President of the Surface Transportation Policy Partnership

Anne P. Canby is president of the Surface Transportation Policy Partnership, a nonprofit national coalition based in Washington, D.C., that advocates for transportation reform. The STPP promotes smarter transportation choices that enhance the economy, make for safer communities, improve public health, and protect the environment. In her position, Canby is a leader of the OneRail Coalition, a national network comprised of freight, passenger, transit, environmental, and labor groups that favors increased investment in rail infrastructure as a way to create jobs, maintain the nation’s economic competitiveness, and meet today’s energy and climate challenges.  As transportation secretary of Delaware from 1993 to 2001, Canby earned national recognition for transforming a traditional highway agency into an operation that recognized the benefits of combining multiple modes of transportation into an integrated network. She also has served as a deputy assistant secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation. Canby has been recognized by such groups as the American Public Transportation Association, the Transportation Research Board, Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations, and the Women’s Transportation Seminar.

Question:

Norfolk Southern’s Crescent Corridor project, designed to improve the speed and capacity of freight moving between the Southeast and Northeast, is a public/private partnership. As such, federal and state dollars are being used to pay for improvements that carry public benefits. In your view, what role do these partnerships play in addressing the nation’s transportation infrastructure needs?

Answer:

I’m going to speak to that as a former state DOT secretary. In Delaware, Interstate 95 is a major corridor and one that has a fair amount of truck traffic. In thinking about how to invest limited public resources, it seems natural to reach out to the freight railroads to seek partnerships that can minimize public costs and improve service, especially when the public benefits are clear.  When rail becomes more attractive to shippers, cargo moves off of a highway that the public pays to build and maintain on to a rail facility where, for a small public contribution to a private enterprise, I alleviate the problem of having heavy trucks and added congestion on public roads. In addition, the public cost is reduced for highway maintenance, and presumably pavement would last longer.

One of the things we’ve absolutely got to do a better job of is making use of the full set of transportation assets that we have, and rail is one of them. Unfortunately, rail has been somewhat the hidden mode over the years, and probably hasn’t been integrated well enough into the idea of what the freight or passenger network ought to look like in the U.S.  When states are struggling to take care of the roads they’ve already built, let alone build new ones, this is a huge issue. It is to everybody’s advantage if we can extend the life of those highway assets by better utilization of the network as a whole.

By shifting truck freight to more energy-efficient rail, there are obvious climate and other environmental benefits as a result of reduced emissions. I also would say that safety is a big issue; if we can minimize accidents on the highway by moving more freight by rail that’s a huge benefit.

Question:

Not everyone agrees that public funds should be used to enhance freight rail infrastructure, arguing that these projects primarily benefit private railroad companies. What are your thoughts on that?

Answer:

Well, the public and users don’t necessarily view the transportation system as public or private.  It should be seen as an integrated system that serves its various users. As we expand our concept of public/private partnerships, more work needs to be done to document the public benefit for public investment and clarify and account for the private benefits that accrue from public investments.  Having a clear understanding of what the public benefits are for investing in privately held railroad assets is critical. It’s something we haven’t developed fully and one that is clearly necessary in my view.  I don’t think it’s that difficult to quantify the benefits, in terms of the environment, energy, safety, reduced traffic congestion, and over time lowering the public cost of highway upkeep, or in the case of intercity passenger travel, reducing or reallocating airport capacity.  These are examples of the benefits we need to quantify and use to build a strong case for public-private partnerships to take away the arguments of people who question why there ought to be public investment.

I’m sure that parallels could be drawn to investments in the aviation system, where there’s a huge mix of public and private money that supports that mode. And, certainly, all the studies on the highway system would indicate that on a cost allocation, the trucking industry probably is not paying its fair share.

Question:

How does the increased use of rail, both for passenger and freight service, dovetail with the goals of the Surface Transportation Policy Partnership?

Answer:

Clearly the major focus has been on the highway system. As a nation, we’re at the point where we need to make sure we have a balanced transportation system and that we’re using each mode for the parts of a trip that make the most sense. For example, long haul freight and passenger trips of 500 miles or so make a lot more sense on rail than they do in the air or on the road from an energy standpoint. Rail occupies a lot less lanes and is much less invasive in communities than major highways, and it offers people additional choices.

Question:

The U.S. railroad industry has been around since the early 1800s, yet it appears that rail is re-emerging as a 21^st century solution to many of our transportation problems. What are your thoughts about that?

Answer:

Well, re-invention is a hallmark of doing things better and recognizing changes in the times. We’ve gone from canals, to railroads, to roads, to air. On the surface side, I don’t know that there’s a new form of transportation we’re going to invent. So, we need to figure out how to make the ones we have work better together to really have an integrated system that is efficient and delivers both people and goods in a timely, environmentally friendly, and cost-effective fashion. I think that’s beginning to happen, but a lot more conversation needs to occur before we achieve that goal.