(The following column, "State needs to get on track with Amtrak," was written by Ben Gottfried and appeared Dec. 19, 2006, in the Albany (N.Y.) Times Union. Gottfried is the Susquehanna region coordinator for the Empire State Passengers Association, a rail passengers advocacy group.)

New York's plans for an effective passenger rail system remain in the planning phase, while other states have added the passenger train to their approaches to transportation. These states have worked with Amtrak during the past several years to develop improved rail service as part of their respective economic development agendas.

While New York championed similar efforts 30 years ago, we now have the dubious distinction of being the only state to be at odds and, in fact, in court with Amtrak, over the failed joint high-speed rail development deal of 1998.

Perhaps we need to talk about the wider significance of improved rail service in New York and its effect on traffic and trade in the Northeast.

Rail travel across upstate New York consists of Amtrak's "Empire Corridor" trains playing cat and mouse with a daily parade of CSX freight trains. CSX's Chicago-bound route is among the nation's busiest freight corridors, funneling valuable freight traffic to metropolitan New York City, New Jersey and New England. The status of the CSX route as a major component of the transportation network for the Northeast means that it is a national transportation asset for freight traffic now and potentially passenger rail traffic in the future.

The line was at one time a mode separated railroad with freight and passenger trains on separate tracks to allow for the faster running passenger trains such as the legendary "Twentieth Century Limited." The passenger-only tracks were removed around the time the state Thruway was opened for business and passenger trains and freight trains have shared the same tracks ever since. Current congestion on this busy railroad means that in order for the route to serve as an effective passenger line, the dedicated passenger tracks will have to be put back. Fortunately, the right of way remains available for this option.

Pennsylvania has just completed a $150 million corridor development project to connect its capital (Harrisburg) to its major metropolitan area, Philadelphia. Maximum train speeds were notched ahead to 110 mph, knocking off 15 minutes for new express trains on the 104-mile line. Pennsylvania has an economic advantage over New York as their new railroad represents an environmentally responsible transportation asset to foster smart growth and attract business and jobs.

The Pennsylvania deal was conceived of after our own 1998 high speed plan for connecting Albany and New York City. Amtrak has contracts with 14 states, worth an estimated $147 million, for similar projects in other parts of the country.

Unfortunately, since 1998, New Yorkers have experienced stagnation, punctuated by increasing fares and declining reliability on the Empire Corridor. One so-called "improvement" for New York thus far has been the discontinuation of food service on the Albany-New York City trains in 2005. This has forced passengers to grab their morning coffee before they board their trains, though some of that coffee reportedly is better than the Amtrak brew.

To further our efforts to actually achieve something along the lines of the Pennsylvania example, New York formed a High Speed Rail Task Force last year to tell us what will be required to get some snappy new trains to connect our cities. The Task Force headed up by transportation expert John Egan correctly advises the need for far greater public investment in rail, utilizing state-federal cost-sharing formulas to address both deferred maintenance (20 percent state, 80 percent federal) and future improvements (50/50). As a comparison, federal highway projects today enjoy a much more favorable "match point" of only 10 percent state funds and 90 percent federal funds. The environmentally friendly and fuel efficient mode -- rail -- is being penalized.

Similarly, the state Department of Transportation has just released its corridor based vision for transportation for the year 2030. That report also cites the need to create a seamless system in which travelers can conveniently shift between modes and operators to complete trips that meet their individual and business needs. The report also notes that the transportation system is essential to economic competitiveness and that we risk falling behind other states with more dynamic transportation plans.

Political players in Washington and Albany often talk of the need to develop energy and environmental policies that are sensitive to our wounded planet. Strategic rail projects, like the Empire Corridor, offer the opportunity to address these desires and further economic development in New York and the Northeast. Let's hope the new team in Albany can articulate the need to develop the rail system in New York and explain the importance of its role as a transportation asset for the entire Northeast. They will need to work with the realigned Congress to press for rail project parity with federal highway projects.

This is probably our best shot in years for bringing responsible projects forward that address our collective desire for sustainable transportation policies. While we seem to have the plans and desire to develop a rail service option for New York, it will ultimately be the match point that wins the game.