i'll do everything i can, senator lautenberg to work with i'll do everything i can, . . . leg tour transportation system. we thank you for your encouragement. senator hutchison. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i am very pleased, too, to be at this hearing and also to have the opportunity to have a texas presence at the hearing because you and i, mr. chairman, have worked far long time on amtrak, keeping amtrak viable and i will say that we've had a very productive

partnership at keeping the national part of amtrak also viable and i think that is essential and now that we're beginning to see the possibilities for high speed rail, i think it becomes even more important to have the national part of they have system also have the opportunity for high speed rail to connect into amtrak and therefore provide really better synergism and ridership and service to both amtrak and the high speed rail that i do think will help ease the traffic congestion in many parts of our country. i was very pleased, you mentioned the amtrak re-authorization bill last year. the first amtrak authorization bill before this last one was 1997, i sponsored that one as chairman of the surface

transportation subcommittee. i think we did some great reforms in last year's to begin the process of having a federal partnership for capital grant programs for states to be ailing to invest in rail. i think that's an important step forward to making it more viable. because any successful rail project is going to have to have multipartners. it's going to have to have private sector, federal, state, because it's so expensive. the early investment is expensive, but then it becomes much more efficient after it is finally built and established. i'm pleased to welcome mr. sabo, who will appear for the first time in your new position as f.r.a. administeror, you'll play a big part in this.

you'll have meetings to determine what the parameters for high speed rail should be. i think having them all over the country is another good sign. i just want to say that the -- robert exles, the former county judge, which is the county executive, in texas, of our largest county, harris county. he's now heading up the effort for a high speed rail corridor, the texas t-bone, it's a great plan coming forward and i think could go right into amtrak. it could have a lot of great results and i hope that it is one of the first projects that can get some of the stimulus funding that would be available. i think that it's great that he's here to talk about the national system and i just want to recognize governor rendell, who also is someone with whom i've worked a long time and his brother is actually my constituent in dallas, robert, and also a good friend and

someone that -- with whom i have worked also in dallas and in texas. so we have a lot of interest here and i look forward to hearing from the witnesses and it's a very distinguished panel. thank you very much, mr. chairman. >> we made a decision before that because of the size and the quality of the witnesses here today we would forgo additional opening statements and we'll try to deal with this expeditiously and have just five-minute rounds or six-minute rounds maybe to give just an extra minute for use as the members see it. i'd like to introduce the witness panel. a good friend and governor ed rendell of pennsylvania. just like the people of new jersey, our neighbors in pennsylvania rely on trains on

a daily basis. governor rendell has been a vigorous advocate for passenger rail and i recall clearly his satisfaction, but his energy in getting a new rail link between philadelphia and harrisburg and it met with almost immediate success and that's the kind of story we expect to see constantly. the honorable joseph sabo, the f.r.a. administeror. this is the first time you've been before this committee since your confirmation. we're looking forward to hearing how you're working to develop first-class rail passenger service, i know your head and heart are behind that. the honorable judge robert exles, chairman of the texas -- eccles chairman of the texas high speed corporation, ms. susan plining, and tom skanke,

commissioner of the revenue study commission, president and c.e.o. of the skancke company and we thank you all for being here and governor rendell if you would, please take five minutes to summarize, try to meet the target, if we can. >> mr. chairman, you forgot mr. boardman. >> i looked at you and -- fire that person. >> i've only been here six months. >> that's what happens, take advantage of relationships. i know, we're glad to have you, joe, you do a great job at amtrak, we're proud of you, i'm sorry, i thank you governor for the reminder. we'll start you off at a fresh five-minute clock. >> mr. chairman, ranking member, it's a pleasure to be here. i think this is a tremendous

opportunity for the country and i would -- i would analogize it to the opportunity we had when we built the federal highway city. i come here today wearing three hats, governor of pennsylvania, chairman of the governors association and co-chair of building america's future, dedicated to building and improving america's infrastructure i started with governor schwarzenegger and mayor bloomberg a bipartisanning orny swarkse believe that promoting intercity rail is a key priority for america's overall infrastructure plan. you talked about the success pennsylvania has had. teamed up with amtrak we invested $145 million and improved the time on that philadelphia to harrisburg line from 120 minutes to 90 minutes and in two short years, our ridership has gone from 898,000 to nearly 1.2 million as a result of that change.

if we build it right, people will ride it. i have no doubt about that. there has been similar progress around the country and a lot of emphasis on doing what we did. the harrisburg line is improved to 110 miles per hour. i'll talk about that in a second. i believe as we look at intercity passenger rail, we can't be content as a nation to build out 110-mile systems. if we do that, we're absolutely consigning ourselveses to second class citizenship compared to asia and europe. we have to find a way to build and finance true high speed rail. as you know, the train in shanghai runs at 268 miles per hour. the japanese bullet trains are at 170 miles per hour. the french t.v.g. is at 160 miles per hour. we can't be content to just build out an ordinary system. what will high speed rail do

for us in addition to moving passengers and helping our climate control? it'll create jobs for our citizens. jobs in building out the system and orders for american factories. let me stress the importance of that. in pennsylvania alone, we have general electric transportation in erie and most of these factories tend to be in hard-hit areas of the country in erie, pennsylvania, they employ over 4 hourks people, -- 4,000 people, they are ready to build the next generation of high speed locomotives. in harrisburg, the biggest steel company in the world has a plant that build railroad tracks with 400 workers. with just this $13 billion investment, they intend to increase, maybe double or trip they will size of their workforce in doing such. t.g.v., the french rail system, is run by a company called sncf a national rail company. they employ over 200,000 people in good paying jobs and let me

remind you, france is a company 1/5 the size the u.s. just imagine the number of jobs that would be permanent jobs in building this high speed rail system as well as all the construction jobs and orders for the factories in building out the system itself. but if we're going to do this we have to do it right and we have to do it at scale. $13 billion and i know what senator thorn said, $13 billion is a lot of money but it's a small amount of money to do what needs to be done. to build high-speed rail up the california coast is estimated to be a $45 billion cost factor. to build a high-speed train from philadelphia to the midwest would cost between $20 billion and $25 billion alone. a couple of months -- a couple weeks ago vice president biden had a meeting with six governors. and it was a very interesting meeting. the governors were all pushing

for their own projects, 100-mile projects. the midwest governors said they had a plan to link the midwestern cities at 100 to 110 miles an hour. senator mccain said there is a plan to link washington with 100 to 110-mile-an-hour train. governor patrick said, slow down. we can't make this effort building 100-mile-an-hour train systems. or else we are truly consigning ourselves to be a second-class nation when it comes to transporting our citizens. we have to look at the maglas. we have to look at the bullet trains. we have to look at improving the aseller. we can go from new york to washington in an hour and 30 minutes. we can go from new york to philadelphia in 33 minutes. we can consign the shuttle to the rusty. and by doing that we can improve east-west traffic all

over the eastern seaboard. we shouldn't be flying people 500 miles or less. we should put them on high-speed trains. now reabthern asked a very important question. -- now, ranking member thorn asked a very important question. what should be given priority? i suggest we create a national infrastructure bank staffed by professionals, not necessarily professionals all of them in transportation. it could be some former members of congress. some former secretaries of transportation. and rank projects on a cost benefit analysis, rank projects on priority, what they do for transporting people, how many people, the effect on climate change. an independent ranking system. because the public wants that. the public doesn't want transportation dollars authorized through the same old system. and certainly not for projects on this magnitude. and lastly, how are we going to

pay for it? because $13 billion, as ranking member thorn said, it is a lot of money but it's just a drop in the bucket. how will we pay for high-speed rail system in this country? i would recommend congress consider using some of the money that comes from a national climate change law to do just that. what better way could we help our climate than getting cars off the road, trucks off the road by building buses off -- buses off the road by building a high-speed rail system? if that money will be spoken for elsewhere or if that bill doesn't come to pass, i think the time has come to look for a federal capital budget. you know, the federal government is the only political entity in the united states that does not have a capital budget. to have a capital budget, to do the things we can do with a capital budget, you have to change the way that c.b.o. and o.m.b. score. they can't score the total investment. they have to score the debt service, like we do in pennsylvania.

we score what we pay for in that year. a federal capital budget, even if the federal capital budget doesn't fund the total infrastructure picture but just funds the infrastructure bank, it could work. so the time is in my judgment the time calls for bold and strong actions. if we do this, the obama administration and this congress will be remembered at the same way that president eisenhower and the congress he worked with is remembered for building the national highway system. >> thank you very much. i didn't want you to speed up at the end, but the -- you got me so excited about high speed. thanks very much. now, for mr. szabo, we'd like to hear from you. >> thank you, chairman lautenberg, senator thune, senator hutchinson and members of the congress. it's an honor to appear here on behalf of president obama, vice president biden and secretary lahood to discuss the future of

high-speed rail. the obama administration has a vision that ensures safe and efficient transportation choices. one that builds a foundation for economic competitiveness, one that promotes energy efficiency, environmental quality and one that supports interconnected livable communities. and in each case passenger rail is an integral part of that vision. in many cases even modest investment in existing right ofways can result in high-speed rail with competitive trip times and continued rails unmatched safety records. transportation is the lifeblood of any economy. and not only will the high-speed rail vision improve mobility, but obviously the construction will create many short-term jobs but more more importantly the sustained investment will revitalize

domestic rail suppliers in the manufacturing industry. rail is already among the cleanest and most energy efficient means of moving goods and people. in fact, one study indicates that implementing the current federally designated high-speed rail corridors would result in an annual reduction of six billion pounds of co-2. a network taking our national rail system is a foundation with traditional speeds and then commuter rail systems and providing connections with transit will provide those interconnected communities that we see. senator hutchinson mentioned outreach. we think that's critical in the development of our guidance and as we continue to move forward with the national rail plan, we believe that's fundamental, that we need to reach out and

engage the very stakeholders right from the inception of all this. particularly pleased that in the seven outreach sessions we've conducted so far, nearly 1,200 people participated with a high level of enthusiasm and with a great deal of very, very beneficial comments that were in fact incorporated into the guidance that we just released. our success is going to determine -- be determined by these partnerships. and like the construction of the highway system, states are going to play a very critical role. we're on track, and we're using essentially the same model that the europeans did in their rolling out of high-speed rail. our near-term strategy seeks to advance new expressed high-speed corridor services that speeds over 150 miles per hour in corridors of 200 to 600

miles. and then for corridors of 100 to 500 miles we seek to develop both emerging high-speed rail corridors at speeds of 90 to 110 miles an hour on track with freight operations. and also develop high-speed rail corridor systems at speeds of 110 to 150 miles an hour on dedicated tracks. in addition we will be looking to upgrade the reliability and traditional 170-mile-an-hour inner city service. our guidance document was out on time. it provides four tracks for possible funding. projects that are individual projects that have individual utility and individual benefits. a track for corridor programs which is more comprehensive on implementing a full buildout of a corridor plan. a track for planning to assist those states that aren't quite

as far along but still have a keen interest in implementing high-speed rail plans. and then an area for projects that will provide for 50/50 split, that will allow those states that are willing to help match dollars allow us to stretch our dollars further. the criteria for selection will be based strictly on merit. we will be measuring the public benefits, those that are measurable, achieveability and cost-effective. a key element will be the applicant's ability to mitigate risk, the applicant's ability -- their fiscal capacity to carry out the project, their fiscal ability to cover capital and operating expenses and their ability to have adequate project oversight. this is a transformation for f.r.a. historically we've been a safety agency and safety remains our top priority.

but it's important to note that our passenger rail staff is, you know -- our staffing levels are from a quieter era when all we had to do was issue a couple of grants to amtrak or perhaps to short line railroad. and clearly that's changed. we're asking the members of this committee to support the president's fiscal year 2010 budget that starts to address the staffing problems managing a program of this magnitude that will bring to this agency. and we ask that project oversight takedown be consistent with more -- the more traditional 1% instead of the quarter of one percent that was asked for us in the recovery act. with that i look forward to your questions. >> thank you very much. and now mr. joe boardman, former f.r.a. administrator,

former state transportation official. joe, forgive me again for leaving you at the station when the train was pulling out. i am back apologetically. >> all is forgiven and i hope to never leave you at the station, senator. thank you, mr. chairman, and senators all. amtrak has been providing inner city passenger service for nearly 40 years and we regard ourselves as the leaders in the field. but half of our 310 daily trains operate on some part of the northeast corridor which is currently the only high-speed railroad on the continent. its -- in its operation we built gradually to but surely into 150-mile-an-hour railroad. this has given us a unique and unpair lelled experience in the operation of service above 100 miles an hour under north american conditions. i recently returned from an extensive tour of our western operations. in fact, 9,000 miles worth of

riding the train and amtrak prepared food. they were good but i would have liked more variety. i can assure you that the mood of our employees and our supporters is optimistic. people are excited about the future of amtrak and inner city passenger rail and there's a real sense that we have a historic opportunity ahead of us. the passenger rail and investment improvement act or prixa establishes a new relationship between the government, states and the railroad. this committee played a privityal role in enactment of this legislation. this is my first appearance before this committee as president of amtrak. so on behalf of the company and all of its supporters i'd like to thank the committee and in particular senator lautenberg and senator hutchinson for your bipartisanship. the states are the strategic planners. they decide which markets should be served by rail and they fund the operating cost for newer expanded corridor

services. while the federal matching program provides funding for capital projects, states will need to provide the annual funding for those portions of the operating cost that are not covered by revenues. the u.s. department of transportation coordinates state efforts and administrators the federal capital fund for corridor development. amtrak is the nation's rail operator. it designs and provides service on behalf of the states and the federal government in cooperation with the host companies which own much of the railroad right of way. this is an extraordinary vision and a lot of the ideas that are contained in it will probably be components of the transportation re-authorization bill that's going to come before crong in the coming years. the american recovery and reinvestment act or arara provides $1.3 billion dollars for capital improvements. it provides funds for rail congestion mitigation grant programs with $8 billion of

capital fund. it will focus attention and funding on those projects that can be accomplhed in the nearer term. essentially in the next five to seven years to address longer term development needs, president obama has proposed to make about $1 billion a year available for grant funding. a lot of the discussion that has followed has been about speed. but the real issues are trip time and market relevance. and the natural yardstick for comparison is the automobile. so when we talk about improving speeds we need to be thinking about those increases in the context of their effect on trip times. frequency is major component of relevance and we need to make sure we are developing a sufficient number of frequencies to provide travelers with range of choices. there are really three ways to develop passenger train speeds. the best known method is one that a lot of people have in mind when they say high-speed rail. and it's been an order of magnitude the most expensive and time consuming, trains that

operate consumely in the 120 to 150 to 220-mile-an-hour range. these projects require a new right of way with very high standards of engineering, our dedicated passenger railroads require the most modern equipment, are electrified. they are end point focus services. another is the high-speed service that's developed incrementally on ap existing railroad. to do this track and upgrades -- are upgrading to an existing line. depending on the route this could entail some smoothing out of curve and perhaps grades as well as some improvements to grade crossings and signaling systems. this began on the northeast corridor after 1976 when amtrak gained control of it. and over the years we've gradually raised speeds from -- to 125 and then places to 135 and 150 miles an hour. there is, however, a natural sweet spot at 110 miles an hour that offers some significant

advantages. you don't need to close or separate grade crossings. you can operate diesel powered services with existing equipment. most importantly, you don't necessarily need a dedicated track or right of way. although in some circumstances they might be desirable. those are fore midble cost advantages and 110-mile-an-hour service allows less trip times that makes it more competitive in certain markets. thirdly, reducing the portions of your journey that trains cover at a very low or very low speeds. goirl is not raw speed but it's rather an economically, reliable and trip time competitive service, bage part of reducing trip time involves finding ways to raise operating speeds at that low he end of the range. we replaced a crossing in chicago's brayden park. trains actually had to come to a stop before getting a signal to proceed at 10 miles an hour. we can now move trains through that interlocking at 40 miles

an hour, and this is will take several minutes off the time. i hope the committee will keep amtrak and inner city passenger rail in mind as it considers some of the pending legislation we expect to see in the coming months. transportation emissions need to be addressed in any proposed climate change policy solution, and that we believe expanded inner city passenger rail offers significant opportunities to reduce carbon emissions. i want to commend chairman rockefeller and chairman lautenberg. it moves us in a direction of a mode neutral program that uses policy outcomes to guide transportation investments. transportation policy that's focused on outcomes would allow the federal government to focus its limited resources on investments that achieve real benefits. >> thank you. >> thank you >> and mr. eckels, we're pleased to have you with us.

i did mention before that the high-speed rail program transportation cooperation that you are with is texas facility. and we have had the good fortune to work with senator hutchinson over the years. i must say she was a light at the end of the tunnel on a few -- really tough -- really tough moments that we had. it's a pleasure to work with you. thank you, mr. eckels. please. >> we have enjoyed with working with senator hutchinson on high-speed rail in texas and into our current process. before you -- i want to thank them for their help with me as a party person getting in my testimony today on airplanes and i appreciate their support and assistance. i also want to thank ranking member -- there we go, ranking

member thune and all of the senators for being here today and the interest that you have in this project in our state and these projects across the country. i believe this it technology will support transportation immobility in the united states, and i know am by no means alone. governor rendell made the good point about high-speed inner city rail to find $185 miles an hour and higher is we think the most important thing to remember is when you talk about high-speed rail is evidence by the examples around the world. projects that actually work that provide real significant potential -- to reduce potential -- reduce the congestion in our crowded skies and highways, reduce carbon emissions, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, stimulate and orchestrate economic development across the country right now. i was not invited here to talk about the preaching to the choir, though, for high-speed rail. you are aware of the benefits