A report today by the U.S. Public Interest Research Group points out what several Times readers have noticed -- the Obama Administration's recently announced $8 billion stimulus program for trains hardly brings "high-speed rail" to most regions, including the Northwest.

"Many of these proposals have been geared not toward building the truly "high-speed" passenger rail systems in the decades to come, but simply toward restoring passenger rail service to a basic level of adequacy," USPIRG says.

So the lobbying group is urging a bigger commitment: to link all cities with fast track lines 100 to 500 miles long by midcentury. USPIRG has been asking members of Congress to channel $50 billion in future gas taxes toward the program, said Blair Anundson of WashPIRG, which held a regional news conference Tuesday at Seattle's King Street Station.

In the last round of stimulus funding, states requested $57 billion for new rail projects, seven times the amount of money available.

Washington state is getting $590 million for the Cascadia line, from Blaine to the Columbia River. Extra tracks will be added at ports to separate freight from passenger trains, and curves in Everett will be straightened, among other projects. "Positive train control" systems will be installed to slow or stop trains that get too close, allowing speeds to exceed the current 79 mph limit. Still, this first round of projects shaves only 10 minutes off the 3 1/2-hour Seattle-to-Portland trip, while greatly improving on-time performance.

The Amtrak Cascades ridership has improved from 95,000 in 1994 to 770,000 in 2008, the report says, citing state data. By 2030, speeds are supposed to reach up to 110 mph, and a Seattle-to-Portland trip would take only 2 1/2 hours, after a hoped-for $6.5 billion investment.

The left-leaning USPIRG recommends a national infrastructure bank, taxes on increased land value near station, money from "cap-and-trade" carbon reduction policies, airport surcharges and highway funds to pay for the train vision. The nation would still lag far behind China, but should try to match Europeans in rail investment, the report says.

Wondering what all this talk of tuition-setting authority means in terms of the price tag on education?

Senate Committee Services released a report Monday that lays out possible future tuition rates under the maximum-limit provisions of SB 6562.

The measure seeks to grant University of Washington, Washington State University and Western Washington University the authority to set resident undergraduate tuition -- without approval from the Legislature -- for the academic years 2011-2012 through 2017-2018.

But there are limits. Annual tuition increases may not exceed the lesser of 14 percent in any one year or a compound annual average rate of 9 percent, calculated over the preceding 15 academic years.

This means that tuition at UW, which was $2,875 in the fall of 1996, could rise to as much as $14,920 by the time classes begin in 2017, according to the report. That is more than double the amount students paid this year -- $7,125 -- which was almost $1,000 more than they paid the previous year.

WSU could charge as much as $14,841 by the school year 2017-2018, and Western could charge $11,794.

Students from the three universities testified against tuition hikes at Monday's Senate Ways and Means Committee hearing.

Their main concern is that without financial-aid guarantees (like a promise from the Legislature to fund state need grants and the work-study program), the rising cost of school would make it a pipe dream for middle- and low-income families.

Although they were in disagreement on most matters, officials from the universities, who all testified in support of SB 6562, agreed that state dollars for financial aid would be crucial for students. Without it, they said, the bill's attempt to help schools would not succeed.

Testifying that the problem has not been fixed, only shifted to the students, Marcus Sweetser from the Washington Student Association told the committee that students have become "bargaining chips."

Families that plan ahead for college using Washington's Guaranteed Education Tuition program would also be affected.

According the Office of the State Actuary, "increased tuition growth means higher premiums and prices." GET units would become more expensive, resulting in "cash-constrained" purchasers being able to afford less.

The bill does try to provide some relief for middle- and lower-income families.

One requirement calls for universities to grant partial- to full-tuition waivers in a tiered system.

For example: The year is 2018 and tuition at UW is $14,920. If a family of four makes $47,500 a year, then all of their student's tuition would be waived. If another family of four makes about $95,000 (the estimated median family income) then they would receive 50 percent off tuition.

It appears one would need a college education just to understand the bill's mathematics.

Gov. Chris Gregoire said Monday that she has a lot of questions about last week's ruling by King County Superior Court Judge John Erlick that Washington state is not providing enough money to its public schools.

"There are some, if you've read the opinion, ambiguities in there... that really put billions of dollars at risk and litigation... at play," Gregoire said in a meeting with reporters. "I need clear understanding and direction. As does the Legislature."

"There is no question in my mind that education is the paramount duty of the state of Washington," she said. "...but how you carry that out needs to be well understood because we're going to invest billions and I don't want to end up in litigation forever."

Gregoire said state leaders may ask Erlick for clarification, or perhaps seek review by the state Supreme Court. The decision about whether to appeal rests with state Attorney General Rob McKenna, she said.

In the ruling, Erlick said Washington is failing to live up to its duty, outlined in the state constitution, to provide "ample" funding for the public schools. But Erlick left it up to state lawmakers to decide how much funding would be enough, and how fast the state should provide it.

Meanwhile, about 30 state representatives have signed a letter asking Gregoire and McKenna not to appeal.

"The court did not tell us anything that we do not already know," said the letter, circulated by state Rep. Ross Hunter, D-Medina. "The Legislature is not giving schools the money they need to provide the quality of education we want."

Hunter was one of the lawmakers behind a measure passed last year that calls for overhauling the state's school finance system. That bill also made major additions to the list of education programs that the state would pay for, such as a full day of school for kindergartners. As of now, the state only funds a half day.

The bill didn't establish a start date for the new basic-education program, but set a deadline for it to be fully in place by 2018.

Erlick's ruling, the letter said, is a mandate to make sure that bill "does not become an empty promise."

-- Staff reporter Andrew Garber contributed to this post from Olympia.

The Senate Ways and Means Committee on Monday afternoon approved Senate Bill 6843, which would suspend Tim Eyman's Initiative 960 and let lawmakers increase taxes with a simple majority vote.

The measure now goes to the full Senate for consideration.

I-960 requires a two-thirds vote in the Senate and House to pass a tax increase, or voter approval.

Senate Bill 6843 suspends the two-thirds requirement until July 2011, which would allow simple majority votes on tax increases next year as well. But it also makes permanent changes, such as stating that any future tax increase going toward a voter-approved initiative only needs a simple majority vote.

OLYMPIA -- The big environmental bill of the legislative session -- a proposal to triple the tax on oil, pesticides and other chemicals and devote the money to storm water cleanup -- was formally introduced today in the state House and Senate.

House Bill 3181 (and Senate Bill 6851) would triple the "hazardous substances" tax created by a 1988 voter initiative.

That could raise as much as $250 million a year to clean up polluted storm water that has been cited as the leading threat to the health of Puget Sound and other waterways.

But as a carrot for lawmakers, the bills would deposit much of the new tax money in the state general fund over the next few years. That could help plug ongoing budget shortfalls.

In future years, more and more of the cash would be devoted to storm water cleanup.

The bills already have significant support among majority Democrats, with 33 cosponsors in the state House, and 24 in the state Senate.

This is sure to set up a big fight with the oil industry, which pays most of the current tax at its five refineries in Washington. Industry lobbyists have argued the tax will only show up at the gas pump for ordinary consumers.

Last year, the oil industry successfully fended off a similar proposal, which it labeled a "$1 Billion Hidden Gas Tax."

Asked about the tax this morning, Gov. Chris Gregoire sounded a supportive note and rejected the suggestion that the tax would necessarily lead to higher gas prices.

"Let's be honest, a (hazardous substances) tax has been in place since what, the 80s, and there has been no increase since the 80s. And these are oil companies that are making lots of profits so for us to assume that we pay for it at the gas pump -- I don't think is there," Gregoire said at her regular Monday news briefing.

"If we want to get Puget Sound cleaned up, we can't sit there and hope and pray it happens some day. We are going to have to take action to get something done."

Gregoire said she'll decide whether she can support the proposal -- and any other tax plans -- after the state gets its updated revenue and caseload forecasts in the coming week.

Photo by Seattle Times photographer Ellen Banner
Students awash in purple gathered on the Capitol steps in Olympia Friday, calling for lawmakers to resist further cuts to higher education and to protect financial aid.

An estimated 350 to 400 people from the University of Washington's Seattle, Tacoma and Bothell campuses gathered at noon shouting "knowledge is power" and letting out "whoop whoops" for state need grants and work study programs.

Sen. Derek Kilmer, D-Gig Harbor, told the crowd that he washed dishes under the work study program to help pay his way through college. It was all applause and cheers for the senator, whose bill to grant universities temporary tuition-setting authority is making its way through the Legislature.

Sen. Jim Kastama, D-Puyallup, also addressed the rally. "It's about time we come up with a dedicated source for higher education," he said, who is sponsoring a bill that would use lottery money to fund financial aid. The bill passed out of the Senate Higher Education and Workforce Development committee on Wednesday. Kastama told the students that they are "the most important natural resource we have in this country."

"We need a movement here," said Tim Mensing, president of the Associated Students of the University of Washington. "Without a movement we are going to keep getting cut."

After the rally, participants delivered to key lawmakers petitions from the American Federation of Teachers and the Washington Student Association. Each contained about 8,000 signatures, according to the ASUW, and implored the state to support higher education.

The Senate Ways and Means Committee held a testy hearing on Senate Bill 6843, which would suspend Tim Eyman's Initiative 960 and let lawmakers increase taxes with a simple majority vote.

Eyman lashed out at the hearing saying, "citizens are watching arrogant Democrats decide rules don't apply to them ... The taxpayers have to follow the law but this bill exempts you from it."

Sen. Adam Kline, D-Seattle, went on the attack, arguing that Eyman never talks about what will happen if the state has to cut funding that pays for services such as public schools and health care for the poor.

"I'd like you to talk about the other side ... the necessary expenditures that deal with people's lives that we don't have enough money to pay for," Kline said.

At that point the hearing devolved into a argument with Kline and Eyman talking over each other.

Eyman got the last word, telling Kline, in part, "You don't care about anybody's opinions but your own," before the committee chair, Sen. Margarita Prentice, D-Renton gaveled them down, saying "That's it."

I-960 requires a two-thirds vote in the Senate and House to pass a tax increase, or voter approval.

Senate Bill 6843 suspends the two-thirds requirement until July 2011, which would allow simple majority votes on tax increases next year as well. But it also makes permanent changes, such as stating that any future tax increase going toward a voter-approved initiative only needs a simple majority vote.

The bill is expected to be moved out of the Senate Ways and Means Committee by Tuesday.

Five members of the Seattle City Council joined representatives from business, labor, the University of Washington, and Eastside governments Thursday morning to support the state's proposed six-lane 520 bridge replacement (video here) -- even though the size of the controversial Montlake Interchange remains a mystery.

They huddled behind a stack of documents 2 1/2 feet high, compiled during 13 years of design studies.

"The purpose of process is not procrastination," declared Redmond Mayor John Marchione.

On Monday, Montlake-area neighborhoods, along with Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn, House Speaker Frank Chopp and other officials, called on the state to redesign two of the six bridge lanes for bus-rapid transit and light rail only -- instead of making them high-occupancy vehicle lanes (with express buses included), as legislators approved in 2007.

That sort of change would delay the project up to two years, to rework the environmental studies, replied House Transportation Chairwoman Judy Clibborn, D-Mercer Island, at the Thursday press conference inside the Museum of History and Industry.

Current proposals indicate that a Montlake interchange could be twice the size of what's there now. Clibborn said it must be roomy enough for transit ramps to be added later. In the 20th century, Washington built stubs and "ramps to nowhere" at the Washington Park Arboretum and north Beacon Hill, in vain.

The immediate goal or target of Thursday's gathering seemed somewhat vague. Bellevue Councilmember Grant Degginger (foreground) joked afterward that this was a "We Are the World" group, intended for "the public who sees us as endlessly talking and not doing anything."

What's changed this month, says Clibborn, is that Seattle council members and transportation staff are eager to work with the state on the design. Seattle City Councilmembers Richard Conlin, Tim Burgess, Sally Clark, Jean Godden, and Tom Rasmussen joined her.

Neighbor Robert Rosencrantz, former president of the Montlake Community Club, said the important thing was "what we didn't hear. What's the interchange going to look like, and where it's going to be."

Conlin said most council members are skeptical of the state Department of Transportation's proposal to build a second Montlake Cut drawbridge near the interchange. But there's no alternate concept yet that can use just the current drawbridge, and still have room for separate bus lanes to reach the UW campus.

McGinn said later he's baffled that council members would stand with Clibborn, after they opposed the state's interchange concept, known as "A+," in a letter a few days ago. "Do they support trying to shove a six-lane highway into Seattle, or not?" McGinn said.

He said Seattle DOT will indeed work with WSDOT, if the state considers transit lanes instead of HOV lanes. McGinn said planning should begin right now for a rail link to UW to be operating at or near the time of bridge completion in roughly 2018, not a generation or two later -- and with bridge tolls contributing toward transit costs.

Other 520 drama posted here.

In other 520-related news, a bill is moving through the Legislature to make megaprojects move quicker, by reducing neighbors' and cities' power to challenge permits. SB 6366 would send certain disputes directly to state courts, bypassing local hearing examiners. (Washington courts tend to lean strongly toward government proponents.) In case of a dispute over shoreline permits, the state Department of Transportation could start work anyway in other segments of the project.