Virginia set to compete for high-speed rail funds
TOM KAPSIDELIS
High-speed rail in Japan and other nations has leaped ahead of the U.S. One official says high-speed rail in the Richmond region would be “transformational.“
Virginia will take the first formal step tomorrow in seeking more than $1.5 billion in federal stimulus money to develop high-speed rail corridors.
Tomorrow is the deadline for a pre-application by the state for a share of the $8 billion available for high-speed rail development under the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act, adopted by Congress in February at President Barack Obama's urging.
"Anything that's not in the pre-application will not get funded, so it's a huge deadline," said Daniel L. Plaugher, executive director of Virginians for High Speed Rail in a breakfast presentation today to the Greater Richmond Chamber at Willow Oaks Country Club.
Virginia's proposed $1.51 billion plan includes $491 million improvements in a six-mile stretch around Richmond's Acca rail yard and a 13-mile link between the yard and Main Street Station in the city's downtown. The improvements are necessary to remove bottlenecks that limit rail service to the renovated station
Other parts of the proposal include:
- $185 million to add a third rail track between Richmond and Fredericksburg;
- $152 million to improve conventional rail service between Main Street Station and Petersburg; and
- $195 million to upgrade the rail corridor between Richmond and Washington, D.C., to allow high-speed trains that could cut the trip to 90 minutes on a reliable basis.
The state will submit the final proposal for developing the rail corridors on Oct. 2, and the federal government is expected to award money to the winners on Nov. 16.
Kim Scheeler, president and chief executive officer of the Greater Richmond Chamber, said his organization is working to build support for the state's proposal.
""It really is the kind of thing that can be transformational for this community," Scheeler said.
-- Michael Martz
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
Not sure how high speed rail would work in a small town like Richmond. It may work if there was light rail linking the suburbs to the main high speed rail line going to DC and places south/north. People could commute to work in DC but it’s still a 90 minute ride to DC with this type of rail service. There’s just not enough of a population here to support it, I could see a high speed rail linking the major east coast cities, maybe putting Richmond on a smaller spur?
One of the most persistent arguments against government subsidy of railroads is that while all taxpayers foot the bill, only a minority directly benefit from the subsidy by traveling on trains.
Viable passenger rail, however, directly benefits the public good and indirectly benefits the entire population.
I’m curious, though why these arguments are only wheeled out for AMTRAK. Let’s think of other expenditures that don’t meet this test.
1. Government funded research for breast cancer. Only about 52% of the population are eligible to benefit directly (discounting the small percent of cases among males), and of those only a much smaller percentage will need treatment.
2. Government support of schools. Many people don’t have children. Why should the childless pay for other kids to be educated?
3. Airports. I recently heard a guy buying a six-pack in a country store boast that he had never been on an airplane and wasn’t a gonna go. Why should his tax-money go to fund my love of flying?
4. Military bands. There are more people serving in military bands than in the entire state department. I and many others don’t like or listen to brass band music. Why should we pay all these salaries to roar out the Washington Post March?
5.Government support for floodwalls, beach erosian, etc. etc. Most people don’t live near the shore, and many never even visit.
I suppose that’s enough.
“unlike Japan that had but one ocean to worry about, the US had 2 and only 3 of them were in the Pacific.“
If the US had two oceans, how could three of them be in the Pacific? How is a raven like a writing desk? Deep.
Motley,
As I said, I love Rail travel, and would love to have it too…..
But the problem (re: it will benefit the city, etc.) is that ALL Virginias will pay for it, including the people in Lee County that will never benefit from it.
“Posted by ( Will ) on July 10, 2009 at 4:14 pm
“we did not have any” has a fairly common construal in the English language. It means “none.“ Zero, zip, nada.“
I guess you can write sarcasm, but can’t read it. Sorry, the sarcasm tag is not working on this site today.
And you are wrong. While the Japanese did have 10, the US had only 7, and unlike Japan that had but one ocean to worry about, the US had 2 and only 3 of them were in the Pacific. (Let’s forget about the Indian and artic lest this degrade into a geography and history lesson for you).
So yea, lets get rid of all modern weapson because someone else might not have them and that would not be fair, right? Liberal thinking.
Apparently I am not the only one that does not know.
Thanks for the kudos guys.
High speed rail is a good thing! It will benefit us all. Salaries will go up and Richmond will have many more opportunities as a city.
I see where some of you are coming from in that funds shouldn’t be spent to benefit a few. But in this case, as citizen’s of the city, we will all benefit from the added tax revenues at least.
It’s a good thing guys! Then we can all go to DC and enjoy some baseball! (I’m trolling there. Just ignore me.)
I’m not the expert here; however I believe the roads needed to be wider because there were more cars on the roads, not the other way around? The chicken and the egg thing, maybe? I’m very very happy they widened the roads.
I’m all for high-speed transportation of “many kinds” as long as it makes a profit! Pays for its self! Makes money! Like all business should have to do, including GM!
Look at the Concorde, OUT OF BUSINESS, because it didn’t make a profit. We all have seen new technology that may-will take it place one day. Chances are at a profit or it will need to go out of business as well.
Now on the other hand when gas goes up to $10 a gallon. I want my seat on top of the train cuz I will not be able to afford to go to Kings Dominion or Busch Gardens.
Oh no, another takeover on the horizon? The US Government high speed entertainment transportation business while having a beer company. That one just might work!
Dang I forgot another foreign company purchased another American Icon that was profitable, Anheuser-Busch. So we will be stuck with the Scobby-Doo train again, without a beer.
Or just get the Japanese to build us a train. They have the technology and it’s not like we need jobs in this country, right? They have already taken over the US automotive industry and made a profit while doing it, maybe?
But you can bet they will layoff American workers in a heartbeat if needed, to make a profit!
Heck, what’s one more DC red carpet affair, we typically lay it out for the overseas governments/companies while shooting our selves in the foot.
The government for the people run the people. Now that should be the other way around I believe. That chicken and the egg thing again.
I miss my once great country!
Good research MotleyFool!!!, I had forgotten about the small rural airports and the Govt. subsidies to airlines that fly there. I used to live in an area where this was the case, and one of the 2 airlines dropped out because the subsidy wasn’t enough to cover the extra cost. Again, GOOD RESEARCH!
i just spent 30 days in a foreign country and i can tell, public transportation there kills US. i can go from one end to another on a high speed rail that tops 290km/hr. once i get off, i hop on a subway line that rivals any city. it costs about 1.25 each ride.
once i get off that, i can either take a taxi or a bus which costs about 25cents.
If Richmond wanted to, it is goin to be expensive to come close to what other country already have. you need a dedicated line for the high speed rail, you need people willing to give up land for subway, and you need people to actually use it.
MotleyFool - Thank you for the information, and I withdraw my contention on the subsidies and admit my error.
However, I have not changed my opinion. In the first place, the money spent on roads is not a subsidy, but taxes collected for just that purpose. And it is the lions share of the $189 quoted. As one of the links indicates, the amount spent on the Air Subsidy is peanuts compared with what was spent on Amtrack, and the latter go a lot fewer places (how many El Centros does the train go to?).
The subsidies are wrong, as by the admission of the second link, those people could easily secure transportation to a money making route.
I am not against public transportation. I am against confiscating money for a purpose that is used and restricted to a select few of the paying public.
Post a Comment(Requires free registration)
- Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
- Respect others.
- Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
- See the Terms and Conditions for details.
Advertisement