Though the bulk of transportation money is spent on highways, some states are devoting more resources to rail.

By Julian Wolinsky, Contributing Editor

	North Carolina Gov. Jim Hunt was a moving force in restoring state control to the 317-mile North Carolina Railroad last August, which will pave the way for a regional rail system planned for the Raleigh-Durham region. In addition, the state is tentatively planning to inaugurate passenger service to Asheville in western North Carolina next year. Photo by Joseph M. Calisi

"Investing in improved rail service is an investment in California's future." That declaration by Gov. Gray Davis last November could well be the call to arms for a nationwide effort to restore and expand regional passenger rail service as a significant segment of America's transportation network. California, in conjunction with Amtrak, is a leader in this movement and has been for many years.

Davis, who's building his reputation as a fiscal conservative, is nonetheless placing an increasing emphasis on passenger trains and is putting up the money to pay for it. Over $52 million has been earmarked in his 1999-2000 budget just for the corridor stretching from San Diego through Los Angeles and Santa Barbara to San Luis Obispo. In the past 10 years more than $500 million has been spent in Southern California on new rolling stock, upgraded rights-of-way, and station improvements, helping to make this the second-busiest route in the nation after the Northeast Corridor. Additional millions in state funds have been appropriated for two other intercity routes, the Capitol Corridor between San Jose, Oakland, and Sacramento, and the San Joaquin service connecting Bakersfield with Sacramento.

Davis is one of many governors and local elected officials finding it politically profitable to champion the cause of regional rail. "Transportation cuts across the conventional political spectrum, because you have some fairly prominent conservatives supporting Amtrak," says National Association of Railroad Passengers Executive Director Ross Capon. "And it also draws people who are supportive for environmental reasons and for the economic health of their communities."

Capon calls the Cascades service in the Pacific Northwest corridor "the poster child for regional passenger rail." Ridership has increased by 150% in the last six years, to an estimated 571,000 in 1999, due in large part to the introduction of Talgo tilting trains from Spain (but manufactured in the U.S.) purchased by Washington State and Amtrak. Also, thanks to a significant infrastructure investment by the state, running time between Seattle and Portland has been reduced from four hours to three hours, 30 minutes.

There are other factors besides traffic jams driving the rebirth of trains. Americans flying to Europe are increasingly using air-terminal connections to regional and main line railways, finding them faster than bus shuttles or renting a car. Meanwhile, airlines have enlisted the railways as a feeder system for long distance travelers because it is increasingly uneconomical to fly shorter route segments. The first application of this concept in the U.S. will be at Newark International Airport. A new station is being built on the nearby Northeast Corridor that will be connected to airline terminals by an extension of the airport monorail. Farther north, a station is planned at T.L. Green Airport in Providence, also on the NEC.

Another important development is the revitalization of city centers, including an expanded residential population, cultural activities, entertainment venues, and shops. "It's not nostalgia. It's very practical to have a city center where you can walk to everything," says National Corridors Initiative President and CEO Jim RePass. "And people are re-discovering this."

Other parts of the country are heading in the direction pioneered by California and Washington. North Carolina Gov. Jim Hunt was a moving force in restoring state control to the 317-mile North Carolina Railroad last August. For the previous 104 years, the line was controlled by a freight railroad, most recently Norfolk Southern. Major state-financed right-of-way upgrades will now take place, in part to prepare for high speed passenger rail. State control will also pave the way for a regional rail system along the NCRR being planned by the Triangle Transit Authority in the Raleigh-Durham region. In addition, the state is tentatively planning to inaugurate passenger service to Asheville in western North Carolina next year.

Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore has also emerged as a heavy hitter for passenger rail, working with CSX to get cooperation for a higher speed service between Washington and Richmond. Plans call for building a third track between the two cities over the next six years along with an increase in top speed to 110 mph. This will translate into a 28-minute reduction in trip time.

One step at a time
Incremental increases in line speed-in the 10-to-30 mph range-should in the long run be more significant than trying to leap ahead to the velocity of Europe's super speed railways. And these small-scale projects are far cheaper and thus more palatable to politicians and taxpayers. Average speed or actual trip length is what counts. That being said, the line between intercity and commuter rail is getting increasingly blurred as speeds start to increase. RePass contends that if a train can operate at 125 mph comfortably and safely, "what used to be an intercity train becomes a commuter train."

Virginia and North Carolina are part of the federally-designated four-state Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor project, along with South Carolina and Georgia. The line is seen as being time-competitive with travel by automobile or airplane on a door-to-door basis. The first segment, from Washington, D.C. to Charlotte, N.C., is scheduled to be running by 2010, followed by an extension to Jacksonville, Fla.

Wisconsin is another state where political leadership is driving the expansion of regional passenger service. A task force appointed by Gov. Tommy Thompson, who is also the chairman of Amtrak's board of directors, has issued a report recommending that the state legislature authorize borrowing up to $50 million to help build a high speed line between Madison and Milwaukee. This would be part of the Midwest Regional Rail Initiative, an $852.6 million, 3,000-mile project to connect major cities in nine states. Other primary routes would link Chicago with Green Bay, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Detroit, Cleveland, and St. Louis.

Regional rail is a growth industry in North America, with numerous new systems in operation or planned. Many operate over long distances, especially in the west, and have become popular with motorists fed up with daily drives of 150 miles or more. Beginning in late 1992, the Southern California Regional Rail Authority developed the five-county Metrolink network focused on downtown Los Angeles, which now totals some 450 route miles. Minneapolis is in advanced planning on its first line, which will stretch 80 miles into the exurbs. Other major success stories are the Altamont Commuter Express linking Stockton and San Jose, Calif., through the Altamont Pass, and West Coast Express in the Vancouver, B.C., region.

Obstacles persist
Roadblocks to regional rail expansion are inevitable. The highway lobby certainly won't roll over and play dead. The nation's road network needs billions of dollars in overdue maintenance and there are many new road projects that even the most ardent rail supporter would admit must be built. But, says RePass, "The highway system is heading toward gridlock. What I see happening is greatly increased pressure to build commuter and intercity rail service, and it's going to come from the people who are finally stuck in traffic one time too many."

Anti-tax advocates are another potential threat. Initiative 695, overwhelmingly passed by voters in Washington State last November, slashed the motor vehicle excise tax, a primary source of operating subsidy for Amtrak's Cascades and local transit services. Most observers believe voters were focused on overturning an onerous tax, not attacking public transportation. The question now is whether lawmakers will provide another source of revenue to maintain the current timetable.

Even though contributions from state and local sources will increase, paying for all of these new regional rail proposals will still be problematic in many cases. That's because the federal government's contribution has a major impact on which transportation projects will be pursued. With most federal dollars flowing into highways and airports, there's heavy pressure on the states to ignore rail, even if they now realize it's the best investment.