population across the land. That is why I sometimes feel a little bit like Buck Rogers' grandfather, instead of his father.

In a wholly serious vein, I want to stress that I have become thoroughly persuaded of the wisdom of the farsighted course which the administration has chosen. The development of adequate public transportation systems is such a massive undertaking and the future needs of this country are so challenging, that it would make little sense to devote the energies of the Federal Government to a program which did not look to the needs of the future and which would be obsolete before it began.

I have been impressed by the hard reality of some of the data which has come to my attention as I have delved into this problem. For example, in our northeast megalopolis where we already have 20 percent of the Nation's population living on less than 2 perceont of the Nation's land, the population is expected to swell from 37 million to 64 million by the end of the century, and intercity travel is expected to increase by as much as 200 percent. Clearly, the freedom of human mobility is going to become a political issue of the highest order.

Already we are being given some hints as to the social and political costs of meeting the problem. I noted with interest the Commerce Department's estimate that the airports in the northeast megalopolis will need to be expanded at a cost of $1 billion by 1980 to meet increased traffic and that 65 percent of the cost is associated with the relatively short-haul flights within the megalopolis corridor.

Highway costs and needs are inevitably going to skyrocket, too. We already have 14 percent of the Nation's automobile ownership in the northeast megalopolis and even if the proportion remains constant, the increase in absolute numbers of cars is bound to push the congestion of our highways to the limit. One recent estimate held that by 1980, just between Washington and Baltimore, there would be a threefold increase in minimum average daily automobile trafficfrom 33,800 to 93,900-but only a twofold increase in the number of highway lanes to accommodate the flow.

Clearly, we are going to need all the information we can get about more economic and more efficient alternatives for moving great numbers in speed and comfort without infringing on the private freedoms of individuals. And so I therefore lend my full support to the long-range aspects of the administration bill because I believe it will help us to plan our long-range policy objectives.

Of even more immediate interest to me and my constituents, Mr. Chairman, is the demonstration phase of the administration program, which I hope will be fully supported and adequately financed by the legislation which comes from your committee. For it is this immediate demonstration work, I believe, which can help do the essential job of preserving and upgrading existing service until the long-range concepts can come into being.

I was particularly pleased that the spokesmen for the Department of Commerce were able to assure this committee the other day that they do contemplate a demonstration project at the northern end of the corridor between Boston and my own State capital at Providence. It is good news indeed that the Department plans to use this area to test wholly new equipment such as gas turbine cars which could make the Providence-Boston run in less than half an hour-providing a

welcome service for interurban commuters, shopping housewives, students and patrons of the many recreational and cultural facilities which both cities have to offer.

We have found, too, that there are some very sound reasons for the selection of this particular length of track for this test. It is, in the first place, one of the best stretches of existing railroad track in New England, if not in the East. It is straight and well graded and lends itself to high-speed operation with maximum safety. It is my understanding that it already has an authorized speed of 90 miles per hour, which I am told is the highest permissible speed on the New Haven system.

Moreover, the line traverses an area of high consumer responsiveness to change in transportation service. This responsiveness was indicated in 1963 when the New Haven Railroad, in conjunction with the Massachusetts Mass Transit Authority, conducted a demonstration project designed to measure consumer response to lower fares and more frequent service during offpeak hours.

The experiment was limited in time and concept. It lasted only 6 months and it involved no new equipment and no increase in speed. The only variables were increased frequency of operations and intrastate fare reductions that did not apply south of the Rhode Island line. But even these limited inducements were sufficient to generate a 27-percent increase in patronage on the intrastate portion of the line. And they even generared a 10-percent increase in interstate service, where frequency was increased but no rate reductions applied. Total passenger traffic on the Boston-Providence line, including interstate traffic, increased from 683,800 in 1962 (before the demonstration began) to 938,000 in 1964.

There are some important public policy considerations for continuing these tests of consumer response along the lines now proposed by the Department of Commerce. The principal one is the fact that we are faced with a railroad crisis in New England and we need all the information we can get to help in resolving the matter.

The New Haven Railroad which has been in receivership since 1961 now has petitioned to abandon its passenger service in entirety and the States which it serves are being confronted with the need to provide public_support of the rail passenger service if they want it to continue. But before they can be expected to make the substantial public commitments involved in preserving this service, it seems to me that they properly need to know what the range of public response will be to such service.

The Federal demonstration project, I believe, can provide an essential function in helping the States decide their future policy. The Federal project is not intended to be, and should not be, a permanent subsidy program. But it seems to me that it could and should be a very valuable, if temporary, demonstration of the usefulness of modern and efficient railroad service in a heavily urbanized area-an area, I might add, where existing service is so bad and so rundown that it is very difficult for State government policymakers to estimate exactly just what future course to take. The Federal demonstration project would be, in effect, a model of what that service could be and thus an accurate guide for future policy. Thus, Mr. Chairman, there are urgent and extremely practical reasons, both immediate and long

range, why this program should be brought into existence without delay.

I congratulate the administration for its imagination and resourcefulness in developing this program from the original concept which I put forward 3 years ago this month, and I hope that your committee will see fit to take prompt and favorable action.

Senator SCOTT. Thank you very much, Senator Pell.

Any questions? Senator Lausche?

Senator LAUSCHE. I just want to ask one or two questions. This may not be immediately germane, but can the Senator tell what Rhode Island has done thus far toward eliminating tax burdens on railroads? Senator PELL. We have taken steps to relieve some of the local taxes on the railroads. I think, while not doing as much as Connecticut, if my recollection serves, or about as much as Connecticut, we have done more than the other States it has served.

Senator LAUSCHE. I think you have.

Senator PELL. Yes. We have tried very hard indeed for some years. I think though small we have something like 5 percent of the passenger miles traveled on the New Haven system in our State. We have within that range sought to do more than our share.

Senator LAUSCHE. This test that was introduced and which you discuss, is that still in progress, where the frequency of service was increased and the rate reduced?

Senator PELL. This is now, as I understand it, being pretty well terminated, and I do not have the most recent figures of how the passenger service has dropped down.

Senator LAUSCHE. That is all.

Senator SCOTT. I have no questions, since I am already familiar with the Senator's proposal and I might add he was indeed the originator and the inspirer of the legislation that has led to a number of other Senators cosponsoring his bill and I am very glad to be a cosponsor myself.

Senator PELL. Thank you very much.

Senator SCOTT. Thank you. Senator Williams is unable to be present at this time. His statement will therefore be inserted in the record at this point.

STATEMENT OF SENATOR HARRISON A. WILLIAMS, JR., IN SUPPORT OF S. 1588

We are faced with the problem of dealing with the world's first "megalopolis." In order to competently approach this situation it is necessary that we think in terms that may be strange to many of us. We are dealing here with a complex of 435 miles which in 1960 contained 37 million people. The habits of this "community" dictate that their proximity should become an advantage rather than a hardship. We are blessed with the possibility of expansion in these areas but we must act with determination to make communication and commutation as fast and serviceable as possible. What we decide on as the master plan for this area could well set an example for all our future efforts in the field of transportation.

Our subject is of national significance since there are many other areas throughout the country which could benefit from this type of intercity transportation. The steps that we now take in investigating the feasibility of rapid transportation between Washington and Boston will serve as a bold example for solving similar problems that exist in other areas of the country.

Private industry as well as academic institutions have already undertaken much research on this problem. This is the time to set an outstanding example of how Government, private industry, and scholarly endeavor can combine to solve a problem of national importance. We have already seen in the past 8 years that space travel is not merely to be pondered over in the classroom or on some cartoonist's drawing board. We are in the 20th century and we should forthrightly approach the problems of the future now rather than confine outselves to stop-gap solutions for past problems.

The benefits of this legislation would not be limited to the Northeastern section of the country. Although the original study would be made in the eight-State area between Washington and Boston, the research done for this project would yield many and varied benefits to planners as a whole, just as the project now under construction in Japan has supplied us with both instruction and inspiration. The results of such a plan would be of great use to areas with similar problems such as those encompassing the Seattle-Tacoma-Portland area, the east coast of Florida, and the Milwaukee-Chicago-South Bend-Cleveland area. The growth of our cities demonstrates that there are many common strains in the problems that face all our major concentrations of urban population. The facts and ideas that will be generated by such a study would be beneficial to all.

It was announced on Monday that a 20-mile section of track in Trenton, N.J. had been selected to carry on experiments for this high-speed transportation. When improvements are completed on the track in this area it will enable trains to travel up to 150 miles per hour, or almost twice as fast as rail transportation presently available in that area. Mr. C. McKim Norton, president of the Regional Plan Association has ably expressed the benefits that such a plan will bring to this section of the country when he said, "Trains would be able to make more runs than they do * * * and obviously this will lead to a more favorable economy."

now

Let's look at some specific examples of the need for such rapid rail transportation in the northeastern area. In 1953 highway

passenger-miles for this area totaled 78 billion miles and in 1963 that figure had risen to 115 billion miles, or an increase of 47 percent. Again in 1963 air traffic between New York City and Washington was 1,342,910 passengers traveling 275,296,550 passenger-miles while 1,659,400 passengers traveled 311,967,200 passenger-miles between New York and Boston. These air traffic statistics are particularly significant for they show an increasing desire for high-speed transportation between these points. I am sure that the studies now being conducted by the Department of Commerce on this matter will furnish us with even more impressive evidence of the transportation needs of this megapolis.

From this information we can readily see that the present modes of transportation are not even adequate now. The population in this area increased over 3 million in the past decade; prospects show an even greater growth potential for the future. The increased mobility of our people as a whole demand that some action be taken in this field. We must make this a mobile megapolis.

The railroad industry must catch up with the advances which have been made in other fields of transportation. The assistance that would come from this bill would be bold and continuing, a vote of confidence for an industry that has done so much to broaden the horizons of this Nation and to people them with those ready and willing to continue to work for its welfare and prosperity.

Senator LAUSCHE (presiding). Our next witness is Senator Scott.

STATEMENT OF SENATOR HUGH SCOTT

Senator SCOTT. I understand Mr. Saunders is expected shortly. He is on his way from the airport, and I would be very glad to have the opportunity to introduce him to the committee when he arrives.

Mr. Chairman, let me say at the outset of my testimony that the substance of my remarks this morning represents an endorsement of the research and development program authorized by S. 1588. I shall urge, however, that as much attention be devoted to the task of improving and modernizing existing passenger railroad service in the northeast corridor as to the effort to develop new and much more rapid ground transportation systems. In giving the nickname "Buck Rogers" to these systems, I do not in any sense mean to reflect facetiously or adversely on Senator Pell's testimony, nor do I mean to downgrade the long-range aspects of the research to be undertaken pursuant to S. 1588.

Mr. Chairman, as a cosponsor of S. 1588, I appreciate this opportunity to testify in support of this legislation to authorize the Secretary of Commerce to undertake research and development in high-speed ground transportation. This is an important bill which should be promptly enacted.

I am appearing before your subcommittee today not only to express my support of S. 1588, but also to outline my views as to how we can most productively proceed in the development of high-speed ground transportation, first in the northeast corridor between Boston and Washington, and then in other heavily populated intercity transportation corridors.

S. 1588 authorizes such sums of money as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of the bill. The President has asked for an