Click here to subscribe today or Login.
Let’s talk trains. Not the electric model type that lets avid railroaders create the landscape of their dreams, nearly god-like in choosing where mountains, rivers and houses go to justify that O-gauge red and silver Santa Fe diesel’s journey around the tracks, the consist of lit-up passenger, diner and baggage cars beaming …
Well, not that type of train, which compared to real train service is inexpensive and free of bureaucratic red tape or the reality of passenger demand.
The real world of passenger rail service returning to our region got a shot in the arm recently with the release of a study on that pegged the economic impact of running a local line from Scranton to New York at $87 million, a number U.S. Rep. Matt Cartwright, D-Moosic, immediately latched onto that like a knuckle coupler meeting its mate in a railroad yard. Bringing rail service back to NEPA has been a long-haul pull for Cartwright, with scant success (“scant” as in “zero”).
But putting politics aside, the fundamental question is always, to play off the voice in the Field of Dreams film, “If you build it, will they come?”
More exactly, will they come in numbers enough to justify the expense?
As an article about the study pointed out, the current plan would create a Scranton-to-New York ride of 3 hours and 25 minutes one way. It’s difficult, though not impossible, to see commuters opting for a nearly 7 hour daily trip unless the bus alternative gets as long.
Which is a real possibility. As a story about the study pointed out, NYC has some unavoidable physical choke points — two tunnels and a bridge — that have been increasing in congestion. It’s not that hard to see days when such train travel time would be competitive. And if you have to sit in train for more than three hours to avoid the frustration of a bus or car sucking in exhaust fumes while standing still, well, maybe some people would accept the trade off.
But there is a bigger factor that rarely gets discussed in this country. Despite the reality that the Iron Horse made modern America possible, trains fell out of favor once roads became so ubiquitous. And every time politicians start talking about cutting Amtrak subsidies, they conveniently forget just how much the government “subsidizes” roads and highways. It was not a private company that boldly built the Interstate Highway system that put passenger train service on the rocks; It was President Dwight Eisenhower and the federal government that started a remarkable bit of engineering to open America up to the personal automobile, including the Interstate that bus riders travel to the Big Apple.
Eisenhower and his advisers saw the proposed Interstate system as a means to open more of the country to development, but also as an alternative way to quickly evacuate sections of the country in case of emergencies, or to move men and material in time of war. The Interstate System was built in part as a back up for existing transportation. It is a bit ironic that system meant to supplement passenger rail crippled it.
Other countries have never forgotten the value of rail as an integral part of a well-rounded transportation system. While the cost and likely use of expanded service here needs to be considered, we should not lose sight of the broader potential for a well-designed and managed expanded rail service both to Scranton and nationwide.
— Times Leader