Suggestions for Action
What do you think is the most effective way to turn this idea into real policy?
Add your suggestions here for how you think we should run an advocacy campaign to
advance the idea – including the overall strategy, messaging, targets, and tactics.
Approach this from the standpoint that people reading this forum already agree
with you on the importance of the issue, and are asking "What can we do to help
make this a reality?"
You can also comment on and rank the suggestions submitted by others.
Write a Suggestion
If you would like to leave a suggestion please sign in, or create an account
Endorsements for this Idea
Nonprofits and bloggers can formally endorse an idea they support. 2 current endorsements:
All of congress should be taking trains to Washington DC and back to district each congressman represent.
After few months of this, I think you will find High Speed Rail off to good start.
A member of Transportation for America
Supporter for National Gateway
Supporter for Citizens for Personal Rapid Transit biggest transportation breakthrough in 100 years.
http://www.taxi2000.com/
Suggested by Stewart Young on 05/31/2009 @ 03:22AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Like the federal highway system...the feds could build the rail and signal system and then allow private companies to operate the trains over the tracks.
On popular routes where more than one company wants to operate...a lottery system could be set up to award the contract...like some airports now do for landing slots.
The private comapnies whould be in charge of rolling stock, hiring staff, and selling tickets.
Suggested by Michael Raney on 03/31/2009 @ 05:59AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
One of the best ways to support our mutual goal would be to join the National Association of Railroad Passengers (NARP), the largest (22,000+ members) citizen--based non-profit (501c3) rail advocacy group in the country. NARP helped create Amtrak and has defended it against ceaseless attacks ever since. More recently, NARP has developed a blueprint for expansion of rail passenger service and is busy promoting that vision. For more info on NARP, go to narp@narprail.org
Suggested by J Howard Harding on 03/18/2009 @ 10:18AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
My 11-year-old son put his problem-solving brain to the question of how to improve our transportation system and make it work without the use of oil -- or coal. As he argues below, using electricity doesn't have to lead back to coal (see below). Out of the mouths of babes . . .
Virginia
If the world ran out of oil
By Ian Herrick
Bellingham Cooperative School
December 2008
If the world ran out of oil, we would have to start using horses, bikes, trains, and trolleys instead of cars, trucks, and buses. If we did that, a lot of other things would have to change, including: garages, roads, and factories.
Instead of garages in every house we would need to have stables and bike sheds. Instead of parking spaces we would need bike racks and hitching posts. We would need to also have stations for trains and trolleys.
Instead of asphalt roads, horses need dirt. Bikes run fine on asphalt and dirt. Trolleys need tracks; they can't move without them.
Car factories would have to be shut down, but we would need carriage factories, saddle factories, trolley factories, bike factories, and train factories.
We won't need gas stations any more, but we would need more farms growing oats and hay. Bikes do not need any special fuel because they are human powered. Trains and trolleys can run on electricity: we would need more substations.
Trains that run on electricity are not as noisy as diesel trains.1 Also they are a lot cleaner, quieter, and more powerful.2 “Public policy in the US currently interferes with electrification—higher property taxes are imposed on privately owned rail facilities if they have electrification,”3 according to Wikipedia, the online free encyclopedia.
Trolleys are going to be our mass transit and trains are going to take care of our long-distance shipping. All that moving around will take a lot of electricity. So here are some ways to make electricity: burning coal, natural gas, and petroleum; splitting atoms of uranium (nuclear power); and capturing renewable energy through hydropower, geothermal power, solar power and wind power; and burning biomass. The main source of electricity now is coal.4
We will eventually run out of coal, so we'll need to find some other sources of electricity. Solar panels take the sun's rays and turn them into electricity. Burning biomass is renewable because we can grow more biomass. We won't run out of hydropower or geothermal energy, either. All these resources are renewable and reliable.
How would everyday life change, using alternative transportation? There would be a lot more poop on the road, a lot cleaner air. Also, more jobs cleaning the roads and taking care of and breeding the horses. It would take longer to go places, so we won't be able to do as many things during a day. Also, it will be safer for pedestrians.
We will need the government to build the tracks and roads. Private companies will be needed to supply factories that will produce the goods for the new transportation system. Government and industry will have to work together to put this plan into action.
Notes
1. Wikipedia, “Electric Locomotive,” Wikipedia (free online encyclopedia), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_trains#Power_transmission
2. Ibid.
3. Ibid.
4. Energy Information Administration, “Energy Kids Page,” Energy Information Adminsitration: Nov. 2007. http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/energyfacts/sources/electricity.html
Suggested by Virginia Herrick on 01/25/2009 @ 03:48PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
The main thing is to coordinate modes of transportation so there is no long waiting period from train to bus or trolley to coaster. Shuttles could be initiated in large cities from trains or buses to designations. Then there should be a way to transport cars along with the passengers to certain areas from and to suburbs.
Suggested by Otto VonAuchvetter on 01/24/2009 @ 06:27PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Not only should we have high speed trains between close cities, but we should build up our existing rail systems and utilize them more. Just think the fuel and emission savings that would be created if we could get the majority of those cross-country semi's off of the road and have the materials sent via train except overnight shipments that would be flown and short runs would be trucked.
Suggested by Michele Morgan on 01/19/2009 @ 08:15PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
While high speed rail is nice, what can be done now and in fact is "shovel ready" in comparison to high speed rail, is to improve freight rail lines since they really are more efficient than long haul 18 wheelers. There are many cases where bottle necks inhibit the rapid flow of goods that can be straightened out and lines can be overhauled and improved to facilitate traffic.
Having said that, there is the real danger that rail operators are playing the system the same way the financial houses have been doing these many years. That needs to be taken into account.
Suggested by Daniel Miller on 01/18/2009 @ 02:49PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I did not see the Daily Kos folks (and their Energize America 2020 Campaign) listed on the site. They have been working for several years on an 'energy manifesto' which includes a section on sustainable transportation strategies and I think it is vital that they be included in any national campaign. There are doubtless other public-interest groups who are hip-deep in the issue of an integrated, sustainable transportation system (including high-speed rail) who should also be included. So, the first step should be getting the NGOs and non-profits and citizen groups on-board and on the same page. In addition, include activist groups who might be willing to put some muscle behind a campaign, like MoveOn and TrueMajority. Otherwise there will be multiple and redundant advocacy efforts on the part of each group.
Next, have the steering comittee coordinating these groups meet with Congressional Representatives who are on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and have a dialogue. People like Peter DeFazio in Oregon and Jerrold Nadler in New York have been working for years trying to garner support for improved and expanded Amtrak services and implementation of high speed rail. They are our allies and they have in-depth knowledge about the problems and potentials inherent in crafting a system of rail transport that meets 21st Century needs. Also, I think including elected representatives in the campaign is a good idea where they can post a response and a periodic update on high-speed rail issues that folks can read and respond to.
Having done that significant piece of homework, you can then offer an informed spectrum of issues, ideas and insights that can be presented to citizens across the nation through this website or another crafted specifically for this issue and kick-off an intelligent and informed exchange of ideas that can then be relayed effectively to our legislators. There are plenty of us who are hungry for information and education on the issues that matter to us. If is not enough just to be for something or think it is a good idea. Case in point: Yes, we need high speed rail, but we also need a set of sustainability criteria to guide us in designing and advocating for it: building a bullet train to Las Vegas, for example, is a spectacularly bad idea if the city isn't going to be around in 20 or 30 years -- or at least not at its current scale -- which is a very real possibility given the disappearing water resources in the Western states! And a high-speed train system also has to be linked to an expanded regional train system so you can get from New York City to DC via bullet train and thence to other points south -- like Charlotte and Asheville NC via regional transport and trains. So we need to inform our advocacy with an understanding of the design and policy issues involved. This will empower citizens concerned about the issue of rail transport to think intelligently and creatively about the needs of their regions, communities, and also to ask the important questions.
I hope this helps. And I hope I didn't veer too much into the realm of comment.
This is an issue dear to my heart. I would be happy to engage further with the change.org organizers around this campaign. Please feel free to contact me.
Connie Tate
conniedtate@gmail.com
Suggested by Connie Tate on 01/17/2009 @ 03:45PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Perhaps this will be pulled, but it does not oppose the core idea -- getting more efficient transportation -- but details how difficult it can be to attain it through such trains.
The Department of Energy's fact book, found at http://cta.ornl.gov/data/index.shtml -- notably chapter 2, table 12 - reports that in the USA, transit and rail systems are typically only modestly better than private automobiles in terms of energy efficiency. And today's private cars are a pretty low bar. Many of the USA's rail systems are as much as twice as bad as private cars, though Amtrack is better.
This may be a criticism, but consider it a challenge. With this "track record" it is not enough to simply call for more high speed rail. We must detail how we can get load factors which will give it much greater efficiency, the sort of efficiency levels they see in Asia with their high loads. That the U.S. rail systems have failed has not been for lack of trying, so I put forward a challenge that we must propose something that is radical and new which can surmount these past problems, and not just by a little, but by a lot.
Suggested by Brad Templeton on 01/17/2009 @ 03:25PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.