New Congress will see a new push for HSR legislation - High Speed Rail - column

Railway Age, Dec, 1990 by Donald M. Itzkoff

A spectrum of options with varied capabilities will have to be fostered to accommodate tomorrow's [transportation] needs. This multimodal-approach helps to assure that options such as high speed rail and maglev are fully and fairly considered as the nation looks for solutions to transport problems .... We are poised to begin a decade of achievement in the deployment of high speed technologies. "

Thus Deputy Secretary of Transportation Elaine L. Chao confirmed the Administration's new view of high speed ground transportation at the Second Annual Washington High Speed Rail Forum, Nov. 9, in Washington, D.C., sponsored jointly by the High Speed Rail Association and the law firm of Reed Smith Shaw & McClay.

In addition to the keynote remarks by the Deputy Secretary, the more than 200 attendees at the Forum heard from Senator Harry Reid (D.-Nev.), sponsor with Senator Pat Moynihan (D.-N.Y.) of the Senate loan guarantee legislation in the 101st Congress, and FRA Administrator Gilbert E. Carmichael and Major General Patrick J. Kelly of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, co-chairs of the National Maglev Initiative. Technical briefings by FRA, Corps of Engineers, and Department of Energy staff and a panel debate with Congressional aides rounded out the program.

The timing of the Forum, coming shortly after the 101st Congress went home and just three days after the midterm elections, provided an opportunity for reflection on the changed perspective in Washington. The loss of two key high speed rail proponents in the House, Rep. Tom Luken (D.-Oh.), former chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Surface Transportation Subcommittee, who retired, and Rep. Doug Walgren (D.-Pa.), narrowly defeated in his bid for reelection, added to the program's immediacy. For although five different Congressional committees had held hearings on high speed rail in 1990, and the FY 1991 budget signed by the President provides for over $12 million to FRA and the Corps of Engineers for high speed R&D and oversight, Congress failed to enact comprehensive high speed legislation before adjourning. At the High Speed Rail Forum the question on everyone's mind was, would the momentum continue in 1991 ?

Deputy Secretary Chao responded affirmatively. "While government policies should not unduly influence the choices of the marketplace," she declared, "it is clear that the Federal government today is a participant, rather than a sideline skeptic, in encouraging development of high speed ground transportation. it is fair to say that the posture of the U.S. Department of Transportation has undergone a significant change-from passive to positive."

Specific federal initiatives cited by Deputy Secretary Chao include the Transportation Research Board multimodal high speed study due out next year; the National Maglev Initiative, including review of highway corridor guideway feasibility and safety assessment of the Transrapid system; and technical documentation and review of existing state and regional proposals and systems, including Florida, California-Nevada, and the Northeast Corridor. The Deputy Secretary also outlined new proposed regulatory and legislative steps such as permitting states to provide available highway rights-of-way at little or no cost to high speed rail projects; permitting states to use federal-aid highway funds to make highway facility adjustments to accommodate other modes; and revising the planning authority already available under the Surface Transportation Act to permit states to consider such modal transportation alternatives as maglev and advanced steel wheel technologies.

But speaking to the Forum audience prior to the Deputy Secretary, Senator Harry Reid took issue with the Administration's position that "development of high-speed surface transportation [is] primarily a state and local-and private sector responsibility." With respect to encouraging the development of a U.S. magnetic levitation industry, Senator Reid lamented that America is losing the maglev race." in Senator Reid's view, the demise of high speed legislation in the 101 st Congress shows "the public is not aware of how fast this race is being won. It also demonstrates the ignorance of the key role the federal government can-and historically has-played in the development of transportation infrastructure." As examples, Senator Reid pointed to federal funding of canal, airport, and highway construction. He also highlighted federal involvement in the first experimental telegraph line between Washington, D.C., and Baltimore during the 1840s, the origin of our present multi-billion dollar communications industry Senator Reid drew a parallel: "All of these examples-and maglev-have one thing in common. They are private sector inventions which the private sector cannot develop into a national network without some kind of federal involvement to minimize the risk." The Senator suggested that the NevadaCalifornia and Florida projects, which to go forward may require public provision of interstate highway rights-of-way and/ or grade crossing construction, underscore the risk and expense to the private sector of investing in maglev or any other high speed technology.