Authorities investigating possible connection between abduction cases
Iowa Legislature 2013 adjournment in sight, leaders say
Oklahoma tornado death toll currently 24, not 51, medical examiner says
Iowa City debates whether police officers belong in schools
Linn County casino campaign cost $3.43 million, final figures reveal
Would a passenger rail system benefit all of Iowa?
Related Stories
It’s not a Quad Cities project, not an Iowa City project, but a project that will benefit all Iowa, passenger rail enthusiasts stressed while lobbying at the Capitol Monday.
“What we do know about passenger rail is that it would be a boon to the state of Iowa, the University of Iowa, the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, and most importantly, to the people of Iowa,” Sen. Matt McCoy, D-Des Moines, said during a panel discussion of plans to improve passenger rail service in Iowa.
Improving a rail corridor from Council Bluffs to the Quad Cities also would benefit freight rail service, creating a “safer more reliable transportation system,” McCoy said.
“For a state like Iowa that depends so heavily on exports and exporting our goods to market, this is such a critical link … not to mention the huge opportunity to relieve what is an already congested I-80 system,” McCoy said.
He and Sen. Joe Seng, D-Davenport, are urging the Legislature to take advantage of $87 million in federal funds to help develop the rail corridor. It would require an investment of about $3 million a year in the form of an operating subsidy.
That’s not an investment Gov. Terry Branstad is willing to make, his spokesman, Tim Albrecht, said.
What do you think of the plan? Would development of a passenger rail system benefit all of Iowa?
-u20042.png?1366232523)
To say that a passenger rail system would benefit all of Iowa is probably an overstatement, but it certainly could benefit much of Iowa.
I speak as a fan of rail travel. For us, rail service is an enjoyable way to travel cross-country. We have driven to Mount Pleasant, Minneapolis and Chicago to catch a train to more distant locations. Better rail service within the state that made it easier to connect to a hub elsewhere would be great. A train that connected us to Chicago would be particularly welcomed.
I don’t see much value to a train that only connects destinations within the state. For example, I doubt I would ever use a train to go to Des Moines.
I am not in favor if there needs to be a $3 million per year subsidy. It needs to stand on its own.
Hogan,
Rail service, like airlines, motor vehicles, shipping, has never stood on its own. We build and maintain roads, waterways, and airports at taxpayer expense. Why should railway be the only form of transportation accessible to the public expected to go it alone?
Do you have an answer for that?
What I know is that just yesterday, Albrecht said that a taxpayer in western Iowa shouldn’t have to pay for rail in eastern Iowa, even if it means losing federal funds for the project. And yet, just recently the Governor defended giving over a hundred million dollars in credits and tax breaks to Orascom, using bonds for flood recovery because “they would have been lost if we didn’t use them.” Maybe a taxpayer in inner city Des Moines shouldn’t have to pay for a fertilizer plant, if that’s his logic.
Also, the upgraded tracks would help improve freight efficiency and safety in all likelihood, which would be good for the state.
If it’s such a great benefit, why would it need a $3 million / yr. subsidy?
You could ask that about any subsidy ( energy sector, agriculture, & transportation sector ). Just one subsidy in the energy sector: Ethanol.
“You could ask that about any subsidy.” I totally agree.
“Just one subsidy in the energy sector: Ethanol.” Huh, What’s your point?
No point, just giving an example — first one that came to mind. I could have mentioned subsidies to tobacco farmers.
I think efficient high speed ( “high speed” is relative ) rail for the US would be great. I recall hearing of studies that show for distances under a couple hundred mile efficient rail beats air. Europe has a great rail system (but not cheap) with a lot of passengers though Europe is not the US — the distances tend to be shorter ( London to Liverpool is only 175 miles ( even Berlin to Paris is only 545 air miles )). However it’s a catch 22 — the ridership is too slim pay for the efficient service and the service isn’t there to draw the ridership.
Cedric, I’ve travelled by high speed rail in Europe and is is “cheap”. I took a train from Milan to Rome and it was only about $40. Just last year I took a train from Innsbruck to Venice for about $60.
Unless you mean to construct. What I’ve heard is that it is a large investment. However, while traveling from Innsbruck to Venice, i had the pleasure of sitting on the platform with my dad who worked for the railroad here in his youth. And the one thing we were both amazed at were the number of trains and destinations. We sat there for about an hour and there were probably a dozen or trains arrive and depart while we were watching, and every one of them was full. It didn’t matter if the train was going north or south. They were each there for about 4 minutes. They were full when they pulled in and they were full when they left.
I don’t know what the proposed route is, but I’m for it. We need to be looking for more effiicent transportation options and rail is one mode of travel we should be pursuing. We should be developing a system of rail and bus routes that will allow people to travel to nearly every city in the state.
As fpr the subsidy it’s business as usual, Governor Branstad is choosing the route of short term political benefit over doing what is best for Iowa and its citizens.
3 million dollars doesn’t repair much interstate. It does however buy shippers and passengers access to a upgraded rail system across the entire State.
The reduction in vehicle traffic and the associated wear and tear on I-80 alone will save 3 Mill. Even if it allows us to safely delay replacing a single interchange a year – we are well ahead of that money. It will also allow attention to be shifted to other deserving State highways in poor shape throughout the entire State. Also worth the money.
This discussion is more about improving the rail line that the Iowa Interstate Rail system (to which, the CRANDIC leases rights to use their tracks in the Cedar Rapids and Iowa City area), than it is about providing passenger rail service. One must understand that an already vibrant freight rail system exists in Iowa. It runs through Cedar Rapids in the form of the Union Pacific Railroad. This east/west rail line passes most closely to Des Moines at Ames. Upgrading the Iowa Interstate tracks between Iowa City and Des Moines has long been a subject of contention. The big money involved in railroads has long been a source of political power. This bill, using the red-herring of ‘passenger rail’ is yet another ploy by the power brokers in Des Moines to pull a little more power away from the rest of the state and locate it in Des Moines. Though I very much like the idea of Passenger Rail, I think that its mention in this bill is only to help grease the wheels to the state sponsoring track improvements on a section of railroad tracks that will only take away from the financial vitality of Cedar Rapids and those communities served by the Union Pacific. Because of this, I am opposed to improvements along those tracks mentioned.
Williams,
I live in Iowa City. I would love to be able to take a train to Des Moines or Chicago. I fail to understand how a passenger line, even though the proposed route now carries freight and will continue to carry freight, is going to hurt the economic vitality of a freight line that runs east/west 35 miles to the north.
You throwing in the evil plot on the part of Des Moines to do I’m not quite sure what makes me think you’ve been reading too many spy novels. Either that or you’ve forgotten that “The Octopus” (Frank Norris) was published in 1901 and while the Wicked Witch of the West may have been the monopolistic railways of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the Wicked Witch is dead. She’s been replaced by other Wicked Witches