Modern Musings: Oh the places the Green New Deal could take us … and faster

While riding an Amtrak train home to New York last week, I started to wonder about why the United States has yet to build a truly high-speed train. Amtrak’s Acela Express is technically considered high-speed, but it feels incredibly outdated compared to the bullet trains of the rest of the world.

Eight other countries already have trains that travel faster than 200 mph. Japan’s bullet train, known as Shinkansen, was built over 50 years ago. The Acela can go up to 150 mph, but it averages not even half of its top speed. It also only travels from Boston to Washington, D.C., including the cities in-between.

For a country as vast as the United States and with so many commuters traveling in and out of densely populated cities every day, a high-speed train would transform people’s lives. With all the investment capital and technology that exists within our country, it seems insane that we have yet to build a high-speed rail that is comparable to other developed countries’ transportation systems.

It is also clear that America’s crumbling infrastructure is in desperate need of updating. For example, New York City’s subway system constantly faces delays — only about 65 percent of weekday trains arrive on time.

The Green New Deal proposed by U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Ed Markey last week certainly offered some hope for transportation improvements. The resolution’s main goal is to reduce energy usage and cut back on carbon emissions by switching to 100 percent renewable electricity, which in turn will produce new jobs.

As part of the effort to reduce the country’s carbon footprint, it proposes high-speed rail as a cleaner alternative to air travel. Faster trains may even encourage more commuters to travel by train, which would reduce the number of cars on the road and further reduce carbon emissions.

Since the Green New Deal is a nonbinding resolution, it cannot directly create new legislation or programs. If it passes, it will simply act as a guideline for Congress to work off of over the next 10 years.

Still, just the acknowledgment of the problems with our current systems, that have largely gone unaddressed for years, as well as the recognition of a possible more efficient and eco-friendly future, feels like progress.

A critical aspect of the Green New Deal is that it emulates FDR’s New Deal by framing climate change in the same context of public works projects to improve infrastructure that will, in turn, improve employment.

California is currently working on a bullet train capable of traveling over 200 mph that will run from San Francisco to Los Angeles, but it’s struggling with funding despite giving many Californians jobs. Under the Green New Deal, such projects could potentially receive more federal funding, and the jobs these projects would create would stimulate local economies.

Perhaps the most concerning issue on many people’s minds is the cost of such expansive projects. To some, improving our railroads might even seem unnecessary. But as any commuter will probably tell you, commuting is hellish.

It’s time-consuming — the average one-way commute time is around 26 minutes for Americans. In more congested cities, like Washington D.C. and New York, the average one-way commute takes 43.6 and 35 minutes, respectively.

The negative health effects of commuting, like higher body mass index and cortisol levels and fewer hours of sleep, are even more worrisome. Throw in the all-but-guaranteed delays and traffic, and commuting can become a daily nightmare.

Looking toward 2020, think about the hope the Green New Deal offers: a more environmentally friendly infrastructure that would help create jobs, boost the economy and improve the health of Americans. Make sure you, and everyone you know, votes for someone who will make that hope a reality.