Why Not Over Here?

Forget the "EU" stuff. At the local level, no funds for roads and for parking allows a 1 euro (little more than a dollar) tram or bus fare. I live in Nice, France and we do not need everybody to drive into town when they can "park and ride".

Since this thread seems to have died down, I'll kick the embers a bit.
Every day I'm more amazed at how opposition to passenger rail has become such a litmus test issue among, and I'll phrase this carefully, certain self-proclaimed conservatives in the United States. Years ago when I lived in Texas, there was a Republican state senator whose pet issue was high speed rail to be built as a private/public partnership. Today this gentleman would be drummed out of the GOP. There seems to be some kind of diktat coming from headquarters...choo choos bad, very bad.
In a previous post, I used to phrase "tinfoil hat" which could be taken as a snarky bit of name calling, but the right wing opposition to passenger rail isn't coming from any kind of reasoned argument but instead has the stench of paranoid hysteria. Those evil trains are being forced on us by sinister outside forces--socialists, Europeans, liberal elitists, etc. etc.
Let's see...those socialist car hating Europeans. Are we talking about the continent where most current governments are right-leaning? The home of the autobahn? Where millions of Brits, Italians and Frenchmen are as passionate about fast cars as any red blooded American gearhead? Maybe those European businessmen, who care as much about profits as their American counterparts, see no reason to despise a certain efficient system of transport based on some weird mix of spite and rigid doctrinaire thinking.
So it must be the enemy within, those educated liberal elites. True, some of their hives are located amidst the remnants of commuter rail in the Northeast, where some of them ride the same trains as bankers and plumbers. Proves nothing. What about the rest of the country? Madison...no trains in sight. Berkeley...a stop on the BART line? Austin just built their first little shoestring light rail line, while Dallas has been expanding a rail system for decades. In fact, most growth in commuter rail in recent decades has been in sunbelt red state America, which probably reflects population trends and the power of the dominant Republican party to steer federal money to pet projects.
So up until recently, it seems that trains weren't such a hot button issue. Amtrak bashing was always a GOP sport, but Republicans were ok with federal pork building commuter lines out to the burbs. But now this crazy moonbat stuff...I just don't get it.
I recently read a column by Michael Barone where he trashed Obama's proposals for high speed rail and instead offered up a brilliant free market alternative. His cutting edge solution for 21st century American transportation needs? The "Chinatown bus"! These are private bus lines that cater to the Chinese immigrant community by offering cheap bus fares to major cities. They also serve downscale casino daytrippers and have been discovered by budget conscious backpacker/student types. As any New Yorker knows, these buses have been involved in some horrendous accidents because of inept drivers. Boarding sites are scenes of chaos, where public spaces become private bus depots. The competing companies have at times resorted to violent intimidation against their rivals. Whatever...nice to know I have one more cheap transportation option!
But to put this forth as a serious alternative to a transportation system that every other developed country on earth is building is moonbat crazy. Is this their vision for a "can't do" America? Who's going to build a new Tappan Zee bridge when the old one falls into the Hudson? The Fung Wah bus people? Who cares? Anything to spare us from those evil trains!

The above gets my vote for "post of the year."

The moonbats' idea for national transportation policy is essentially one person per car with $1 a gallon gas brought about by drilling in everyone's back yard. Everything else is "collectivism," dontcha know.

http://www.grist.org/transportation/201 ... ior-modifi

jaystreetcrr wrote:Since this thread seems to have died down, I'll kick the embers a bit.

Moderator's Note: *standing by with a firehose*

Thank you to our contributors for not making ad hominem attacks. Any such attacks will result in this thread being locked, no matter the agenda.

That's the part I don't get.. The immediate leap from "make a train available to people as an option" to "force everyone on a train and confiscate their cars".

I have no idea when or how this started.

jaystreetcrr wrote: I recently read a column by Michael Barone where he trashed Obama's proposals for high speed rail and instead offered up a brilliant free market alternative. His cutting edge solution for 21st century American transportation needs? The "Chinatown bus"! These are private bus lines that cater to the Chinese immigrant community by offering cheap bus fares to major cities. They also serve downscale casino daytrippers and have been discovered by budget conscious backpacker/student types. As any New Yorker knows, these buses have been involved in some horrendous accidents because of inept drivers. Boarding sites are scenes of chaos, where public spaces become private bus depots. The competing companies have at times resorted to violent intimidation against their rivals. Whatever...nice to know I have one more cheap transportation option! But to put this forth as a serious alternative to a transportation system that every other developed country on earth is building is moonbat crazy. Is this their vision for a "can't do" America? Who's going to build a new Tappan Zee bridge when the old one falls into the Hudson? The Fung Wah bus people? Who cares? Anything to spare us from those evil trains!

And in the example you just cited, no one used the state's monopoly on coercion to force anybody to do anything, and no self appointed "New Puritan" decided what was best for everybody. For many of us, that measure becomes a strong "litmus test".

With regard to the safety and other issues you raised, these can be addressed by existant socio-political remedies. and the same is true of the economic and health-care "saftety nets".The line between ideology and realpolitik often needs to be redrawn, but it clearly exists.

What began to take root in Washington nearly theree years ago was something entirely different -- a quatntum shift away from decentralized pluralism to a seires of "one size fits all" programs administered by a much-stronger central govenment ... in other words, the supposedly-enlightened European model. The figurehead for that movement spent many of his formative years in cultures far removed from the typical American experience. And his party's hijacking by a supposed intelligentsia commiited to that leftward shift has alienated millions of people who live closer to the street, the farm, and the factory floor.

If Americans really want to redesign our infrastructure and transport systems along more-collective lines, they are free to do so. either via the ballot box, or the free exchange of their "dollar votes". Ts some degree, they did so in California two years ago. But rather than use that measure to lay the groundwork for someting that can be successully, but incrementally introduced, the self-righteous HSR crowd continues to pursue an all-or-nothing approach. Because this debate isn't relly about pragmatism, it's about power, and a very wise man made an unforgettable comment about the corruptive effects of power more than a century ago,

And now, there's this (just to fan the embers some more, not that they need that in TX):

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/09/0 ... il-project

Lessons from Wisconision (sp) , i think . Turning down feddy bucks coming to your backyard is not good politics .

Another Moderator's Note: I forgot to mention this earlier, but let's keep the discussion focused on congestion pricing and how that affects transit implementation. Fung Wah buses and HSR primarily serve the medium range travel market, though there's enough overlap that I'll excuse the digression thus far.

Got it. No namecalling, and keep the focus on commuter/light rail, congestion pricing and alternatives to all cars/all the time...

jaystreetcrr wrote:Got it. No namecalling, and keep the focus on commuter/light rail, congestion pricing and alternatives to all cars/all the time...

Exactly. Though, I will give style points to anyone who works in an insult like "nattering nabob of negativism."

Want to reduce commuter auto traffic? Try this concept: free express commuter rail. Fund it with high congestion pricing, variable tolls, and parking fees. Buy underused rail corridors that lead into the city, create huge Park & Ride complexes (with parking fees) where those corridors intersect major interstates, and run service every 5-10 minutes, 24 hours a day with high-capacity EMUs. The terminus/termini wouldn't need to be in the center of the CBD, just close enough to walk, ride a bike, catch the city transit system, or take a battery-powered cab. Supplement that system with a good, low-cost rapid transit system for the inner suburbs and city proper, and you'd instantly halve the car traffic in cities.

Of course, you might also make cities into ghost towns if the free transit was too inconvenient, and you still haven't dealt with delivery drivers, utility trucks, and all the work vehicles in a metropolis. Oops.

As I recently observed in another thread, changng fuel-cost considerations have caused me to cut down considerably on "solo driving" in recent years, so much so that you have to go back to 2007 to find a time that my trusty 4-wheeler has been more than a hundred-or-so miles from its home base at the time.

But that doesn't mean I have to stay home; I sometimes get around this by driving to Hackettstown or High Bridge and stashing the wheels in favor of NJT; that picture will improve a little more when service is estended to Andover sometiime soon. From there, It's possible to get to most of the places that count anywhere from Portland to Nofolk without too much trouble.

This woulsd be the most obvious benefit of restoring, expanding, or improving the quality (via higher speeds and greater frequency) of existing suburban and exurban services, rather than holding out for that expensive, inflexible, and unproven HSR.

So instead of mouthing off my almighty opinions, I'd like to throw out a puzzler that I briefly touched on above and see if anyone can enlighten me with information or answers.
Dallas, Texas, the heart of red state America, has been steadily expanding a regional light rail/commuter rail network. From what I hear the ridership has exceeded expectations. They wouldn't be building more lines if it wasn't. So what's going on down there?
How are they paying for this--tax increases, bonds?--and are they getting any federal money? Is the more recent anti-rail ideology espoused by some on the right clashing with pragmatic business conservatives who realize they can't pave their way out of traffic jams? Is passenger rail really a success in Dallas or is it just more pro-rail hype? If it is working, then why? I can't imagine any of that supposed anti-car coercive stuff happening there so are free people making free choices to ride the train?
Please inform us, especially if you're from Dallas. I've skimmed some sites but more from a traction foamer perspective than a political/urban planning one. Think I'll take another look

jaystreetcrr wrote:So instead of mouthing off my almighty opinions, I'd like to throw out a puzzler that I briefly touched on above and see if anyone can enlighten me with information or answers.
Dallas, Texas, the heart of red state America, has been steadily expanding a regional light rail/commuter rail network. From what I hear the ridership has exceeded expectations. They wouldn't be building more lines if it wasn't. So what's going on down there?
How are they paying for this--tax increases, bonds?--and are they getting any federal money? Is the more recent anti-rail ideology espoused by some on the right clashing with pragmatic business conservatives who realize they can't pave their way out of traffic jams? Is passenger rail really a success in Dallas or is it just more pro-rail hype? If it is working, then why? I can't imagine any of that supposed anti-car coercive stuff happening there so are free people making free choices to ride the train?
Please inform us, especially if you're from Dallas. I've skimmed some sites but more from a traction foamer perspective than a political/urban planning one. Think I'll take another look

I don't feel up to wading through financial statements, but if you do, here you go: http://dart.org/debtdocuments/investori ... nformation

Can't help you on the public opinion part - they're on the wrong end of I-35 for me to know anything. I suspect Dallas isn't anywhere near as "red" as the rest of Texas though, just as Austin isn't.

DART gets most of it's revenues from a local 1 cent sales tax collected from it's 13 member cities; almost $400 million per year. It has been able to receive federal funds for various capital programs; both bus and rail system. At most the federal share has been 50%, and on only a few capital programs. Fares from bus and trains contribute less than 20% of it's revenues. There was referendums by the various cities to approve DART membership and collecting the sales taxes. Just about every other city in the DFW area collects that same amount of sales taxes for economic development vs transit. So, the citizens of 13 DART member cities decided to collect that 1 cent sales tax for transit vs economic development projects, and the other cities in the area just the opposite. But it was a local decision, not some paper pusher in Austin or D.C.
As for whether the funds spent have been worth it, every new referendum held recently has passed supporting DART. I believe every new light rail line has exceeded expectations technically, but that's irreleverant as long as DART maintains its political support locally. Likewise, if it loses it's political support, it's irreleverant if it meets or exceeds expectations technically. Additionally, while Texas as a whole may be considered a "red" state, the city and county called Dallas are leaning "blue". Likewise, you'll find "red" areas in "blue" states. Nothing new about that. And that is what happens when people generalize - individual entities are different.