Perdue's change of heart on high-speed rail is welcome news

Editor's note: Today's guest editorial is from the Savannah Morning News. Gov. Sonny Perdue returns from a meeting of governors in Washington as a new convert to the idea of high-speed rail. What's more, he's vowed to evangelize the governors of neighboring states -- who skipped the meeting with Vice President Joe Biden and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood -- on the merits of establishing a high-speed rail network. Perdue's change of heart is welcome news. For years, Perdue downplayed high-speed rail as too expensive and unlikely to draw enough riders to be self-supporting.
To be sure, President Obama's announcement of $8 billion in rail funding from stimulus funds, plus another $5 billion called for in the president's budget, might have been enough to turn the governor's head on the issue. (Although aides say Perdue's train travels in China and Spain also played a role.) The seductive nature of federal money does not, however, negate the wisdom of improving the nation's transportation infrastructure in a way that gives Americans more choices, helps reduce our dependence on foreign oil, lessens highway congestion and cuts illness-causing air pollution. While $13 billion isn't really enough to start construction on a high-speed rail system, it is enough to kick off the studies and planning necessary before construction can begin. The president's initial proposal calls for upgrading existing Amtrak routes, instead of laying all-new rail lines. That should hold down costs by reducing expenditures on right-of-way acquisition. While this idea risks maintaining Amtrak's brain-boggling routing system, word from Transportation Secretary LaHood is that the route plan for the new lines is still fluid: New stops could still be added. As for the issue of rider demand, the much faster trains should increase the appeal of rail travel. High-speed rail is often faster for regional travel than air lines, once airport hassles are figured in, along with travel to city centers from outlying airports. Those who doubt the viability of high-speed rail point out that it will take billions of dollars and decades of time to build a nationwide rail network. But the question is not whether we want to spend the money, but where we want to spend it. Should we continue spending those billions on foreign oil and protecting our interests in oil-rich Middle Eastern nations? Or should we spend those dollars at home? Investing those dollars in cleaner, less oil-thirsty technologies like high-speed rail gets an "amen."


More Opinion

Georgia Says

Albany (Georgia) Herald on Islamic State's threat to America: Call it ISIS, ISIL or the Islamic State. By any name it is deadly, and America ... Read More


Because it’s none of our business

Grantville’s parks and recreation director was suspended for one week without pay. And the reason for that was … Hang on a seco ... Read More


Try voting for a change

A popular Coweta County middle school teacher resigned last week and was later charged with misdemeanor possession of marijuana. And the Int ... Read More


Rants, Raves & Really?!?

A look back at last week’s highs, lows and whatevers: RANT: A 41-year-old, Michael Rivera of Palmetto, died in a single-vehicle accide ... Read More


Georgia Says

The Times, Gainesville, Georgia, on expressions of faith: On any given fall Friday night, you'd be hard-pressed to find a football field in ... Read More

Foley beheading is ‘growing up’ moment for social media

The beheading of American journalist James Foley – and the distribution of images showing that crime – have led to a moment of m ... Read More