EDITORIAL: Wise decision on federal rail funds

IBJ Staff
November 14, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
IBJ Editorial

Local advocates of high-speed rail are understandably disappointed that the Indiana Department of Transportation has dropped the Chicago-Indianapolis-Cincinnati corridor from its application for federal rail funds (see story, page 1), but the logic behind doing so seems sound.

Competition for the $8 billion in federal funds is stiff—applications totaling $57 billion have been filed—and the guidelines suggest routes that are further along in planning and cover multiple states will be viewed more favorably. If the Obama administration is serious about high-speed rail, there will be other opportunities to fund work on the route, which falls almost entirely within Indiana.

Although the route isn’t in the mix this go-around, it’s encouraging that the state intends to apply for funds for the Chicago-to-Cleveland line.

For decades, the department has been more a department of roads than a true department of transportation. Almost 100 percent of its budget is typically devoted to road projects, with only a pittance going toward alternative forms of transportation.

And roads clearly still dominate the discussion in Indiana. The Indiana Commerce Connector that Gov. Mitch Daniels proposed in 2007 was a non-starter, but a network of roads that would accomplish essentially the same thing—an outer loop beyond Interstate 465—is happening in piecemeal fashion as the counties surrounding Indianapolis lay plans to connect to one another.

Among the many high-ticket road projects on the state’s to-do list is a $567 million plan to revamp I-465 and Interstate 69 on the northeast side beginning in 2012. And of course work already has started near Evansville on the controversial $1.8 billion extension of I-69 through southern Indiana.

The state can’t turn back the tide on all these road projects, nor should it, but it needs a healthy mix of transportation types to keep up with other states. Taking advantage of federal money is a start, but the state needs to make available to communities throughout Indiana a stream of dedicated funds for alternative transportation projects.

Even projects funded largely by the federal government typically require 20-percent local participation, and right now that money isn’t anywhere to be found.

Legislation in the last two sessions of the General Assembly that would’ve allowed local governments to capture a percentage of state sales taxes for alternative transportation gained support among lawmakers but ultimately failed to pass.

Given the state of the economy and continued state revenue shortfalls, the 2010 legislative session might not be the best time to push for such legislation again, but eventually the issue will have to be dealt with.

The state’s application for high-speed rail funds is clearly motivated by the availability of federal money. But we hope it also signals a genuine change in philosophy on the state level—one that places more importance on alternative forms of transportation.•


To comment on this editorial, write to ibjedit@ibj.com.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Why should I a home owner pay for this"car sharing" ????

  2. By the way, the right to work law is intended to prevent forced union membership, not as a way to keep workers in bondage as you make it sound, Italiano. If union leadership would spend all of their funding on the workers, who they are supposed to be representing, instead of trying to buy political favor and living lavish lifestyles as a result of the forced membership, this law would never had been necessary.

  3. Unions once served a noble purpose before greed and apathy took over. Now most unions are just as bad or even worse than the ills they sought to correct. I don't believe I have seen a positive comment posted by you. If you don't like the way things are done here, why do you live here? It would seem a more liberal environment like New York or California would suit you better?

  4. just to clear it up... Straight No Chaser is an a capella group that formed at IU. They've toured nationally typically doing a capella arangements of everything from Old Songbook Standards to current hits on the radio.

  5. This surprises you? Mayor Marine pulled the same crap whenhe levered the assets of the water co up by half a billion $$$ then he created his GRAFTER PROGRAM called REBUILDINDY. That program did not do anything for the Ratepayors Water Infrastructure Assets except encumber them and FORCE invitable higher water and sewer rates on Ratepayors to cover debt coverage on the dough he stole FROM THE PUBLIC TRUST. The guy is morally bankrupt to the average taxpayer and Ratepayor.