Passenger Trains > Congress

Passed  a  6 year  transportation bill yesterday. That is  really the  RAIL NEWS  of the  day. Details to follow  from NARP  as they look at all 1000 pages. Highways win, of  course.

The cut to NJ Transit was largely restored.

Posted from Android

*



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 02/10/16 12:25 by darkcloud.

Some states make awful choices about transportation. NJ, NM, have been in thrall to their governors' political ambitions.

Posted from Android

The cap on total damages for a passenger rail incident was raised 47%, from $200 million to $295 million.  Amtrak opposed it but there was no good reason not to raise it.  Still there is no escalator for cost-of-living adjustments which leaves the cap vulnerable to being struck down in court.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/02/15 06:03 by GenePoon.

GenePoon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The cap on total damages for a passenger rail
> incident was raised 47%, from $200 million to $295
> million.  Amtrak opposed it but there was no good
> reason not to raise it.  Still there is no
> escalator for cost-of-living adjustments which
> leaves the cap vulnerable to being struck down in
> court.

i think i read in an article that $12 billion was set aside for PTC ... also i read Commuter agencies are upset about the liability limit raise because they're afraid their insurance rates are going to go up ...

darkcloud Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Highways win, of  course.
>
> As it should.  

Highways have wrecked lots of formerly nice areas in this country.  They are expensive to build and require frequent rebuilding, and they are noisy and extremely dangerous.

And the commutation tax breaks are totally tilted in favor of driving. We can defer up to $225 per month on a pre-tax basis for parking but no more than $130 per month towards mass transit.  For a few short years there was something closer to parity but once the tea party congress was seated the scales were tipped back.

RRTom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> darkcloud Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Highways win, of  course.
> >
> > As it should.  
>
> Highways have wrecked lots of formerly nice areas
> in this country.  They are expensive to build and
> require frequent rebuilding, and they are noisy
> and extremely dangerous.

We can learn from Germany. They have both the Autobahn and ICE trains. We limit ourselves with Game Theory, that there has to be a WIN (and implicitly, passenger trains must LOSE). On state and local levels, anyway, things aren't so bad in regards to trains depending on where you live.

While some NIMBYs have been successful in fighting highway expansion (Hwy 710 in Pasadena), they get silenced easily (and aren't a threat in reality) when lane expansions potentially lead to more traffic and noise. Yet we allow NIMBYs to nitpick when there's proposal for increase in number trains. Such train haters us Americans are.

Rather than blaming one mode of transport (airplane or automobile), we should be critical of our transportation planners, that we can't support ALL modes of transportation. Call them cheap (highway OR trains, but not both). Call them stupid (many examples). Call them corrupt (probably can't find all the examples). I think my comments suit the title of this thread nicely. :-)

Out_Of_Service Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> GenePoon Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The cap on total damages for a passenger rail
> > incident was raised 47%, from $200 million to
> $295
> > million.  Amtrak opposed it but there was no
> good
> > reason not to raise it.  Still there is no
> > escalator for cost-of-living adjustments which
> > leaves the cap vulnerable to being struck down
> in
> > court.
>
> i think i read in an article that $12 billion was
> set aside for PTC ... also i read Commuter
> agencies are upset about the liability limit raise
> because they're afraid their insurance rates are
> going to go up ...

Of course the rates will go up.  For one reason,
they had to have $200 million coverage before, now they
will have to get an additional $95 million.

This doesn't bode well for excursion operators and their
insurance, either.

*



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/10/16 12:25 by darkcloud.

< As it should.  85% of workers drive, 5% use transit, and more use buses than trains.  Triple rails' usage and you'd still have more than 80% of workers using the roads. But who cares about reality, let's just throw money at trains regardless of whether it would ever be the most efficient solution for the situation, ignoring the huge differences between European and US density and geography, because !CHOO CHOO!  >

Just more stupid armchair analysis by Darkcloud, applying global statistics to specific markets.

80% of commuters entering Manhattan from all direction are done by public transit. Similar can be said about all the large city systems.
It would take a 30 lane expansion of the Long Island Expressway to absorb the LIRR, then no place to put the 180,000 cars once in Manhattan, to say nothing of 6 million NYCT subway riders per day.
 

RRTom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> darkcloud Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Highways win, of  course.
> >
> > As it should.  
>
> Highways have wrecked lots of formerly nice areas
> in this country.  They are expensive to build and
> require frequent rebuilding, and they are noisy
> and extremely dangerous.

and the economy would "crater" without all of our highways.  in fact, we should be spending more on them for maintenance and improvements.

i am all for spending more on l.d. trains and n.e.c. improvements too.........

66

RRTom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> darkcloud Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Highways win, of  course.
> >
> > As it should.  
>
> Highways have wrecked lots of formerly nice areas
> in this country.  They are expensive to build and
> require frequent rebuilding, and they are noisy
> and extremely dangerous.

 Of course highways win, when the oil companies and highy lobbies have the republican congress in their back pockets.  I just hope in the next 20 years the USA realizes the mistakes of the past 50 years and get going on alternate transportation...other wise our children are screwed....

darkcloud Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Highways win, of  course.
>
> As it should.  85% of workers drive, 5% use
> transit, and more use buses than trains.  Triple
> rails' usage and you'd still have more than 80% of
> workers using the roads.
>
> But who cares about reality, let's just throw
> money at trains regardless of whether it would
> ever be the most efficient solution for the
> situation, ignoring the huge differences between
> European and US density and geography, because
> !CHOO CHOO!  

LOL. Darkcloud, if you feel that way about trains, why do you continue to belong to a railfan website?Or do you just dislike passenger trains?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/02/15 08:18 by ATSF3751.

The dirty secret that darkcloud and others don't want to admit is that the American highway system is biggest experiment in government socialism in the history of the world.  It can only exist by extorting massive taxes from the public (and not just fuel taxes, but also state and local property, sales, and income taxes) to support it.  Unfortunately, the public highway infrastructure is crumbling because it is so cost-inefficient that it would (and, in fact, really is) fiscally bankrupting the country to support it at a sustainable level.  I've always advocated the idea that, if America really wants to find out what modes of transportation are most sustainable and efficient, remove ALL taxpayer subsidies from all modes of transportation and see which mode survives.  Hint:  it won't be the highways and airlines.

I'm a political conservative, but I haven't been totally brainwashed by the highway bureaucracy to believe that roads aren't a huge, huge socialistic enterprise like many of my conservative cohorts have been.  Roads and highways have their place, but it should be on equal footing with passenger rail as far as a mode of passenger transportation is concerned.

< and the economy would "crater" without all of our highways.  in fact, we should be spending more on them for maintenance and improvements. >

We need all of them, like we "need" every Post Office, military base, and railroad line in every de-populated and de-industrialized area  ? I don't think so.

I-88 between Albany and Binghamton, NY comes to mind. The economy wouldn't "crater" if this under-used highway were downsized to one side of the median, or closed all together, and everyone take NY Route 7.

Since the Highway Trust Fund has now gotten $62.5 Billion in bailouts from general funds  in the last 7 years, what we need is a Highway Route Closing Commission.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/02/15 08:33 by joemvcnj.

WW Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ....  I've always
> advocated the idea that, if America really wants
> to find out what modes of transportation are most
> sustainable and efficient, remove ALL taxpayer
> subsidies from all modes of transportation and see
> which mode survives.  Hint:  it won't be the
> highways and airlines.

Anyone get to use eminent domain?

darkcloud Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Highways win, of  course.
>
> As it should.  85% of workers drive, 5% use
> transit, and more use buses than trains.  Triple
> rails' usage and you'd still have more than 80% of
> workers using the roads.
>
> But who cares about reality, let's just throw
> money at trains regardless of whether it would
> ever be the most efficient solution for the
> situation, ignoring the huge differences between
> European and US density and geography, because
> !CHOO CHOO!  


In my driving I use perhaps one percent of the nation's roads and bridges, yet pay for them all. I do not fly. Yet, I'm happy to see my tax dollars support the nation's transportation needs: roads, bridges, air, rail.

Art House

http://www.northjersey.com/news/federal-compromise-bill-would-boost-nj-transit-rail-system-1.1465246