What does it say when Maria Saporta referred to rail as the “third leg” of our nation’s transportation system? In what I honestly thought was a column not nearly up to her normal, high standards, Maria wrote about why our nation needs to invest more in rail transportation. She wrote the column in a tone that nearly spoke of this concept as self-evident. I wish it were self-evident, because more funding for rail (or less funding for roads and air, take your choice) would be a much easier lobby.

Nevertheless, judging from the letters sent to the AJC in response to the column, her writing got many Atlantans to think about third legs. I recently received a copy of a letter to the editor sent by the president of GARP, Steve Vogel. This response to the responses, I felt, made for a better case than Maria’s column:

Regarding the dialog currently taking place in the AJC about Amtrak
and commuter rail, I offer the following responses:

• In his LTE last Saturday, Mr Daryl Polster questions the veracity of the poll that says 70% of Americans support Amtrak. The actual figure in a poll conducted by the respected Gallup organization is 69% (sorry for the error), including 62% of those who said they would not be personally affected by the total end of Amtrak.

• Mr Polster also suggests that Amtrak should raise its fares to eliminate the “subsidy”. Would he ask the same of the airlines, who are being subsidized by being allowed to declare bankruptcy, thus eliminating debt and pension liability, not to mention the $5 billion in loan guarantees after 9/11?

• Furthermore, Mr Polster states that highways are “almost completely paid for with gasoline taxes, which are, in essence, a user fee”. This is in sharp contrast to a Brookings Institution study that shows only 54.5% of highway support comes from gas taxes and user fees. And, that study didn’t include things like the cost of policing the highways.

• There is a telling remark in Ms Frankston’s piece about the Lovejoy commuter rail line. Dana Lemon, the DOT board member from the area that would benefit the most from the line says, correctly, “We cannot build enough roads to reduce congestion in Metro Atlanta.”.

The DOT and ARC’s own figures say that highway commute time will continue to increase in the future. Guess what? A train trip that take 40 minutes today, will take the same 40 minutes in 10 or 20 years.

• Rep Steve Davis, the vocal opponent of the rail line, received substantial campaign contributions from automobile interests, including dealerships and oil companies. Is it any wonder he wants more roads?

• In a remark that, in my opinion, borders on irresponsibility, DOT board member Sam Wellborn is reported as saying that he “is against government subsidizing public transportation systems”. I guess Mr Wellborn would discontinue the money from Georgia’s General Fund that goes to the DOT, as well as things like the air traffic controllers who guide airplanes. All transportation, public and private, is subsidized to one degree or another. Who is paying for the 5th runway at Hartsfield-Jackson, the cost of which, BTW, would fund a complete Georgia intercity rail network that would benefit Georgians, not those who happen to be changing planes.

• I do agree with Mr Wayne Westmoreland in his LTE from Monday’s Horizon in that rail service will not solve the congestion problem. But no one is saying that it will. It will offer alternatives, however, and commuter rail has shown itself to be viable in many US cities, including several start-ups in the last dozen years. Indeed, Atlanta, with one exception, is the largest city in the country without commuter rail service. Mr Westmoreland also brings up the tired mantra about rail service that “pays for itself”, which I have already addressed.

When the nation, Georgia, and Atlanta realize that passenger rail is, in fact, the third leg of the transportation stool, we will all benefit.

Steve Vogel
President,
Georgia Association of Railroad Passengers
Decatur, GA