’s developing high-speed rail system, which is likely to need start-up funds in the coming months. The rest of the funds would likely to go to states like North Carolina and Michigan, which have dedicated rail investment programs.

An overview of the bill (PDF) has been posted on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee’s website. State Departments of Transportation would have to develop quick action plans for how to utilize the funds, and would have to submit various reports to the federal government on their progress (PDF) to ensure accountability (PDF). In addition, states that fail to define the use their allocated money within 90 days would have their funds revoked and sent back into the general pool and to be used by other states. If, for example, Wyoming decides that it has little to do with the $10 million that is allocated to it for transit, that money can be reused by other states.

This is an exciting bill that will likely form the basis for the transportation component of the stimulus bill. While it lacks major new ideas - such as the development of an intercity high-speed system - it provides a lot of money to ensure the maintenance of the nation’s transit and rail infrastructure during this difficult time.

Press Secretary Gibbs Answers Questions

The Question:
“Will transit and intercity rail projects be a major component of the infrastructure stimulus package, rather than focusing on highway projects?“
- John B, Chicago

Press Secretary Gibbs' response:
Yes, John, transit and intercity rail projects will be a major component of the President-elect’s infrastructure program. Not only will they provide jobs to help get this economy moving again, but they’ll reduce our dependence on foreign oil, cut the amount of carbon in our atmosphere, clean our air, and more importantly, improve the quality of life for millions of Americans.”

LaHood for Obama's Transportation Secretary: Good or Bad?

The strongest emotion surrounding Barack Obama’s pick of Ray LaHood, a congressman from Peoria, IL, for the top DOT job seems to be surprise. He wasn’t on any of the shortlists, and he’s a Republican without much transportation experience. Obama needed a Republican in the cabinet (Robert Gates is a registered independent), and for better or worse, transportation got him. Fortunately, he seems to be a strong moderate who is well-liked and easy to work with. Mainstream news outlets, such as the Chicago Tribune say that "Unlike many Republicans in Congress, LaHood has a record of supporting funding for Amtrak and public transit."

However, a closer look at his record tempers that view slightly. To start off with, some of his record is reassuring. He did vote for this year’s 2008 Amtrak reauthorization legislation and has supported other pro-rail and pro-transit legislation. He has also made comments against privatizing Illinois’s Amtrak rails, and has praised Amtrak subsidies in light of the larger funds given to highway and air interests. But some of his comments about high-speed rail and Amtrak are a bit worrisome. Our friend Robert Cruickshank at the CAHSR Blog has pointed to LaHood’s comments about high-speed rail in 2004:

LaHood said he considers Amtrak “the lifeblood transportation for small communities,” and he knows many college students from Chicago’s suburbs use trains to travel to school, Copley News Service reported via The Lincoln Courier.

“On the Northeast Corridor, Amtrak is fabulous,” LaHood added, “and after 9-11, it became the transportation of choice for a lot of people because they felt it was safer than flying.

“I think if we’re going to have a pot of money where we subsidize airlines and we subsidize the funding of highways, that we certainly ought to continue to subsidize Amtrak,” LaHood said.

He said, “I don’t think we can afford at this point, with the kind of deficits we’re running,” to be talking about high-speed rail.

While funding is his main concern, he said, “People in rural Illinois are not for high-speed rail… They do not want a train traveling 120, 125, 150 miles per hour through the rural areas, and I support them on that.”

As Cruickshank states:

Obviously 2008 is different from 2004, and the “HSR vs. Amtrak local” dichotomy that LaHood set up in these 2004 comments may no longer apply (if it ever did). But this doesn’t exactly inspire confidence in our new Secretary of Transportation, who ought to be someone who understands the ins and outs of transportation policy, particularly high speed rail.

I would also take issue from how he describes Amtrak here. It’s great that he supports our national rail carrier, but I think it’s critical to not write it off as a service for small communities and cash-strapped college students. That’s basically saying it’s a second-class option for those who can’t afford to fly or don’t have access to an airport. That’s fine for continuing the status quo, but if we want to improve our passenger rail system, even a little bit, we need to recognize that trains are there to provide fast and efficient service between major cities (and small towns) that is convenient and affordable for all Americans. We need a train system that people want to take, not one they have to.

That being said, perhaps we’re jumping the gun. He’s now operating under Obama’s administration. His effectiveness when it comes to rail will likely be a product of the administration’s views on the subject and willingness to impose them.

Conservative rail advocate, Paul Weyrich, dies at 66 on December 18th. Last mini-essay.

As talk about infrastructure stimulus heats up and as state leaders opportunity to advance new transportation goals in Wisconsin that meet the challenges of the 21st century. In addition to spurring ourprepare a wish list of projects to propose, we have a historiceconomy, targeted and wise infrastructure stimulus investments should help to solve our biggest transportation problems and produce real results for the long haul.

It is not enough to simply spend money. As many have pointed out, America’s transportation system isn’t just broke, it’s also broken. And Congress would be wrong to assume that with transportation more is always better. On the contrary, transportation contributes to many of America’s most pressing problems.

Our transportation system is the chief source of our nation’s addiction to oil, consuming two out of every three barrels, and leaving America vulnerable to volatile prices and hostile foreign regimes.

Each year Americans waste billions of dollars and millions of hours stuck in traffic - a problem that is often made worse by construction of new highways.

Too many transportation projects like Alaska’s infamous “Bridge to Nowhere” have been embarrassing boondoggles that erode confidence in government and divert dollars from more productive uses. Clearly, not every infrastructure dollar is equally well spent. As departments of transportation across the country eagerly offer wish lists, what rules should be established? There must be a commitment to spend for results rather than simply to inject dollars into the economy. The current federal transportation system primarily collects gas taxes from the states and then pumps those dollars back based on outdated formulas forged by political compromises that had nothing to do with achieving national goals.

For decades, the federal government has spent billions of dollars on highway projects with little evaluation and no accountability. That must change. Spending must be based on allocating dollars where they will yield the greatest results and guided by clear goals for what the transportation system should accomplish.

Thus the next Congress should spend taxpayers’ money more wisely by focusing transportation dollars on solving our nation’s biggest problems. Federal transportation money should be spent only on projects that produce real results over the long haul - for example, by reducing our dependence on oil, alleviating congestion, improving safety and supporting healthy, sustainable communities. For its part, the Wisconsin Department of Transportation and other state DOTs should report on the results of how transportation stimulus money was spent. That sounds like common sense, but it would actually be a major advance. States should report back on the extent to which the projects funded with stimulus money increased or decreased jobs, energy security, carbon dioxide emissions and vehicle miles traveled. This accountability will help make sure money is not misspent.

In doing so, a transportation stimulus should move the nation toward a vision of the future and also protect the nation’s existing transportation assets. Emphasis should be placed on expanding clean, efficient transportation choices for Americans by prioritizing investment of new funds for street cars, light rail, commuter rail, rapid bus service, high-speed intercity rail and other forms of modern public transportation. The stimulus should allocate at least as much money to these transportation choices as to roads and highways. Doing so will encourage transportation investments that build dynamic and accessible communities, where more Americans can walk, bike or take transit to get where they need to go. Meanwhile, stimulus money allocated to highways and bridges must first address long-deferred maintenance and repair projects instead of new highway expansions.

Here in Wisconsin, a stimulus package could put people to work on vital projects we will need for the future, such as the Kenosha-Racine- Milwaukee commuter rail line, high speed intercity rail that connects our major metropolitan areas and fixing Wisconsin’s 1,300 structurally deficient bridges. These aren’t just good jobs programs to get through the recession. These are projects that will improve our economy for the 21st century. By ensuring that infrastructure stimulus money is spent wisely, we can ensure that Americans put back to work today can feel proud of what they’ve built for the future.

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in Newsweek: Building Back

America has failed to invest in its infrastructure for the past 50 years, and the bill is coming due. The situation is reminiscent of the ancient Roman Empire, which grew strong because of its advanced aqueduct system, but which fell into decline when that feat of engineering tumbled into disrepair. We're in danger of repeating that history, but it's not too late to fix the problem if we take decisive action now.

That's why Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and I formed Building America's Future earlier this year. Long before any of us realized we were in a recession, the three of us—a Republican, Democrat and an Independent—understood that America needs a large-scale, immediate investment in our nation's roads, schools, parks, hospitals, waterways, ports and more. We are extremely pleased to have heard President-elect Barack Obama pledge to do just that as part of his economic recovery plan. In fact, it's exactly what I talked to President-elect Obama about when I joined the nation's other governors in Philadelphia earlier this month.

Our infrastructure is more than just a quality-of-life issue. It is an economic issue. Americans waste billions of dollars while semi-trucks carry goods on gridlocked roads and lose millions of gallons of water in leaky old pipes. We lose time and dollars because our ports are not computerized or modern enough to meet today's demands. Our businesses lose real dollars because our buildings are not energy efficient. This kind of waste raises the costs of everything from clothing to cars to raw carrots. It's clear that the faster we can move people and goods, the stronger our economy is. In short, we are a dinosaur economy trying to compete in a space-age global environment.

We live in the country that first landed a man on the moon, that is responsible for the mass-produced automobile and that created the Internet. So why do we sit bumper to bumper on the freeway for two or three hours in order to get home from work during rush hour?

We're a society where e-mail, handheld devices, videoconferencing and thousands of satellites in orbit keep us connected. So why do Americans stand in long security lines at the airport, in our socks, just to sit in the terminal for hours as our flights get delayed because of overcrowded airport runways?

None of this makes sense in America. It doesn't make sense that in the greatest country on Earth we still rely on trains that go the same speed as they did 100 years ago, so our shipping times and commutes are longer than other countries. It doesn't make sense that we drive across unsafe bridges like the one that collapsed in Minnesota and live behind inadequate levees like those that failed in New Orleans.

If we were to come up with an analogy, I'd compare our situation to running a company. Imagine trying to compete in today's business world of BlackBerrys, e-mail alerts, videoconferences and PowerPoint when all you have is an IBM Selectric typewriter and a single telephone landline. You're going to get beat. And when you think about America's aging infrastructure, we're going to get beat, too—by our competitors China, India, Europe and Brazil. Travel overseas and you see faster commuter trains, better public transportation, double-decker freeways, and more efficient ports. Meanwhile, infrastructure spending as a share of gross domestic product in the United States has dropped 25 percent over the past 20 years. So, government spending is at an all-time high, while investment in our critical infrastructure is at a historic low.

Recession or no recession, our nation desperately needs to update infrastructure that lags behind that of even some developing countries. But it is also true that a recession is the perfect time to put money into long-term investments like massive public-works projects because it creates jobs while pumping up our economy. It's like hitting two homeruns with one swing. FDR knew that when he created the New Deal.

Californians didn't know this in 2006 when they said yes to $42 billion in infrastructure investments. But what has been an added benefit is that the money from those investments is being pumped into our state's economy right now, when it's most needed. For every $1 billion in infrastructure projects, we create 18,000 jobs—and that's a conservative estimate. In 2008 alone in California, we've committed more than $10 billion dollars in infrastructure investment, which will create at least 200,000 jobs over the life of that investment. And when our state unemployment rate has broken 8 percent, that kind of investment has a profound effect.

A massive national infrastructure investment program would give a boost to our economy right now. We have already identified $136 billion in projects across the country that, within 120 days of the new president's administration, would lead to orders from American factories and job offers to American workers. Steel beams would be ordered, as would cement, design employees and more. More than $28 billion of those projects are in California, and that would mean at least 500,000 jobs here, beginning immediately. Time is of the essence, and all infrastructure dollars must produce real results. The members of Building America's Future strongly support a "use it or lose it" requirement to any infrastructure investment to ensure that new funds will be used to put Americans to work immediately and not languish unspent or tied up in red tape.

By following California's lead, the new administration will be improving the quality of life for Americans, enabling us to compete better with our competitors around the globe, and putting shovels in the ground immediately in order to create needed jobs. The nation's governors stand ready to help.

What are the Benefits of High Speed Rail If Done? Video

Senator Kerry's December 1st Town Hall Meeting in Cambridge, MA Regarding High Speed Rail

Press Release Regarding High Speed Rail for America Act: November 25th, 2008

Kerry-Specter Bill Would Create Jobs, Stimulus, Infrastructure Investment
Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Governor Ed Rendell Applaud National High-Speed Rail Initiative

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) introduced a bill to create new jobs by updating the nation’s crumbling infrastructure. The High-Speed Rail for America Act of 2008 would transform America’s outdated and underfunded passenger rail system into a world class system.

“At a time when our economy desperately needs a jumpstart, we need an effective national investment that puts Americans back to work,” said Sen. Kerry. “A first-rate rail system would protect our environment, save families time and money, reduce our dependency on foreign oil, and help get our economy moving again. The High-Speed Rail for America Act will help fix our crumbling infrastructure system, expand our economy, and match high-tech rail systems across the globe.”

“We must continue to focus our energies on building and maintaining a strong national passenger rail system in order to ease congestion of air and highway corridors connecting high-growth markets, as well as to meet energy and environmental goals,” said Sen. Specter. “The High-Speed Rail for America Act is an investment in our nation’s infrastructure and has the potential to provide tremendous economic opportunities throughout Pennsylvania and the nation.”

Sens. Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.), Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Daniel Inouye (D-HI), Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), Joe Lieberman (I-CT.), Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Olympia Snowe (R-ME), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), cosponsored the legislation.

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell both voiced their support for the high-speed rail initiative.

“Creating a national high-speed rail network is an ambitious goal, but one that gets more urgent by the day,” said Mayor Bloomberg. “Investing in modern infrastructure is vital to the nation’s long-term economic and environmental health - and in the short-term, it would help put more Americans back to work. Many countries in Europe and Asia are investing in high-speed rail, and if our economy is going to remain competitive, we have to start catching up. Greater investment in our railways is a top goal of Building America's Future, the infrastructure coalition that Governors Rendell and Schwarzenegger and I created. I applaud Senator Kerry for tackling the issue head-on, and I strongly support his efforts to create the high-speed rail network our country needs.”

“This long-overdue national investment in high-speed rail would help to stimulate economic recovery while creating good jobs that cannot be outsourced,” said Gov. Rendell, one of the founding co-chairs of the Building America’s Future coalition. “Expanding our nation’s critical rail infrastructure will make our transportation network more efficient, reduce traffic pressure on our already busy interstate highways, and improve the environment.”

The High-Speed Rail for America Act of 2008 builds upon the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 which reauthorizes Amtrak and authorizes $1.5 billion over a five-year period to finance the construction and equipment for eleven high-speed rail corridors. It provides billions of dollars in both tax-exempt and tax credit bond and provides assistance for rail projects of various speeds. The bill creates the Office of High-Speed passenger rail to oversee the development of high-speed rail and provides a consistent source of funding.

Specifically, the High-Speed Rail for America Act of 2008 provides $8 billion over a six-year period for tax-exempt bonds which finance high-speed rail projects which reach a speed of at least 110 miles per hour It creates a new category of tax-credit bonds – qualified rail bonds. There are two types of qualified rail bonds: super high-speed intercity rail facility bond and rail infrastructure bond. Super high-speed rail intercity facility bonds will encourage the development of true high-speed rail. The legislation provides $10 billion for these bonds over a ten-year period. This would help finance the California proposed corridor and make needed improvements to the Northeast corridor. The legislation provides $5.4 billion over a six-year period for rail infrastructure bonds. The Federal Rail Administration has already designated ten rail corridors that these bonds could help fund, including connecting the cities of the Midwest through Chicago, connecting the cities of the Northwest, connecting the major cities within Texas and Florida, and connecting all the cities up and down the East Coast.

Senator Kerry's Speech on High Speed Rail for America Act

The following speech was given by Senator Kerry last month regarding High Speed Rail for America. Personally I find this speech well-written and well in-depth and shows that this proposal has potential to gain support.

While the U.S. is investing heavily in other forms of transportation, our investment in world class rail is dwarfed by other countries. For example, Germany's federal government gives its states $8.9 billion a year for rail projects, France spends twenty times more per capita on rail than the U.S., and the Ministry of Railways in China invested $19.6 billion in rail in the first half of 2008 alone. That is why we need to provide a constant source of funding for investment in high-speed rail. The High-Speed Rail for America Act of 2008 will take our outdated and underfunded passenger rail system and transform it into a world class system.

The High-Speed Rail for America Act of 2008 builds on the authorization of highspeed rail grants by providing billions of dollars in both tax exempt and tax credit bonds. It provides assistance for rail projects of various speeds. The bill creates the Office of High-Speed Passenger Rail to oversee the development of high-speed rail and provides a consistent source of funding. This office will ensure that we have the leadership to keep this mission on track.

High-speed rail is often the fastest and most reliable way to get from downtown to downtown between most cities 100-500 miles apart. High-speed rail can save up to an hour per trip when compared to air travel and reduces trip time by more than 50 percent compared to driving. The legislation provides $8 billion over a 6-year period for tax-exempt bonds which finance high-speed rail projects which reach a speed of at least 110 miles per hour. This speed is often most practical for corridors of less than 100 miles or for less travelled routes which cannot justify the investment into world class high-speed rail traveling at 150 miles per hour.

The High-Speed Rail for America Act of 2008 also creates a new category of tax-credit bonds: qualified rail bonds. There are two types: super high-speed intercity rail facility bond and rail infrastructure bond. Super high-speed rail intercity facility bonds will encourage the development of true high-speed rail. The legislation provides $10 billion for these bonds over a six-year period. Rail projects that reach a speed of at least 150 miles per hour will be eligible for these bonds. This would help finance projects including the proposed California corridor and make needed improvements to the Northeast corridor.

Rail infrastructure bonds will fund projects approved by the U.S. Department of Transportation and be part of a State's official rail plan. The High-Speed Rail for America Act of 2008 provides $5.4 billion over a 6-year period for this type of bond. The Federal Rail Administration has already designated ten rail corridors that these bonds could help fund, including connecting the cities of the Midwest through Chicago, connecting the cities of the Northwest, connecting the major cities within Texas and Florida, and connecting all the cities up and down the East Coast. These are projects that are ready to go, but they need a source of financing.

The need for a bold shift in the way we approach transportation is clear. Traffic congestion continues to worsen in cities across the country, creating a $78 billion drain on the U.S. economy with 4.2 billion lost man hours of work and 2.8 billion gallons of wasted fuel. Last year, domestic flight delays cost the economy $41 billion and consumed about 740 million additional gallons of jet fuel waiting on the ground. Passenger rail reduces congestion and is an effective alternative to highway and air transportation. Americans want alternatives--and we can deliver them. We must focus on making the transportation sector part of the solution to global climate change. The transportation sector accounts for approximately one-third of U.S. CO2 emissions--and automobiles make up 60 percent of that. Public transportation is an essential part of the solution to global warming. According to the American Public Transportation Association, public transportation reduces CO2 emissions by 37 million metric tons annually and saves the average American household over $6,000 annually.

The demand for alternative forms of transportation is only growing. The number of people riding Amtrak surged by more than 13 percent in July 2008 from a year earlier--the most passengers carried in any month during Amtrak's 37 year history. Amtrak ridership set an all-time record for fiscal year 2008, achieving growth of 11 percent. As we look towards economic stimulus legislation next year, we must rethink the approach we have taken towards mobility in this country. Countries around the world have realized the benefits of high-speed rail and continue to build out their systems as we fall farther and farther behind. For far too long, we have not made adequate investment in our infrastructure. We cannot let this pattern continue. We have all heard the skeptics and cynics dismiss the idea of high-speed rail for decades, but due to high energy prices, increased passenger rail ridership, and the need to reduce greenhouse gasses, the time is ripe for a big change. Not only will this change create a modern and reliable transportation network in the Untied States, it will provide tens of thousands of good new jobs and help stimulate the sluggish economy. I pledge to continue fighting for the development of a modern high-speed rail system connecting the major cities across America, and I ask all my colleagues to support making this vision a reality.