> >from Vermont Senator Jim M. Jeffords to President Clinton and US
> >Transportation Secretary Rodney Slater argued that the heavily-populated
> >area has become congested, and urged them to upgrade tracks along the
> >330-mile stretch between Boston and Montreal with federal highway funds.
> Getting access to the US federal "highway slush fund" would be great!
> >"Our population density and a 150 percent increase in travel throughout
> >England has combined to overwhelm traditional modes of transportation in
> >region," the letter said. The rail would also allow passengers to use the
> >Manchester airport as an alternative to Logan Airport. "Boston's Logan
> >Airport, the hub of the region's air traffic and one of the main gateways
> >for travelers to northern New England, is among the nation's busiest,"
Every time local news does a bit on the lines at airports, delays, canceled
flights, lines of people who are, most of them, going to be traveling in the
continental US, I wonder why they do not take trains. Okay, trains are not as
fast as jets, but you will not wait as long, you will be able to move around, the
seats are more comfortable, the food will be better, and unlike a train, you are
not necessarily stuck with your seat mates' company for the trip.
Once the balance is tipped, and people remember that there is another way to travel
besides driving and flying, train travel will re-enter the national psyche. And
if you find a passenger train agreeable for a 600 mile trip, it is not a great leap
to prefer riding light rail rather than driving 40 miles.