President Obama delivers on American High-Speed Rail

I have looked forward to this day for a long time.

It is a great honor--a great honor--to have President Obama and Vice President Biden in Tampa, Florida, to announce our American Recovery and Reinvestment Act High-Speed and Inter-city Passenger Rail grants.

 
The investments we announce today make rail a viable transportation alternative in many regions. With this historic $8 billion investment by President Obama, we are jump-starting American High-Speed rail.

The bulk of today's awards go to new, large-scale high-speed rail programs--projects such as Florida, with $1.25 billion to develop a high-speed rail corridor between Tampa and Orlando with trains running up to 168 miles per hour--and California, with $2.25 billion to connect Los Angeles to San Francisco and points in between with trains running up to 220 miles per hour.

In total, 31 states and the District of Columbia will receive awards. In addition to 13 corridor investments, we are also awarding several grants for improvement projects and planning. These efforts on existing routes and emerging corridors will lay the groundwork for future high-speed and intercity rail development. 

I've said it before, and I believe it even more today: this is an absolute game-changer for American transportation.

We will make passenger rail more efficient, providing better service in travel markets across the country.

• High-speed rail travel offers competitive door-to-door trip times
• It reduces congestion on key routes between cities
• It reduces transportation emissions
• And, most of all, it creates the jobs of the future, the jobs America needs right now

Look, I am very proud of what our transportation infrastructure helps us achieve every day. Moving hundreds of millions of people and millions of tons of goods from place to place. It's amazing.

But it's not good enough. It's the infrastructure of a previous century, one with plentiful energy and no sense of the role carbon emissions play in our health and the health of our planet. And it's not adequate for the growth of our nation's population, its commerce, its mobility.

We need an expansive, safe and energy efficient rail transportation network. We need to generate economic development. We need to reposition our infrastructure for the 21st century.

As we mentioned last April when we announced the program, our overall strategy has two parts: improving our existing rail lines to make current train service faster and identifying potential corridors for the creation of world-class high-speed rail.

Today’s awards begin us down the path toward these goals.

Now, the particular investments we're making today--they make sense. We're connecting cities that are too close for efficient air travel but--with the highways connecting these cities nearly choked beyond capacity--too far for productive road travel. Cities like St. Louis and Chicago.

We know that people already want to travel between these cities; we're here to begin making that downtown-to-downtown travel significantly easier, faster, and more productive.

As I've mentioned on this blog before we received many more applications than we had funds to distribute. States and regions and communities across the United States are clamoring for high-speed service.

But some areas are just not ready. In some areas, investments to lay the groundwork for increasing the speed and reliability of current service have been deferred and deferred.

Today we're fixing that. We've made awards to states to improve existing track, repair tunnels and bridges, and increase the speeds of lines already serving passengers.

We can't just put faster trains on old tracks and send them across bridges that need repairs. So, with these targeted investments, passengers will see many benefits in the near term.

High-speed rail corridors will offer competitive door-to-door trip times. From Los Angeles to San Francisco, a 2-hour 40-minute comfortable ride from city center to city center will replace a 6-hour trek of fighting traffic to get out of one downtown and fighting traffic to get into another.

High-speed rail will create jobs now and for the foreseeable future. We have commitments from over 30 companies in the rail business to create or expand U.S. rail manufacturing should they be awarded contracts for portions of this money. These companies know high-speed rail, and they could become partners to those awarded rail grants.

What kind of jobs? Planning rail networks; designing, producing, and laying miles and miles of track; building, installing, maintaining, and operating equipment; constructing or upgrading stations, tunnels, and bridges; operating the routes.

It's pretty clear we're talking about a lot of jobs--tens of thousands. And let's be clear about this: that $8 billion will do its job-creation work right here in America.

High-speed rail reduces oil use and the environmental costs of the mobility we prize so dearly. Hey, I'm an old-fashioned guy who grew up in the Midwest--I love cars. But let's be realistic; cars are the least efficient method of travel we have, even with our fuel-economy standards. Rail ridership takes cars off the road.

Now, before we get too carried away with the very near future, I have to remind everyone about the past. The interstate highway system that we take for granted today did not materialize overnight. It has taken over a half-century, and we're still building onto the network.

But, the point is that today we can take it for granted. Our highways take us where we need to go, and the nationwide coast-to-coast system has been a model for the rest of the world.

And President Obama’s vision for high-speed rail mirrors that of President Eisenhower, the father of that Interstate highway system. 

It's also worth pointing out that designing, building, expanding, and maintaining those highways has created job after job after job for decades. When completed, the highways brought people. People brought small businesses and more jobs.

We have no reason to expect that developing high-speed rail will not also be an engine of jobs and economic development.

And someday--tens of thousands of good-paying jobs from now, one reborn American manufacturing sector from now, and many federal-regional-state and public-private partnerships from now--we will be able to take for granted an efficient high-speed rail network that is equally the pride of our nation and an engine of growth.

Until that day, we do have some learning to do. I have seen high-speed rail working in Spain and just being introduced in Russia. Only last week, I heard lessons from the experience of developing a network in Japan.

These countries have all seen the future; these countries have all made the commitment that we make today with President Obama's initial investments in Florida and 30 other states.

And I assure you that one day, not too many years from now, ours will be the go-to network, the world's model for high-speed rail.

Today we embark on the first step of that exciting journey. Today, as promised, we change the game.

Comments

[Phillip Johnson]

It seems to me that a lot of the focus is on the cost of the project, understandably so. As an US Army Veteran, and supporter of all of our troops, I have a question. Has anyone in congress, or across our great nation, considered how much extra money we would have to rebuild our public transportation system if we were not trying to overextend ourselves in useless, and impossible to win wars?

I am so sorry Mr. President, I think if you really did what myself and many others who voted for you thought you were going to do, we'd have a lot more money for Healthcare Reform, advancements in alternative energy, and high speed rail systems. Stop the senseless killings of our troops abroad, and focus on the plethora of problems right in within our own borders. You'd be pleasantly surprised how much easier it would be you and our nation to step out of the stone ages. Why are we so far behind the rest of the developed nations, like China, and all of the countries in Europe when it comes to public transportation?

I have to completely agree with Judith Ford's take on this. Our leaders need to wrap their heads around the fact that things are obviously not working for a majority of the people in this country. Stop thinking of the rich few of today, and think of our future, and that of of the world.

Get it together Congress, NOW!!!

[Andrew Bolin]

I am glad the federal government is funding improvements leading to high speed rail. It will be a great improvement for our nation. However, I wish you would have considered funding less projects with more money. There is no better way to see a vision of high speed rail in action than actually completing a link of true high speed rail that people can experience. The use of the $8 billion does not accomplish that. I am also biased towards the St. Louis/Chicago corridor. www.tinyurl.com/stlchihsr

[Michael R. Lowry]

These are absolutely the first steps in the right direction. Ideally, I would hope there is a possibility that the major US airlines would stop lobbying against HSR and instead focus efforts on trying to get involved in designing, constructing, and operating the HSR lines.

[Lives near the train]

ROPED is the only rational person on this blog. I would like each one of you to be totally honest and tell us if you live right near (within 1/2 mile) of a rail corridor. I will BET that NONE of you live near a rail corridor because if you did, you'd think about this differently. I saved for my whole life (25-year career) to finally get a nice little home in a quiet neighborhood. That was 8 years ago and my family and I love living in our community. Now, with HSR coming in with Fed stimulus dollars, I will likely have a 20 - 25' structure, with 4 tracks on top, 25,000 Watts of cantilever electrical lines running one top of it. Commuter and HSR trains will be running at a frequency of one train approx every 3 minutes. My house and my quality of life will forever be ruined. I and many others in the Bay area of California will have their lives forever changed by this project. Try to envision how YOU might feel in the same circumstance. I doubt the DOT will allow this blog to be posted...

[david]

You guys are complete idiots!

Why run a line between Orlando and Tampa? Nobody except Disney passengers will use it (is that a payback to ABC for all the propaganda they give you?).

Why not set lines between New York and DC and other bad weather Northeastern cities? I've flown between the two and at times bad weather forced me to use rail.

You idiots have to realize that people make small economic decisions in all choices in their lives. Not decisions based on the good of the country.

[david]

Sorry you had to take down my previous post. You guys are not complete idiots. You are outright thieves. Stealing from the taxpayer to benefit special interest groups.

I've looked at the map of the proposed high speed rail You have obviously stolen from the public to allow high speed access to Disney and Universal. $2.2Billion for what?

The general public should be informed of your thieving ways. You should be ashamed of yourselves.

[nobody]

Am I the only one wondering why the Midwest isn't linked to the east coast? I'd think that there would be a future link between Cleveland or Columbus and either Pittsburgh or Buffalo.

[Brian Tang]

Why is the online map so much messier in appearance than the display map in the photo?

[TheJackTaggart]

They key swing vote states in the next Presidential election thank you wholeheartedly. It doesn't look very strategic though. Are there an invisible forcefields dividing the eastern seaboard, the west coast, and what Washingtonians like to call Fly Over Country? Is there a reason the busiest east-west and north-south highway corridors don't have high speed rail running alongside them? Maybe you should get back some of the NINJA loans given out by the Fed to the nations banks so we can end our dependence on oil with electric rail.

[Joshua Bigley]

To truckdrivre: I think you're being a bit cynical here--people have been discussing high-speed rail for years--its time to act. Life is complicated buddy. Everything has its little quirks--what's th ealternative-do nothing about anything because that is the tone of your blog. Should we build more highways and SUV's? This is way past due. i commend the Obama admisnitration and the dept. of transportation. Truckdriver, Your post is exxagerated and meritless.

I've been waiting for this for a long time. I lived in Europe and Asia, and frankly I was ashamed of America's stoneage mentality and progress in areas of transit, and the environment.

Hopefully, we can connect these corridors and furture corriders to sustainable residential and business development, and connect to bus and car-share systems.

I'm feeling left behind--I want to ge tinvolved in the change that I see taking place in America. maybe I'll come back. Green roof, green buildings, green transit! A green America. Thanks Obama and Transit Dept.!
Gold star Obama!

[Joshua Bigley]

Where will the trains be built? I hope most of this technology will be built right her in America. Not just the maintainence of cars and rrails but the engineering and construction of these rail-cars. How about in Syracuse N.Y.?

[Alex]

The high-speed rail program would certainly make a big difference especially when it comes to long travel. Businessmen who frequently goes to long travels would most likely appreciate and take benefit with the high-speed rail program. Even ordinary people would benefit from the program like in a way of saving quite an amount of money instead of taking other means of transportation. High-speed rail would somehow cost quite an amount of money but definitely it would save a big amount of time and that alone is something to take note of. Other people may still prefer going on a long travel driving their cars but then again the risk is higher such as collisions in expressways and the like. I'm not saying that I discourage people to take a long travel with their cars, all I'm saying is it would be much better to take on the safest way to travel. Since the high-speed rail program isn't ready yet, people would still have time to maximize the usage of their cars or whatever means of transportation the have.

[Famma]

This all sounds great & I have been all for this. However, I (heard from an untrustworthy source) that the government has made a deal with a company in Spain to make these trains. Is this true?

[Christopher Smith]

Living in Los Angeles for almost 25 years and seeing the tens of thousands of people who travel to Las Vegas on the weekends or regularly, I find it puzzling that a hi-speed rail system to San Francisco/Sacramento/Silicon Valley region would be given a priority over L.A. to Vegas. Yes, a L.A. to Vegas line is proposed, but long term. I would love to see the numbers to argue more of a demand for L.A. to Northern California vs. L.A. to Vegas. I imagine this future hi-speed rail from L.A. to San Fran mostly empty just like a good percentage of the bus lines throughout our country already subsidized by the government.

[bryan]

the high speed rail is earth friendly

[Newark Real Estate Agent]

I truly hope this $8 billion budget will work out and can reduce our dependence on cars and CO2 emission. It's a good initiative.

[Tyler Shepherd]

First of all, I would like to commend you Mr. Secretary for the work that you have done and continue to do regarding the implementation of high speed rail in the United States. I believe this is an integral step in positively restructuring our nation's transportation infrastructure, reducing our dependence on foreign oils, and minimizing our environmental impact. Alongside the aforementioned long term goals, I think that the construction of high speed rail will more immediately help provide a much needed boost to the nation's economy, and the equally unnerving unemployment rate.

That being said I have an admittedly biased, but statistically accurate, problem with the nature in which the funds for high speed rail were dispersed. I am a lifelong resident of Indiana and the very first thing that I noticed is that all the immediate plans for the rail does not include my home state. I understand that there are long term plans to extend the rail to and through Indianapolis, but given the time it has taken to get this far the near future looks bleak for the Hoosier state.

I am confused by this because the basic economics for high speed rail would absolutely include Indianapolis relative to other recipient cities. First off, Indy is the 14th largest city in the country based off of July 2008 estimates from the United States Census Bureau (UCSB). This puts them ahead of all other Midwestern cities aside from Chicago and Detroit, and with Detroit contracting and Indianapolis expanding this could likely change in the near future. Moreover, this means that nine Midwestern cities (Madison, Milwaukee, Cleveland, Dayton, Columbus, Cincinnati, St. Louis, Kansas City and Pontiac) have more immediate rail plans serving smaller populations.

Finally, I realize that Indiana does not have the most booming economy of our country's states, but let’s face it we are all struggling. Specifically, the industrious Midwest has really seen its share of hardship through this recession. However, in comparison Indiana is doing as good as or better than some recipient surrounding Midwestern states in terms of growth in GDP. Namely, our GDP has suffered much less than our neighbors to the immediate east and north (Michigan and Ohio), which collectively makeup over half of the planned rail stops in the Midwest. It is understandable that the Department of Transportation received 278 pre-applications from forty some states, but I can't deny my disappointment that this may disrupt the current expansion of my beloved Hoosier homeland.

[Nathan]

Too many commentators here are not considering the incredible cost of building and maintaining and expanding our interstate highway system. Widening cost millions to tens of millions PER MILE. And this is only widening and not for the entire highway. And study after study shows that widening is self-defeating in the long run. This doesn't include the costs of buying and operating the vehicles to use it. Trains are much more economical, and potentially more green.

People somehow think that road cost are free when they complain about trains being costly.

[John]

Raise gas taxes to pay for high speed rail and other mass transit projects. Raise gas taxes at the state and national levels, before all future increases in gas prices go to foreign oil sellers.

[AKB]

I would like to suggest a second map that goes out further in time and includes rails lines to connect the west to the east. While these maps and rail lines are needed, where is the connectivity beyond the regional level? Granted that it is out into the far future, yet, is overall connectivity not the goal?

[AKB]

Secretary LaHood,

The map looks great, though I have one concern. While the map is perhaps meeting corridor needs, are there plans for interconnectivity between the west and east? Yes, much of the US population does lie east of the Mississippi, but the West's population is growing, particularly in inter-mountain region. It begs the question, again, are there future plans to connect all these separate regions? Rail works, when people can go where they actually want to go. It would be useful to ensure you are putting in lines where travels want to go. It might suit the project to examine the most popular cross country driving routes and flight paths to determine where to put rail lines. Though I understand the corridor idea, it may not be successful everywhere in all corridors.

Thank you,
AKB

[Crystals]

The rail transportation idea is great, and at the same time, I seconded Mr V. Harrison's call for the usage of natural resource for energy independence.

Great work and post.

[Crystals]

I believe there is much to be done for the better good of the American. This is a good starting point.

[Zeenara Najam]

Good News, It should be the whole network. I want to see the detailed list of the projects which are going to make the base of future high speed network.

[rob paper writer]

It`s a little bit strange. I don`t get why the west coast is not connected between Oregon and California? I know that there are exist Amtrak routes but 16 hours from Portland to San Francisko on train and 18 hours on Greyhound are not that fast as it could be...