Vice President Joe Biden: Why America Needs Trains

[marmar]

from HuffPost:




Joe Biden, Vice President of the United States of America
Posted: January 5, 2010 06:48 PM

Why America Needs Trains



One of the Capitol Hill newspapers estimated that I've taken more than 7,000 round trips on Amtrak over the course of my career. But the one I made on Jan. 17, 2009 was a bit different. When I got there, there were 8,000 people standing in the freezing cold. And I wasn't racing to reach the 7:46 a.m. Metroliner (later, the Acela) that I had taken thousands of times before.

I was meeting up with the train that would carry President Obama and me to our inauguration.

That day, Gregg Weaver, a conductor who started riding Amtrak the same year I did--1972--introduced me to the crowd. As Gregg spoke, it struck me that over the years, Amtrak provided me with more than a way to get to Washington to serve the people of Delaware every morning and a way to get home to my family each night. It has provided me another family entirely--a community of dedicated professionals who have shared the milestones in my life, and who have allowed me to share the milestones in theirs.

And it has provided me with one thing more, an understanding of--and a respect for--the role of rail travel in our society and our economy.

Though I don't get to ride the train nearly as much anymore, those were the lessons I brought with me on that final trip to Washington as a United States Senator.

I began making the 110-mile commute shortly after I was sworn in as a Senator. It was the only way that I could have been a Senator at all. I had to be able to get home to spend evenings with my two sons after we lost their mother and sister in an auto accident a month earlier. .........(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joe-biden/why-america-needs-trains_b_412393.html

[PM Martin]

1. K/R

[Robb]

2. We priced Amtrak over the holidays, actually.

Traveling with an infant we thought it might be fun/easier than the flight (Denver to Seattle).

Turned out to be a two-day journey, so we looked at the cheapest sleeper there was for the two legs. The round trip would've cost a little more than two thousand dollars.

I'd love to travel by train in this country, but man. There's a hurdle right there.

[demosincebirth]

14. Its pretty reasonable if you don't get a sleeper, and go coach.

The seats are a lot more comfortable, and roomier, than flying coach. If you have the time, its great.

[demosincebirth]

15. I take Amtrak's Capitol Corridor to Sacramento and it sure beats

the hell out of driving I-880 and I-80 to Sacto. Three hours of shut-eye and I get there feeling great.

[marmar]

3. Who's the train-hating unrec-er?

Come out, come out wherever you are.

[MercutioATC]

11. Anybody who has ever priced a trip on Amtrak?

Takes longer than a plane and costs more.

For many people, riding Amtrak is like going to Disneyworld. It's a pain in the ass and expensive, but it's a cool thing to experience once.

[marmar]

12. Not if you live in a region where's it's a good alternative.....

Even though the trip is longer than it should be, it's still much cheaper and less of a hassle to take it from Detroit to Chicago.....The larger point is that an updated high-speed rail system, which Biden advocates, would make it more desirable.

Ala Western Europe and Japan.

[MercutioATC]

13. I admit that a better system would probably offer better options.

...but you can hardly criticize people for hating on Amtrak as it currently exists.

[dysfunctional press]

28. "Ala Western Europe and Japan."

which is why we won't be seeing it here anytime soon.
western europe and japan have built their systems over time, and have a whole lot less real estate/distances to cover.
it's going to take a lot of time, and money(that we don't currently have) to get one up and running, even if it's done little by little, as it would obviously have to be.

[SoxFan]

16. Passenger rail is more than Amtrak

There's an effort in NH to restore commuter rail service from Manchester and Nashua to Boston. Many other metro areas have commuter rail networks as part of their transit mix.

[MercutioATC]

17. Outside of the eastern seaboard, I'd argue that most people's "train" experience was with Amtrak.

...and the post to which I responded asked who the "train-haters" were...

[dysfunctional press]

29. the chicago area has metra rail service, that even goes slightly into wisconsin.

it's a commuter system that isn't associated with amtrak.

[avaistheone1]

4. We need health care first.

We have about 45,000 people a year dying for lack of insurance.

I don't know of anyone dying because they don't have a train nearby.

[Liberal Veteran]

5. Trains? Aren't those that useless piece of fabric on the back of a wedding dress?

We're 'murkins! We don't need no stinking trains!



Actually, for such a big country, I have often wondered why we are so reluctant to invest in high speed rail to get from one place to another.

[jillan]

7. Lol!

[gateley]

9. I Googled to see if it was because of the oil companies (isn't everything?) --

and found a very interesting piece on Wiki. If you're interested in the history and all the political stuff about our rail system, you might enjoy it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amtrak

[jillan]

6. Love you "Amtrak Joe"!

[HBravo]

8. MN has plans for trains.

[Old Codger]

10. Over the years

I have often wondered why we let the rail infrastructure go so far down, many abandoned rails all over, as a child we used to travel quite often by train and i always thought it was pretty decent, better than the greyhound for sure... other countries have great rail service. But as someone else stated here it is way too high priced to be practical, by the time you add in meals and any other extras that arise on a 2 or 3 day trip it is out of line.

[MrsCorleone]

20. Oil & gas interests had a lot to do with rail's decline. It's all about oil interests

& a fierce unwillingness to let go of an outdated industry & the billions upon billions of $s involved.

[MicaelS]

35. Why? Same as the airlines... DEREGULATION

Deregulation let the RRs cut off service to small town grain mills and other small shippers. That way they no longer hand to maintain the side tracks, and their expensive frogs and switches. Thus they didn't need 4 man road crews any more to switch them. They were able to get rid of cabooses, and the two brakemen on the trains. On most trains there is now just an engineer and conductor or "co-engineer" Eventually they want just a single engineer.

The RRs successfully pursued "unit trains". A train of 100 or more loaded cars of all the same type, Coal, grain, rock, phosphates, etc. Long distance from point to point, and the only stopping is to change crews or refuel. Much simpler freight rates with only one commodity.

RRS have never wanted to share their trackage with Amtrak, even though they get paid by the government, Amtrak delays the valuable freight trains. Outside the northeast corridor or the west coast, the only way the US will ever have passenger rail service is with tracks dedicated solely to high-speed passenger trains, and it costs over $1,000,000 a mile to lay new steel rail track.

Passenger rail service in this country would have to be heavily subsidized by the Federal government, and too many people have vested interests, or ideological issues against comprehensive passenger service.

Personally, I would love to see 300 mph mag-lev trains criss-crossing this country, but it's not going to happen.

[Selatius]

39. The bank bailout alone could've bought us 800,000 miles of track if what you say is true.

Just over a million per mile, yes? Then that's the amount of track the bank bailout could've bought if it were diverted to national infrastructure instead.

[MrsCorleone]

18. In California, the 800 mile High Speed Rail project is the only large scale jobs creator

in the foreseeable future. The project is HUGE and will create oh so many jobs for engineers, construction workers, surveyors, environmentalists, urban planners, rail & rail car manufacturers, alt energy manufacturers, small biz owners along the entire 800 mi stretch, administrative staff, etc. The list goes on & on.

The U.S. is so behind in the times. I was riding Japan's bullet train waaaaay back in the mid '70s. It's time to make autos optional, especially in states with long open stretches, such as CA.

Of course, certain republican elected officials are doing their damnedest to deny their constituents the benefits of these jobs, all so that they can campaign on their constituents' economic misery. I think it is critical that we pay attention to their tactics at the local level & call them out on their deliberate attempts to stop &/or delay the HSR project.

For those interested, HSR website here: http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/

[nemo137]

19. I wish we could get train service where I lived.

I recently moved back to my old home town, Rockford, IL, from Champaign-Urbana, and there are no Trains. The nearest Metra into Chicago (which I had the privilege of taking again this weekend) is in Harvard, about 30 miles away, and the nearest Amtrak stations are Chicago and Mendota. It's ridiculous! We're a city of 150,000 people, just in Rockford proper, and there's no goddamn train service. I would love a train renaissance.

[mopinko]

36. i have no idea why there are no trains out there. i go to galena occasionally

and for the life of my can't figure out why there is no train. they are trying to get one going. you know there used to be trains out there.

[BlueIdaho]

21. I fell in love with trains in Britain

I only wish we could take the train as easily here in the states. Out here in the pacific northwest - passenger trains are few and far between.

[Blue Owl]

22. All aboard!

n/t

[PatSeg]

23. I rather take a train than a plane

under most circumstances. It is roomier and more comfortable and it is a great way to see the country.

[jillan]

26. +1

[Egalitariat]

24. Who has more trains than us?

[marmar]

25. For passenger rail? Es serioso?

We have a passenger rail system that Serbia would be ashamed of.

[Selatius]

40. The Soviet Union probably had a more extensive passenger rail service system. nt

[Golden Raisin]

27. With the entire experience of flying

(on the ground and in the air - and I'm not just talking "terror" and security aspects) becoming more ugly, difficult, unwieldy, uncomfortable, expensive and unpleasant by the minute, I have recently found myself wishing there were a serious, viable alternative, such as a return to train travel. However, like everything else in our infrastructure, the national train system has suffered, not been sufficiently modernized and been neglected.

[BlueIris]

30. We need trains because people aren't going to want to fly on airplanes anymore.

It'll be a loooooong time before I want to do that again, and it would have to be a total emergency to compel me, even then.

[Union Yes]

31. K-N-F'N-R. Nice to hear from the VP. We want more VP Joe! nt

[Hekate]

32. I love this guy. nt

[Sensitivity]

33. Public Trans can be BETTER AND CHEAPER but a national plan is required to redo the infratructure

of transportation on a large scale to accomplish this. There is technology and designs (like the CYBERTRAN) to bring the cost per mile to 1/10th the current construction costs. But like European choice of small cars over American-preferred gas-guzzlers it requires a big commitment to do what makes long-term sense and visionary policy that invest in the future and penalizes unsustainable behavior in the present.

[taterguy]

34. Nice post, Casey Jones

[galledgoblin]

37. cheaper, safer, more environmentally friendly, not to mention

a hellava lot more comfortable and pleasant to ride. please, Biden, keep the pressure up, we desperately need to replace our aging transportation infrastructure, and rail is the way to go!!

[Captain Hilts]

38. WHY AMTRAK NEEDS DEDICATED TRACK. nt