Transit: Obama and Dems Were Thinking Ahead with Stimulus Act
Officials investigating Washington D.C.'s worst subway accident, which left at least nine dead, are eyeing whether the failure to upgrade old trains with key recording devices designed to prevent such collisions contributed to the crash.The train that triggered the crash wasn't equipped with the recorders, said National Transportation Safety Board member Debbie Hersman. It was part of an old "thousand-series" fleet that was not outfitted with the technology, she told reporters Tuesday at a news conference.
The NTSB had previously recommended that all trains have the recorders installed.
Guess who was thinking into the future when they all voted for the Recovery and Reinvestment Act? President Barack Obama and the Democratic Party.
The Department of Transportation moved another step closer to realizing President Obama's vision for high-speed rail in America, publishing guidelines for states and regions to apply for federal funds as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The guidelines require rigorous financial and environmental planning to make sure projects are worthy of investment and likely to be successful. The program will offer grants for both planning and construction so that states can apply for funds no matter what stage of development their project is in. The guidance states that proposals will be considered on the merits for their ability to make trips quicker and more convenient reduce congestion on highways and at airports and meet other environmental, energy and safety goals. And it allows the USDOT to actively promote standard specifications for rail cars and other equipment. The Federal Railroad Administration will award the first round of grants by mid-September. [U.S. Department of Transportation, 6-17-09]
May I remind you all that not one Republican in the House of Representatives and only 3 Republican Senators voted 'YES' for Reinvestment and Recovery Act.
While the bill was passed too late to help these poor citizens that lost their lives or were injured during the Washington D.C. crash; thank GOD President Obama and the Democrats created a plan to help stop such accidents from happening again.
They really need to get started on the high-speed rail(yesterday)soon in California. The voters said in the November 2008 election, let's get this underway.
This is a current story in the news
June 23, 2009 4:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Stimulus Act hasn't been very stimulating yet. The Republican version also had infrastructure spending in their version. The fight wasn't over infrastructure spending as much as it was over all the non-infrastructure spending that wasn't going to do a lot for the economy and unemployment in the near-to-medium term.
June 23, 2009 7:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
It was the Republican Party that CUT infrastructure spending (said it wasn't STIMULUS).
As for the stimulus not stimulating yet -- I see it working, besides, the bulk of the JOBS part was to be created/save in the later part of the term for the bill.
The GOP's idea of 'stimulating' is SHAKING the hands of business owners and ASKING them to support their cause.
The only people they are willing to DEMAND action from are foreign countries like Iraq, Iran and North Korea.
June 23, 2009 8:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Were some of the infrastructure projects questioned? Of course - I would hope so. But republicans proposed various alternative stimulus bills, with approximately $90-$110bn for infrastructure projects depending on which proposal you look at. I think the final bill now has about $90-100bn in infrastructure?
So I don't think they were significantly different on this part of the stimulus bill.
Where the two parties differed dramatically is on state aid.
June 24, 2009 6:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Where the two parties differed dramatically is on state aid.
Which is where a great deal of infrastructure repair and preventive maintenance are funded - including upgrading sensors on things like trains.
Republican infrastructure proposals included a lot of pork, and projects with minimal stimulative input. By design.
Republican leadership and the rank and file have a philosophical enmity towards stimulus in the first place. It should come as no surprise that any support is both tepid, and ineffective.
They cannot abide an effective stimulus - it would diminish their electoral ambitions.
June 24, 2009 10:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Do you have a source that shows that a "great deal of infrastructure repair and preventive maintenance are funded " from the state aid in the stimulus bill?
According to Wikipedia, 90% of the "state aid" in the Stimulus bill is going to Medicaid and education.
I saw on another site that $53billion of the $58billion in total state aid goes to the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund. 82% of this Fund must be spent on education and 18% on public safety and government services.
I presume "public safety" would be things like police, fire, EMT, etc. Doesn't sound like it would include maintaining trains.
So how does upgrading trains fall under state aid?
June 24, 2009 1:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, of course: high speed trains between L.A. and S.F.
And ten years after they build it, it still will be impossible to get down the Wilshire Corridor at rush hour because authorities at all levels will still be futzing around about subway issues, that it would cost too much.
The high speed track, much of it elevated, would be quite subject to large quakes along the major earthquake fault which it will parallel.
The day following the great earthquake in Mexico in the fall of 1985, Mexico City's subway system was up and running despite all of the highrise buildings that had fallen into the streets.
Rather than a bullet train, I think that it is more important for California that the Subway To The Sea be constructed as soon as possible, all the way from Wilshire and Western to downtown Santa Monica.
June 23, 2009 11:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
We have our own cramped and heavily travel corridors as well. San Francisco really needs to put a subway line under Geary Street to Ocean Beach. I believe that was suppose be the BART line but we can hardly count on BART to expand in San Francisco. We also need a line under Van Ness as it is one of the alternates for U.S.101. Way too much traffic. Nineteenth Avenue is second alternative to U.S.101/PCH 1 in San Francisco. Like Van Ness, it carries to much traffic.
With that said, I believe San Francisco is getting ready to put in the Central subway which will run from Cal-Trains to North Beach. I also believe San Francisco is getting ready to build a new Trans-Bay terminal to handle the new high-speed rail. I wish we could get the state or federal government to grant the city more funds to finish this more quickly but that isn't likely. That means we are on our own.
In the mean and in the between time we rely heavily on what we have; the cable cars, the quasi-subway street car MUNI, MUNI electric buses and the refurbished and classic PCC streetcars from around the world.
Los Angeles will have to be creative to finish the Wilshire corridor.
June 23, 2009 11:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
The whole gist of my post was to point out that Obama and and Dems PLANNED ahead to FIX and REPAIR transit equip.....GOP voted this DOWN...said it wasn't STIMULUS, just temporary jobs.
June 24, 2009 8:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, Coonsey. And thanks also for noting the fact that zero republican house members, and the paltry number of republican senators supported the bill. This demonstrates that, rather than having an honest disagreement (some would have voted aye, even with some reservations) there is a republican commitment to sabotage and/or stall anything that Obama's administration does. Regardless of what is the right thing to do.
June 24, 2009 10:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yup that would be what I mean to say.....thanks CVille Dem.
June 24, 2009 11:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not really. The Republicans had an alternative Stimulus bill which I've tried to note above had plenty of infrastructure spending in it.
Just because they voted against the stimulus version that ultimately passed doesn't mean they were trying to sabotage or stall anything. They just had an alternative that they preferred.
June 24, 2009 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's called compromising -- that's what INTERESTED parties do - that wanted to stimulate or fix infrastructure.
Voting NO for something simply because it didn't do EXACTLY what you wanted means you are playing STALL or HURT the DEMS.
Just like they are doing with the health care issue. These same people complaining about the COST now simply IGNORED the costs during the Bush admin.
They have no footing here-- sorry.
June 24, 2009 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
If a Congressperson votes "no" on every bill that is not exactly the one that they would prefer, they are not doing their job. In fact, no bill would ever get passed since the only people who would be 100% happy with it are likely its authors and sponsors. That is not how the system works; it stopped working somewhere around the "K Street Project," and has never recovered from it.
The fact that they are united as the party of "NO" simply indicates that they want only to obstruct; otherwise some would have voted for this bill, which after all helps every state; not just those of the people who voted in favor of it.
June 24, 2009 1:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I disagree. They simply voted no because they felt their alternative made more sense. And like I said earlier, both proposals were very similar on the infrastructure front.
June 24, 2009 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink