"Check out this response in the Huffington Post to George Will's narrow and incendiary remarks in Newsweek about the future of American railroads in a smart reply by Tony Dutzik, Senior Policy Analyst at the Frontier Group. Here are a couple excerpts:
The column raises a few important questions: First, is support for rail really limited to liberals? Second, if it's not, why are people like Will so knee-jerkily (read, ideologically) opposed to pretty much any investment in passenger rail? And third, if the goal of transportation reformers is not world domination and mind control, what exactly is it?
Is rail a liberal/conservative issue?
Rejecting passenger rail on ideological grounds is like rejecting the fork or the screwdriver as technologies that are "too liberal." Passenger rail is a tool -- one that works very well for some purposes in some situations, and less well for others...
The folks at The American Conservative Center for Public Transportation chalk up the reflexive hatred of rail transit to the influence of libertarianism. They write:
How is it then that so many prominent conservative voices are violently opposed to public transportation, especially rail? Part of the answer is that many of those "conservatives" are actually libertarians who profess to believe that "drive or die" represents a free market outcome.
Nothing could be further from the truth. The dominance of automobiles and highways is a product of massive government intervention. For decades, government at all levels poured money into roads while taxing competing railways. After World War II, government also established building codes that mandated suburban sprawl. Today, almost everywhere in the country, if a developer wants to build a traditional neighborhood of the type easily served by streetcars, the law won't let him.
While you are exploring this topic. Take a look at the Frontier Group report, "Do Roads Pay for Themselves: Setting the Record Straight on Transportation Funding." This publication is among numerous valuable research pieces at Frontier Group.
Location
The Steel Interstate System is distinct from the politically contentious, passenger-only, high-speed rail corridor projects because it offers the huge advantage for expedited freight movement that HSR can never offer. The Steel Interstate System links HSR corridors as they are built, because it is truly a national system serving rural areas and small cities as well a large metro areas. This is a system that can pay for itself in reduced imported oil purchases and improved balance of payments. Less environmentally intrusive, the Steel Interstate System uses existing rights of way and does not require tracks dedicated only to HSR passenger service.
By PETER BACQUÉ
Published: March 31, 2011
Conservatives should take the lead in bringing back passenger trains and street cars, the director of the Arlington-based American Conservative Center for Public Transportation said Wednesday during a visit to Richmond.
"Conservatives know that what worked once can work again," said William S. Lind, who made the conservative case for intercity and higher speed passenger rail before the Southeast High-Speed Rail Association at the Colony Club.
Lind said public transit is essential to the conservative agenda because it enhances national security, promotes economic development, helps maintain conservative values, including a sense of community, and provides access to jobs for people who can't afford cars.
About 60 people attended the event.
Conservative opposition to public transportation, Lind argued, is based on misconceptions that the auto's dominance of American transportation is a free-market outcome, that buses are better suited than rail systems for public transport, and that user fees cover the costs of highways.
Passenger rail service, Lind said, is not "a plot to collectivize us," as some conservatives believe.
The dominance of automobiles and highways in American transportation results from massive government intervention, Lind said, with government at all levels pouring money into roads, while taxing railways.
Virginia has 5.4 million drivers and nearly 7.6 million registered vehicles, according to the state Department of Motor Vehicles.
"Our national motto today is 'drive or die,' " he said.
Reducing U.S. dependence on automobiles powered largely with imported oil is essential to America's security, and improved public transportation can help. "We're going to see oil prices go up and up and up," Lind said. "There's going to be an absolute panic."
Building the rail infrastructure for a high-speed rail system in Virginia will cost an estimated $5.3 billion. The state intends to improve rail service through a series of small projects that would eventually allow trains to operate at 90-110 mph, instead of the current 79 mph top speed.
"This is something we can afford," Lind said.
President Obama has asked Congress to authorize $53 billion for high-speed rail, but the proposal has been met with opposition from conservatives because of the cost.
Amtrak, the national rail passenger service, carried nearly 1.2 million people in Virginia last year, and the Virginia Railway Express commuter rail system in Northern Virginia carried about 4 million.
The Staples Mill Station in Henrico County is Virginia's busiest Amtrak stop, handling 266,343 travelers last year, while Main Street Station in downtown Richmond served 27,520.