Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
The AAR and Mississippi navigation (was: "comedy act....")
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="jeaton"][quote user="futuremodal"][quote user="jeaton"][quote user="futuremodal"] <p>Barge companies pay into a Waterway Trust Fund, from which the federal government gets another deficit buffer. Currently, barge companies pay more into the fund than what they are getting out if it.</p><p>[/quote]</p><p>Oh really? From the Corps of Engineer's Fiscal Year 2007 Budget Request:</p><p>CofE Commercial Business Line: Construction, Operations and Maintenance Requested Appropriations-<br />$1.866 billion.</p><p>Sources of Appropriations: Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, Inland Waterways Trust Fund, Special Recreation User Fees and Disposal Facilities User Fees Total $905 million.</p><p>Amount from General Fund to cover the difference: $961 million. And another $2.886 billion from the General Fund is kicked in to cover all the other stuff that the Corps does.</p><p>Just to get a little more specific expenditures for Navagation just on the Mississippi River and tributaries are $359 million for construction and $542 million for Operations and Maintenance for a total of $901 million.</p><p>Totals recieved from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund: $197 million </p><p>You do understand the concepts of more and less?</p><p>[/quote]</p><p>First, you do understand that most of the Corps budget request of late is for that whole New Orleans fiasco, right?</p><p>Second, when was the last time the Corps got what they requested?</p><p>Lastly, you do understand that those budget requests on the Mississippi are related to the entire operation, and not just the barging portion? Like I tried to point out a few posts back, the waterway system is used for more than just barging - flood control, recreational navigation, private navigation, electricity generation, wildlife mitigation, wetlands enhancement, et al.</p><p>Like it or not, barging does pay it's fair share. Kick out the private and recreational users of the waterway system, and put the wildlife and wetlands mitigation in it's proper context, maybe then you might have an argument.</p><p>[/quote]</p><p>Sorry I excluded a key word in second line of my post above. That should be CofE Commercial <strong>Navagation</strong> Business Line.</p><p><strong>Commercial Navagation </strong>is a business line with a separate reporting from the other business lines, which include Flood/Storm Damage Reduction, <strong>Recreation</strong>, Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration, Environmental Stewardship, <strong>Hydro-Power</strong>, Water Supply, Emergency Management, Regulatory Program and the all important $164 million for Executive Direction & Management.</p><p>So just to be clear the Mississippi River and Tributaries expenses for Construction, Operations and Maintenance for the <strong>Commercial Navagation </strong>business line FY2007 is scheduled to be $901 million. The Inland Waterways Trust Fund will provide $177 million for FY 2007.</p><p>[/quote]</p><p>You're simply mincing words. The Commercial Navigation system is used by non commercial users as well as commercial users. It is <strong>interactive</strong>, ergo you cannot functionally separate the two de facto, just de jure for accounting purposes. There is also the caveat of maintaining pre-dam usage of the river system, something for which no commercial or recreational user of the system should have to pay for.</p><p>Something else to keep in mind - that $177 million from the Waterway Trust Fund is but a small portion of the entire Waterway Trust Fund.</p><p>So what we have here is basically half of all Mississippi navigation projects paid for via user fees and half paid for from the general fund. Wanna make a bet that most of that is Katrina related? Perhaps you think that railroads don't need a refunctioning Port of New Orleans. </p><p>Just for fun, let's compare that $1.866 billion for waterway maintenance with the billions being allocated for rail projects in this country. Which mode is getting more right now? PS - yes, I'm including transit. </p><p>Care to take a stab at that one?</p><p>I think once we get this all put in perspective, it becomes clear that rail gets as much via the federal dole as barging, perhaps even more. That's the point of contention I have with the AAR, which wants to paint a picture of pure privatization for rail.</p>
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag
Update Reply
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
Search the Community
Newsletter Sign-Up
By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our
privacy policy
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy