BEFORE THE UNITED STATES SENATE
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
TESTIMONY OF SENATOR JAMES COSTA
CALIFORNIA STATE SENATE
ON BEHALF OF THE
NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF STATE LEGISLATURES
ON
"AMTRAK OVERSIGHT"
MAY 22, 2001
Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, I am Jim Costa, State Senator from California and President of the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). I appear before you today to discuss high-speed rail, intercity passenger rail and our need to address and broaden community, state and national intermodal transportation needs.
NCSL is a bipartisan organization that for 26 years has represented the nation's state legislatures, territories, commonwealths, and the District of Columbia. For more than two and a half decades, transportation issues have maintained a high level of visibility as legislators have confronted emerging and continuing challenges to our transportation infrastructure. This is evident in the prominent role state legislators played in Congress' successful efforts with TEA-21 and AIR-21. It is likely to be as prominent as Congress addresses high-speed rail, intercity passenger rail and Amtrak-related issues.
S.250
Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee, let me start with a wholehearted endorsement of the principles included in S.250, the High Speed Rail Investment Act of 2001. NCSL, the National League of Cities, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the National Association of Counties and the Council of state Governments are joined in a broad coalition of state and local elected officials and many others in support of S.250. I am pleased that over half the membership of the Senate are cosponsors of this legislation. S.250 is truly a reflection of a bipartisan initiative that should be sent expeditiously to the President for his signature.
As you know, S.250 provides $12 billion dollars in Amtrak-issued high-speed rail bonds over 10 years. This is an investment that produces numerous benefits. Communities win because the bonds allow investment in key congestion mitigation, transportation and economic growth strategies. The $12 billion funding is dependent upon a 20% state match, making states partners in an intergovernmental initiative to stimulate development of high-speed rail corridors. Users win because they have another transportation option that will provide faster, more reliable and more frequent service. S.250 also provides $1 billion for non high-speed rail needs that would enhance safety and maintenance in areas perhaps less prepared for or less in need of high-speed rail. Bondholders win as they qualify for a federal tax deduction. And, all of us win through the advancement of an intermodal approach to our transportation needs.
While I am before you, however, I would like to take this opportunity to reiterate a state and local concern with language contained in S.250. As we have indicated in a letter to the Senate Finance Committee, dated May 14, 2001, from state and local organizations, we urge amendment to S.250 on page 27 to remove any reference to a prohibition of state and local taxing authority for rail projects. We also would ask that report language further clarify that no language S.250 preempts state and local taxing authority.
NCSL strongly supports S.250, and if amended, it will strengthen high-speed rail investment, benefit rail infrastructure nationwide and build on the recent successes produced with enactment of TEA-21 and AIR-21 legislation.
A California Perspective
I am no stranger to rail issues as I hail from the San Joaquin Valley that has made and will make significant strides with rail services. In just the past decade, we've increased train service in my area to 5 trains per day. We have accomplished that by bringing together community elected officials, the railroads and CalTrans-California's Department of Transportation, to achieve common purposes. Ridership in the San Joaquin Corridor rose 21% just over the last year. We've modernized train stations up and down the corridor. Most recently, a beautiful new station was opened in Bakersfield last year. Commercial and residential development in and around stations has grown, revitalizing downtown areas and making downtown-to-downtown train travel attractive and affordable. No, not everyone is traveling on the train. However, given our past and future population growth and the auto traffic congestion that predominates in our metropolitan areas, it is vital that we explore and implement a comprehensive, intermodal approach to our transportation needs.
California is not sitting back waiting for opportunities to foster broader rail infrastructure to pass by. We have developed the "California Passenger Rail System 20-Year Improvement Plan". This is a $10.1 billion program "that will meet existing and planned intercity passenger, commute, and freight service levels by reducing trip times, expanding capacity, and allowing rail vehicles to operate at speeds up to 110 mph and, where appropriate, up to 125 mph" (from the Plan's executive summary). California highway system projects can sometimes run $100 million per mile. Yes, we will still build roads at this cost. But, corridor rail service can be implemented for $20 million per mile in urban areas and $4 million per mile in non-urban areas. We determined at the outset to partner with Amtrak and our rail freight companies to produce an investment strategy that will yield tangible benefits. Our mission is to reduce trip times, expand capacity and promote high-speed corridors. Our objective is to confront the huge demand we have for transportation by building capacity wisely and economically. Our goal has been to use four regional task forces--matching our four designated corridors--as our analysts of existing service levels, definers of future needs and planners of projects for commuter, recreational and business travel, and freight rail operations.
Through California's 20-Year Plan and enactment of S.250, we believe the following is within our reach:
- 21 additional intercity roundtrips throughout the state
- a 300% increase in Ridership
- major rail improvements and enhanced rail grade-crossing safety
- increased corridor speeds
- hourly service between Los Angeles and San Diego
- corridor service connecting the downtown areas of Los Angeles and San Francisco
- shared investments and benefits for passenger and rail owners and operators.
We know we must approach this incrementally. We know that we are best suited to using proven resources. Those are but two reasons why we have called on Amtrak, the railroads and community officials to ensure our economic growth, our mobility, and individual opportunity.
California has achieved the rail successes I outlined because of a combined commitment on the part of public and private interests to address the pressing transportation needs of the state. Although the economic and population growth that California has experienced has been beneficial to the state overall, these increases have exerted greater demand for faster, more efficient and alternative forms of transportation. In addition, this demand has forced us to reexamine our transportation infrastructure as an integrated whole, not as individual parts. This is the approach that I believe, we must begin to seriously consider on a national scope. For too long, we have focused on separate modes as opposed to discovering ways to integrate our transportation system with the addition of modes such as rail. I hope California's positive experience with rail investment can serve as a useful model for other states and perhaps the nation.
NCSL's Rail Working Group
I have had the privilege to serve as the President of NCSL since last summer. I participated in and observed the enthusiasm and commitment my colleagues put into key state-federal efforts regarding highways, mass transit, road safety and airports. Since my first year as an officer in NCSL going back to 1997, I have participated in and observed the dynamic congressional effort that led to passage of TEA-21 in the 105th Congress and AIR-21 in the 106th Congress. Mr. Chairman, members of the Commerce Committee, you produced the AIR-21 legislation and boosted the state airport improvement grant program and NCSL is very appreciative and cognizant of your efforts. Now it's rail's turn.
As President of NCSL, I established a Rail Working Group comprised of over 30 state legislators. In just one year, we've met four times, initiated research projects and supported S. 250. This group was formed because of common problems all of us readily recognize--congestion, lost-time in traffic, overburdened and unreliable aviation service, and a need to build our intermodal transportation network. The group also came about as more states tapped their own general funds to support Amtrak.
NCSL's Rail Working Group is exploring several key issues:
- prospects for state rail passenger compacts
- prospects for Amtrak-state mutual agreements
- improvement in the quality of service
- service and financing innovations
- development of recommendations to share with policymakers at all levels of government.
I would like to invite you, Mr. Chairman, and each of your colleagues to a future group meeting to discuss future collaborative rail efforts we might pursue.
Thank you for this opportunity to testify before you today. I look forward to responding to your questions.
|
