Signed in as:
filler@godaddy.com
How to Influence!
An Advocate's Elevator Speech
An Advocate's Elevator Speech
An Advocate's Elevator Speech
Learn how to pitch the benefits of rail travel
Join the Facebook Group
An Advocate's Elevator Speech
An Advocate's Elevator Speech
Join the Hoosiers for Passenger Rail Facebook Group
What Do We Want?
An Advocate's Elevator Speech
What Do We Want?
Learn about the big picture for IPRA
An Advocate’s Elevator Speech
By: Tod K Bassler, Board Member—Indiana Passenger Rail Alliance (IPRA)
Editor's Note: As an advocate for improved transportation options for the USA, we should always have an Elevator Speech in our "back pockets." The following are two versions of my Elevator Speech... the short and the long. The short version can be used when you're actually in an elevator (or anywhere) with a transportation decision maker and you have at the most 1 or 2 minutes. The long version is for when you have someone's (or a group's) attention for at least 15 minutes. Please read these examples and feel free to use them in your advocacy efforts.
SHORT VERSION
Our transportation options in the USA have changed a lot over the last few centuries. While our country was built with the help of the railroad, today's options for getting around are much more limited. Our population has more than doubled since 1950 (now 332 million) and the automobile, a low density transportation option, can no longer get the job done efficiently, especially in urban areas. While the rest of the advanced industrial economies have invested in right sizing transportation options, we here in the USA have not. Traffic jams are now common on our roads and waste a lot of our precious, unrecoverable time. Adding more and expensive highway lanes does not solve the space problem. Will you help fix our country's transportation “jam” by supporting investment in improved passenger rail?
LONG VERSION
The United States of America was built over two centuries ago by hard working visionaries using a transportation tool that got the job done, the railroad. A half century ago, a newer transportation option, the automobile, matured to the point when Americans decided that the apparent freedom of the automobile was too good to resist. At the same time, other transportation options, the airplane and the bus, also became viable options for long distance travel. While automobiles are very useful for short distances less than 100 miles (often referred to as the “last mile”) and airplanes are very convenient for distances greater than 600 miles, Americans have fewer options than other developed countries when taking trips having distances ranging from 100 to 600 miles.
Airlines find it hard to maintain profitable routes under 600 miles and automobile trips longer than 100 miles (typically 2 hours) are stressful and not healthy for passengers. In other words, you need to stop and stretch your legs at least every two hours!
As the population of the world increases (since 1950 the population of the USA has more than doubled and is now 332 million), automobiles as a form of transportation suffer from a density characteristic that cannot be avoided. Autos typically transport 1 to 6 people at a time. Other denser forms of transportation, like trains, buses and airplanes, more efficiently transport larger numbers of people. Our crowded highways (full of cars and large trucks), which frequently resemble parking lots, cannot sustain transporting groups of people using a mode that has such low density. Adding more lanes to highways quickly fill up with more traffic, which further compounds the problem. Yes, highways have a capacity limit on the best of days. Also, poor driving habits, which are widespread today, cause frequent accidents and significant delays on highways everywhere. This wastes our valuable time (which we can’t get back) and money.
So, what happened to passenger rail, which provides efficient and comfortable service in the 100-to-600-mile range? This same argument applies to people who commute to and from work and play, which is typically less than 30 miles. Companies that support competing transportation options (i.e., tire companies and buses) took advantage of the free enterprise business environment in our country and, starting in the 1950s, removed most of the rail-based options for moving people around. Meanwhile, in 1971, the U.S. Government took regional and long-distance passenger rail off the hands of the railroad companies in exchange for preferred access to their routes. The result was Amtrak and enforcing their preference to access to the routes (Ref: The Rail Passenger Service Act of 1970) has been generally unsuccessful.
Americans (especially younger citizens) are realizing today that having transportation options that are “right sized” for a trip offers a more enjoyable experience and at the same time minimizes the impact on the environment. In order to return to more balanced transportation options, investment in improving our passenger rail, including long distance, regional and urban, is the right thing to do.
To invest in improving the USA's passenger rail service, there are four key areas that must be addressed:
1. Preference enforcement must occur (this was the deal in 1971) so trips are time competitive with other transportation options
2. Realistic funding for capital and operations must be available and implemented
3. Passenger rail equipment (especially the train vehicles) must be modern, efficient and most importantly comfortable (and quiet!)
4. Service schedules must be useful to passengers (the proverbial chicken and egg challenge) so the passenger rail travel option is actually available at convenient times.
If the United States of America is to remain an attractive and competitive country in which to live and raise a family, our transportation options must simply be improved. Will you help fix our country's transportation “jam” by supporting investment in improved passenger rail?
What Do We Want?
By: Steve Coxhead, President, Indiana Passenger Rail Alliance (IPRA)
I thought this would be a good time to say a word about IPRA’s long game goals. We do a lot of things in the short term, for tactical reasons, but what is the big strategic picture? What is the prize that we should keep our eye on?
Our focus is, of course, Indiana. We want Indiana to have the benefit of a modern, 21st Century, passenger rail system. We assume the existence of a connecting national system, but leave it to others (and there are many) to do the heavy lifting of supporting the national system, as such. There is some overlap, as when Federal legislation is in play, which could supply funding for Indiana projects, as well as benefiting the national system.
Currently, the national system is supplied by Amtrak. We believe that while Amtrak could be a provider of passenger rail within Indiana, that it is not the only plausible option. Other carriers could conceivably supply service. We’ll accept what works.
We do want INDOT to take the lead in doing the planning for passenger rail within the state, and in seeking the Federal funding that would be an essential component of any substantive development (as is done by the DOT in some other states). Our recent initiative for a state passenger rail commission is part of the effort to nudge INDOT in that direction. We will continue to reach out to INDOT and other planning organizations to this effect.
Some progress has been made in this regard. There exists an engineering study, commissioned by INDOT, which details the improvements that would have to be made to the Indianapolis-Chicago corridor to support additional frequencies and higher operating speeds. Each component is costed out, and the total cost is reasonable, compared to what Indiana has traditionally spent on major infrastructure projects. Plans such as this would form the basis for Federal funding requests, when project funding becomes available.
Restoring the Hoosier State service would be good, but it is not the ultimate goal. The service provided by Amtrak was second rate, and the schedule and frequencies were a recipe for failure. What we want is at least five daily round trips operating at 100 mph, with on time performance in excess of 90%. And the corridor needs to have two legs: Chicago-Indianapolis-Cincinnati, and Chicago-Indianapolis-Louisville. Travel time Chicago-Indianapolis would be 2.5 hours. All equipment would be state of the art.
A seven day Cardinal (provided by Amtrak) would help, but is not an end in itself. The schedule is unhelpful, and a train originating in New York City cannot be expected to maintain a high level of on time performance across Indiana. At best, it would be a supplement to Indiana regional service.
Similarly, the goal of a corridor across northern Indiana from Chicago to Fort Wayne, and on to Ohio (Lima & Columbus), with five daily round trips operating at 100 mph, with on time performance in excess of 90% is equally important, and should receive energetic support from our state government.
There are many other useful projects that could be mentioned (Indianapolis commuter rail, Fort Wayne to Indianapolis, Evansville to Indianapolis, etc.), but the Hoosier State corridor and the northern Indiana corridor are, I believe, the most readily attainable, and would provide the state with a good foundation for further development.
To those who would complain that passenger rail service provided by Amtrak was too slow and too unreliable, and lacked modern conveniences, we should agree, and forcefully make the point that the state needs, and deserves, modern state of the art service, and not stripped down, second rate service, as has been provided in the past.
To those who would complain that state support of passenger rail service has been too expensive, we should reply that multiple frequencies generate enough fare box revenue to cover operating expenses. One train per day does not, and cannot, generate enough fare box revenue. We must go large and insist on multiple frequencies. Initial capital costs can be justified when spread over multiple frequencies, not over one train per day.
So, this is what we want. We need to aggressively push this vision of the future, and not go in circles making excuses for the poor service levels and undesirable economics of the past.
As always, please let us know what you think by messaging to info@indianahighspeedrail.org!