Let's look on the bright side of life.
By all accounts, you would be hard-pressed today to find anyone who views congressional inaction positively. But with the House of Representatives' transportation package languishing amid opposition from both Democrats and Republicans, members of Congress at least have added time to address the bill's severe shortcomings.
Our country's roads and bridges are in desperate need of repair, so crafting economically beneficial legislation with bipartisan support should be lawmakers' top priority. Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman John Mica has already shown us what's possible when business development and other interests meet, including language in the House bill that would spur development around transit stations and jumpstart real estate investment. With that kind of cooperative leadership as a model, the House would be wise to make the following revisions, showing voters that it's the congressional branch with the capacity to get things done in an election year:
- Restore guaranteed funding for public transportation. Let's talk economics, not politics; historically, investments in public transportation generate 31 percent more jobs per dollar than construction of roads and bridges. Moreover, millions of Americans rely on transit systems to get them to and from work, shops and schools every day. Retaining a dedicated source of funding for public transportation adds certainty that those economic connections remain in place. Ignoring 30 years of bipartisan policy, destabilizing business growth and stranding seniors and commuters without cars hardly seems like a way to win hearts and minds.
- More emphasis on bridge and road repair. Our existing transportation infrastructure is falling apart: One in nine of the bridges and overpasses American drivers cross each day is rated in poor enough condition that they could become dangerous or be closed without near-term repair. The longer we wait to fund these maintenance projects, the more they'll cost; according to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, every dollar spent to keep a road in good condition avoids 6-14 needed later to rebuild the same road once it has deteriorated significantly.
- Reinstate measures that provide funding to pedestrian and bicycling safety programs. The decades-long neglect of pedestrian safety in the design and use of American streets comes at heavy cost: From 2000 to 2009, 47,700 pedestrians were killed in the United States. Considering the unfathomable toll such deaths take on families and on economic development and medical costs, it simply doesn't make sense to cut safety funding when we really should be adding to it. With an increasing percentage of the American population wanting to live in walkable communities with housing options near jobs, shops and schools, the transportation bill needs to support programs in line with those market trends.
- Transportation comes first. Partisan add-ons have marred Congress' recent debate over the transportation bills. While lawmakers certainly have the power to raise contentious issues in enacting new legislation, those are distractions that will keep the country from achieving its primary goals. Whatever you think of the specific proposals, everyone knows they amount to poison pills that will delay needed funding and reform until next year.
It goes without saying that Americans are ready for an economically sound, people-friendly, and bipartisan transportation bill. It's a good thing our elected officials have extra time to meet those expectations.
Follow Geoffrey Anderson on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/smartgrowthusa
i think the US should stick w/ semi HSR - forget the fancy track & electric - focus on the busy greyhound routes or the hardly worth flying ones - jeez - if a merc saloon can do 260kph / 150mph + on the autobahn - how hard is it for something on rails - there are so many smart technologies out there.
picking priorities involves a messy spreadsheet - it sure helps if there is a metro at each end - no point if u just gotta rent a car at the other end
give folks a tax holiday for a decade on CNG & they will buy in
go for the big fuel users first - trucks & locos etc.
there must be huge routes regularly intersected w/ gas pipes - dont even need to transport it
mums & dads will follow - they can have a Phill at home at $1 a gallon - but still take a vacation in their NG honda accord
:)
Kai
You state, ‘You obviously want to privatize everything,...’
Not at all, just most things leaving government as the regulator not a competitor in the market place.
You continue, ‘know my history well enough to understand how things worked in the 1700s, 1800s and, in some cases, well into the 1900s and I think that having everything privatized is a proven loser.’
Far from it. There are several examples of infrastructure and transportation investmenst done by private individuals that were unmitigated successes. So obviously you do not know your history. Thanks for making that clear.
In fact it was the state financing of canals in Lincoln’s home state of Illinois which ended in a financial and banking crisis for the state. And the transcontinental railroad was totally corrupt (Credit Mobilier handed out stock to politicians, Sherman was given cheap land, etc), resulted in tariffs that penalized the South and penalized their crippled economy.
And in contrast lest look at the only private railroad in the United States at that time that did not exist because of government grants and corruption…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Northern_Railway_(U.S.)
‘The Great Northern was the only privately funded, and successfully built, transcontinental railroad in United States history. No federal land grants were used during its construction, unlike every other transcontinental railroad built. It WAS ONE OF A FEW transcontinental railroads to avoid receivership following the Panic of 1893.’
I live in Hong Kong for work. My maid (she is Philippina) takes the privatized subway to my house. The population density in Hong Kong is similar to NYC, yet the subway system is better (ranked number two globally), cheaper, and runs at a profit (it has paid US$9 billion in dividends over the last 7 years to the government who stays on as a minority and silent investor). In fact, it only recently raised its rates for the first time in 7 years, about HK$0.30 (equates to about US$0.04…so four cents over 7 years or about a half a cent a year) The cost now to take the subway is HK$4.1 ($0.53) instead of what it used to be over the last 7 years, HK$3.8 ($0.49)…during that time New York’s fare went from $1.5 to $2.25…ripping off riders and the taxpayer since it still runs at a loss even with the high prices.
The subway system here is better, cheaper for people to ride, more profitable, etc.
Our airport, ranked #1 globally, is also privatized and is also better, and cheaper and runs at a profit.
Our tunnels and bridges are also on a toll system and privatized. That is why tax is so low here but the government runs a surplus.
Next question?
Kai