David
Randall Peterman, Coordinator
Analyst in Transportation Policy
John Frittelli
Specialist in Transportation Policy
William J. Mallett
Specialist in Transportation Policy
The
provision of $8 billion for intercity passenger rail projects in the 2009
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA; P.L. 111-5) reinvigorated
efforts to expand intercity passenger rail transportation in the United
States. The Obama Administration subsequently announced that it would ask
Congress to provide $1 billion annually for high speed rail (HSR) projects.
This initiative was reflected in the President’s budgets for FY2010
through FY2013. Congress approved $2.5 billion for high speed and
intercity passenger rail in FY2010 (P.L. 111-117), but zero in FY2011
(P.L. 112-10) and FY2012 (P.L. 112-55). In addition, the FY2011 appropriations act
rescinded $400 million from prior year unobligated balances of program funding.
There are two main approaches to building high speed rail (HSR): (1) improving
existing tracks and signaling to allow trains to reach speeds of up to 110
miles per hour (mph), generally on track shared with freight trains; and
(2) building new tracks dedicated exclusively to high speed passenger rail
service, to allow trains to travel at speeds of 200 mph or more. The potential
costs, and benefits, are relatively lower with the first approach and
higher with the second approach.
Much of the federal funding for HSR to date has focused on improving existing
lines in five corridors: Seattle-Portland; Chicago-St. Louis;
Chicago-Detroit; the Northeast Corridor (NEC); and Charlotte-Washington,
DC. Most of the rest of the money is being used for a largely new system
dedicated to passenger trains between San Francisco and Los Angeles, on which
speeds could reach up to 220 mph. Plans for HSR in some states were
shelved by political leaders opposed to the substantial risks such
projects entail, particularly the capital and operating costs; the federal
funds allocated to those projects were subsequently redirected to other HSR
projects.
Estimates of the cost of constructing HSR vary according to train speed, the
topography of the corridor, the cost of right-of-way, and other factors.
Few if any HSR lines anywhere in the world have earned enough revenue to
cover both their construction and operating costs, even where population
density is far greater than anywhere in the United States. Typically,
governments have paid the construction costs, and in many cases have
subsidized the operating costs as well. These subsidies are often
justified by the social benefits ascribed to HSR in relieving congestion, reducing
pollution, increasing energy efficiency, and contributing to employment and
economic development. It is unclear whether these potential social
benefits are commensurate with the likely costs of constructing and
operating HSR.
Lack of long-term funding represents a significant obstacle to HSR development
in the United States. The federal government does not have a dedicated
funding source for HSR, making projects that can take years to build
vulnerable to year-to-year changes in discretionary budget allocations.
Date of Report: June 28, 2012
Number of Pages: 34
Order Number: R42584
Price: $29.95
Document available via
e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To Order:
R42584.pdf
to use the SECURE SHOPPING CART
e-mail congress@pennyhill.com
Phone
301-253-0881
For email and phone orders, provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card
number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail
or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.
Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP
or #CRSreports