by Daniel G. Jennings
The repeated Israeli incursions into the West Bank have prompted many Arabs to call for an oil embargo against the United States because of America's support of Israel. Such an embargo could lead to a shortage of fuel in the United States, long lines at gas stations, sky high prices for airline tickets, and high gas prices as happened after the Yom Kippur War in 1973. This situation could be made worse by American military action against Iraq and a falling out between the US and Saudi Arabia.
Unfortunately, the United States, unlike most industrialized countries and many third world nations, is completely unprepared for such an oil shortage, because our leaders haven't learned a thing from the oil shortages of the past. America is unprepared for an oil shortage because our national leaders have refused to invest money, time, and resources in the one kind of proven ground transportation that doesn't need oil to run: electric-powered rail lines. Instead of doing what works--investing in rail--our leaders play around talking about oil drilling in Alaska, fuel mileage, and electric cars, and average Americans will pay the price.
If America electrified its existing main line railroads, built new high speed electric rail lines to connect its major cities, and built electric powered transit systems such as light rail lines, commuter rail lines, and subways in all of its major cities, we could survive another oil crisis quite comfortably. Trolleys and trains might not be as flexible as buses or cars, but they can run on electricity, which can be generated by coal, natural gas, nuclear, and hydro power, all of which we have here in the United States.
Yet, America hasn't done this. No serious efforts have been made to create a network of modern passenger trains or electrify our railroad system. Amtrak's budget isn't even enough to modernize America's one existing high speed rail line. New light rail systems have been built in about a dozen American cities, and existing rail transit systems have been modernized or expanded, but these systems are small and limited to only specific areas of cities. Few of the new rail systems serve the vast new suburbs that have grown up around American cities, and no serious efforts have been made to create regional rail systems.
To make matters worse many of our so-called leaders have actively and systematically opposed and even sabotaged efforts to create modern rail transit systems in the United States. Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo, a Republican, is one of several members of Congress demanding that tax money be spent on something called Bus Rapid Transit rather than electric powered rail. The buses Tancredo wants to use for transit would most likely run on, you guessed it, imported oil. Los Angeles Democrat Congressman Henry Waxman actually got an amendment passed preventing the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority from extending its subway west of Western Avenue to the some of the city's densest neighborhoods. Florida Gov. Jeb Bush has done his best to derail efforts to create a high speed train system in that state, and so on. While America's political leaders have done nothing or actively worked against rail systems, foreign countries have been busy building rail lines. Virtually every city in Germany, France, Switzerland, Japan, and Scandinavia has a modern subway system and an extensive network of trolleys, so their people can get around without cars. Most European countries have nationwide networks of electric trains, and some of them have created impressive high speed trains like the French TGV, the German ICE, and the Japanese Shinkansen. Every major city in Europe, Russia, and Australia has an extensive rail transit system, and most of those systems are being modernized and expanded. Many developing nations like Egypt, Turkey, Chile, and China have invested heavily in new rail systems for their cities and the modernization of intercity rail lines. Even Australia, the car-crazy homeland of the Road Warrior, has invested vast sums in modernizing and expanding its rail lines and transit systems.
If an oil crisis paralyzes American cities in the near future, many multinational corporations will simply pack up their offices and facilities and move overseas to nations whose cities have modern rail transit systems. Many American cities could see their biggest employers head off to places like Singapore, Bangkok, London, Sydney, and Geneva, or to American cities that have good transit, such as Chicago and New York. Already, Boeing moved its headquarters from Seattle, its home of over 70 years--which lacks a transit system--to Chicago which has an extensive transit network.
America is going to pay for its short-sighted refusal to make major investments in rail transportation and pay dearly. Perhaps it will take a major oil shortage followed by a major economic downturn to teach America's leaders of the importance of electric powered rail transport.
Three things Congress can do to promote rail transit in the United States:
- Provide Amtrak or whatever successor agency replaces it with enough money to create a modern passenger rail system--$20-30 billion. This can be done; if Congress can dig up $14 billion to bail out the airlines, it can find the money for rail.
- Change the federal Surface Transportation Act so cities and transit agencies don't have to put up matching funds to get federal funds for transit system construction. This is something local governments don't need to do when they ask for federal money for highways. Make it easier for local governments to build rail systems, or expand existing rail systems and get more rail lines built. This change would also stop local transit agencies from having to make a terrible choice: under the current system transit boards often have to choose between building new rail systems and operating bus systems for the poor. If matching funds were not required transit agencies could do both.
- Amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to prevent anti-rail extremists from filing false civil rights lawsuits against transit agencies on behalf of poor bus riders, as has actually happened in Los Angeles. These lawsuits do not benefit the poor; they benefit only special interests that profit from bus systems and road subsidies.
