I posted last week, asking: Should there be a National Transit System?
Apparently some work has been done on this question, though it has not previously been available online. Paul Bay emailed me the linked file (converted to a single PDF file) which is some preliminary rationale and criteria in favor of a National Transit System.
NTS.pdf
After quickly perusing Mr. Bay's proposal, I think there is a strong argument for a "national transit system" as a more solid conceptual basis for the transit program AND a potential intercity rail/transit program. But at the very beginning, the USER perspective needs to be accounted for, I think in terms of some minimum daily frequencies proposed before any Federal $$ are dedicated to a project.
In short-distance intercity rail corridors, for example, a minimum of 6-8 daily round trips, e.g., every two hours, is desirable, with 14-16 daily round trips (hourly) more common. Similarly, HSR development needs to fit into some kind of coherent intercity network plan, with long-term development on an incremental basis in corridors with enough traffic potential to justify the high capital expense of HSR.
The 16-trains (or buses) per day is the minimum level of service on all but a literal handful of Swiss rail routes, and the bare minimum on all bus routes serving areas with a minimum population size (below that, the Swiss still provide at least 4-5 buses daily, such as to remote mountain villages off the beaten tourist track.
Of course, I feel private bus operators should be able to operate where they wish, but buses would be main modes in corridors where there isn't enough traffic for at least 6-8 trains daily--in other words, why bother with low ridership potential? Strong incentives also need to be given to rural public transit operators to connect to these rail corridors as appropriate, as well as private sector intercity buses.
A similar approach in the urban transit area is also needed, but that's another post.