GrampVehicle title and registration fees are prime candidates. That's what's in the Wisconsin legislature's plan. We can start being like cities in China where the license plate costs more than the car.
For an electric car it would be easy enough to collect a road use tax at a comercial recharge station. For home recharging, perhaps a smart meter could keep separate tabs on that.
Such a tax collection system is based on the assumption that all miles driven are within one state. To allow for allocating the appropriate miles to any other state, you might need something like the International Fuel Tax Agreement for commercial trucks.
GrampThey're never at a loss of finding a way to tax. Vehicle title and registration fees are prime candidates. That's what's in the Wisconsin legislature's plan. We can start being like cities in China where the license plate costs more than the car.
Kind of strange. Since most car dealers and oil change places already do the emissions test or "safety test" in other locations. They should have just extended it to include an annual visit for mileage tax assessment where they review your odometer and assess you a tax on miles driven. Why would they shift it to license plates?.........Oh well.
CMStPnP Fixing the gas tax is encouraging but similar to the Federal Level they have no way to tax electric cars using the infrastructure at the same level as gas or diesel cars are taxed. In fact they have money in the bill to subsidize directly the use of electric cars by providing money for charging stations.......which will canibalize train ridership to an extent since an electric car driver is not really paying the true cost of the infrastructure it uses. So as the use of electric cars increases, gas tax revenue will decrease.
Fixing the gas tax is encouraging but similar to the Federal Level they have no way to tax electric cars using the infrastructure at the same level as gas or diesel cars are taxed. In fact they have money in the bill to subsidize directly the use of electric cars by providing money for charging stations.......which will canibalize train ridership to an extent since an electric car driver is not really paying the true cost of the infrastructure it uses. So as the use of electric cars increases, gas tax revenue will decrease.
They're never at a loss of finding a way to tax. Vehicle title and registration fees are prime candidates. That's what's in the Wisconsin legislature's plan. We can start being like cities in China where the license plate costs more than the car.
zardozNah, the executives will just hope that a bridge doesn't collapse before they retire or relocate. To do anything substantial to fix them would put a dent in their budget, and wouldn't look good on their resume.
Yeah, ha-ha, I still remember I think it was 6 years ago I was working in Schaumburg, IL when the whole METRA cronyism issue came to light. So and so's Nephew was hired at the behest of such and such a board member, Some Senator got their daughter in the door via a phone call. I was snickering about that for a while. :)
They are not without "Chicago Machine" political issues. Though they do pretty good work in areas so I don't want to slam METRA too much.
CMStPnP Are they going to speed up replacing the 400 bridges nearing or past the end of their useful lives with the capital plan or with the sustainment money provided by the RTA taxes?
charlie hebdoSince you find Metra so problematic and interfering with your crucial time, maybe you should stop riding the Hiawatha
Oh I am like 100% confident it won't be the Hiawathas that pay the price for the delays indefinitely and I know all I need to do is be patient as WisDOT is not ready to move on the issue yet. They want their trains first, service improvements will come a little further down the line. I am pretty sure METRA will be installing a third track to increase fluidity at some future point (but not more than 10-12 years in the future) if I had to guess randomly. I just want it sooner. :)
If I stop riding the Hiawatha it doesn't fix the issue either. Better to keep riding and beotch more and more. Besides, Illinois seems to like raising taxes more than your average state, so I am just feeding that desire as well.
I don't know all those answers. Six years is a good start. Since you are such a critic of Metra, and nothing is adequate from your perspective, etc., why don't you find out? I would suppose the loco replacements are out of capital funding. "This funding will help us begin to tackle our biggest capital priorities, including locomotives, railcars, stations and bridges."
Since you find Metra so problematic and interfering with your crucial time, maybe you should stop riding the Hiawatha (March on-time 95.3%; 12-month average 95%, Amtrak's #1 performer) and the almost always grossly late, slow-scheduled Texas Eagle (March on-time only 15.8%; 12-month average was 33.5%)? Stick to the airlines or better, since your time is obviously so valuable, charter a jet.
charlie hebdoThis is a capital plan, not about operating subsidies,
Limited to six years.
charlie hebdoThis is a capital plan, not about operating subsidies, which largely are paid from the six-county RTA district sales tax.
Key words bolded. In fact I thought they were short of being able to fund METRA's locomotive replacement until the state stepped in. Is locomotive replacement part of the capital plan or is it part of sustainment and maintenence? Are they going to speed up replacing the 400 bridges nearing or past the end of their useful lives with the capital plan or with the sustainment money provided by the RTA taxes?
[from MHSRA] "Perhaps the single biggest achievement is the doubling of the state’s gas tax. This effectively restores the power of the tax that had been lost to inflation since it was last adjusted nearly 30 years ago. (It’s worth noting that transit fares have roughly doubled over the same period.) And, the tax will now be indexed to rise with inflation every year.The gas tax goes into a fund that pays for all sorts of transportation projects around the state, including the annual costs of operating Amtrak trains. Now, for the first time, a portion of gas tax revenues will be placed into a dedicated fund for transit upgrades. This creates a steady, reliable funding stream that can be used for Metra upgrades needed to lay the foundation for high-speed service around the Midwest.After years of being on hold, the legislature has appropriated $500 million to begin two new Amtrak services from Chicago to the Quad Cities and to Rockford (and eventually Dubuque). The Quad Cities are so ready for trains that they have spent years preparing, including building a station. The State of Illinois is now committed to holding up its end of the deal.Illinois has also committed $100 million for track upgrades to the CN-owned railroad that hosts trains between Chicago and Carbondale. This should address slow speeds and frequent delays on this line, which serves the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana and Southern Illinois University-Carbondale.There’s $400 million going towards CREATE rail projects, including the massive 75th Street project on Chicago’s south side, which will unclog a number of lines used by Amtrak and Metra trains.The package also includes $50 million in new, dedicated funding for biking and walking projects, which will make it easier and safer to get to and from your train--or anywhere--without a car.Finally, there’s an interesting provision in the bill that would let the State cooperate with a private developer to build a new Amtrak/Metra/CTA megastation in Chicago’s South Loop as part of a vision called One Central. This project is still in a conceptual stage, but could serve as a temporary terminal for high-speed trains before CrossRail Chicago is completed."
"The bill also includes fee and tax hikes for vehicle registration, particularly for electric vehicles; and a new state tax on parking garage use. These are sensible ways to to raise money and/or reduce vehicle miles traveled, since car-based travel has many societal costs."
Metra
“We are particularly happy that the funding includes an annual, stable and sustainable allotment of capital funding as well as a significant additional amount from a bond program,” said the commuter rail agency in a statement. “This funding will help us begin to tackle our biggest capital priorities, including locomotives, railcars, stations and bridges.”
This is a capital plan, not about operating subsidies, which largely are paid from the six-county RTA district sales tax.
charlie hebdo https://chi.streetsblog.org/2019/06/03/pritzkers-nearly-45b-capital-plan-is-way-better-for-transportation-than-expected/ The bill passed June 1.https://www.masstransitmag.com/rail/infrastructure/article/21082983/rebuild-illinois-bill-passes-transit-projects-to-see-funding-infusion
https://chi.streetsblog.org/2019/06/03/pritzkers-nearly-45b-capital-plan-is-way-better-for-transportation-than-expected/
The bill passed June 1.https://www.masstransitmag.com/rail/infrastructure/article/21082983/rebuild-illinois-bill-passes-transit-projects-to-see-funding-infusion
While this is good news I tend to agree with Mr Freemarks comments in the article, this is grant during a period of feast and does little to address the famine periods of funding or securing a sustainable funding source that pays for maintenance each year instead of depending on the whims of the state legislature.
Definition of high-speed rail
There are a number of different definitions for high-speed rail in use worldwide and there is no single standard, however there are certain parameters that are unique to high-speed rail. UIC (International Union of Railways) and EC Directive 96/58 define high-speed rail as systems of rolling stock and infrastructure which regularly operate at or above 250 km/h on new tracks, or 200 km/h on existing tracks. However lower speeds can be required by local constraints. A definitive aspect of high speed rail is the use of continuous welded rail which reduces track vibrations and discrepancies between rail segments enough to allow trains to pass at speeds in excess of 200 km/h (120 mph). Depending on design speed, banking and the forces deemed acceptable to the passengers, curves radius is above 4.5 kilometers, and for lines capable for 350 km/h running, typically at 7 to 9 kilometers. There are also a number of characteristics common to most high-speed rail systems but not required: almost all are electrically driven via overhead lines and have in-cab signalling as well as no level crossings. Advanced switches using very low entry and frog angles are also often used.
CMStPnP n012944 Sigh. As I stated the CURRENT traffic does not warrent double track. And yet in the same thread a news article is quoted where two trains breakdown and the timekeeping goes to pot.
n012944 Sigh. As I stated the CURRENT traffic does not warrent double track.
And yet in the same thread a news article is quoted where two trains breakdown and the timekeeping goes to pot.
Breakdowns tend to do that. Much like a car stall will back up highway traffic. Do you call your local DOT demanding extra lanes put in when that happens?
An "expensive model collector"
n012944Sigh. As I stated the CURRENT traffic does not warrent double track.
charlie hebdoAs usual, you have no factual basis for your contentions. Amtrak's metrics are the same on all routes - six minutes late is on-time.
Really? Show me that metric in writing somewhere. I really have a hard time believing the 6 min figure when STB says 15 min. I can't see Amtrak with it's padded schedules saying......."No we insist it should only be 6 min".....lol.
charlie hebdoTrue HSR would require the route to be totally rebuilt with no freight, just to save a marginal amount of time? Not worth it.
So you need to define True HSR because I think your drifting off into the weeds again.
CMStPnP n012944 t has been single tracked since the MILW days, and traffic does not warrent adding a second track. METRA disagrees with you on that and it is in the study you linked to.....ha-ha, which tells me you didn't read it. Reads almost like you were "guessing" here.
n012944 t has been single tracked since the MILW days, and traffic does not warrent adding a second track.
METRA disagrees with you on that and it is in the study you linked to.....ha-ha, which tells me you didn't read it. Reads almost like you were "guessing" here.
Sigh. As I stated the CURRENT traffic does not warrent double track. Metra would like to expand service to Fox Lake, which would require additional trackage for reverse commuters. Just the facts.
As usual, you have no factual basis for your contentions. Amtrak's metrics are the same on all routes - six minutes late is on-time. The Hiawatha route is one of its best. And I also have had personal experience on that corridor. But the only thing that matters is what are the metrics now, 18 years after the ancient study. True HSR would require the route to be totally rebuilt with no freight, just to save a marginal amount of time? Not worth it.
charlie hebdo You contend that Metra is horribly interfering with the Hiawatha Service. When evidence to the contrary is cited,
So now your mad because I wouldn't do your work for you again...
I never said horribly I said interfering with ontime performance and thats based on my ridership experience on the corridor in addition to METRA statements about traffic on the corridor. Which you dispute probably with little or no ridership experience on the corridor. The report even backs me up and states the corridor from Rondout to Tower A5 is already "congested" before the addition of new trains.
If you read the report, METRA contends it will be severely constricting potential HSR "Hiawatha" schedules for the corridor based on the current congestion if it implements the report cited above as written and so it says it really needs to do a phase II of the report above closer to the actual implementation and points to rapid urbanization of the area it wants to service.
Your position is everything is just fine on that corridor regardless of what even METRA states there is congestion already.......and whats your evidence? Amtrak timekeeping stats which even Amtrak admits are not triggered until an elapsed period of time has passed. Which I might add was spelled out in a much earlier report I did link to but which you did not read in it's entirety or missed that point.
BTW, Phase I of the report was never meant as an implementation plan it was intended as a rough sketch and a hopelessly optimistic one at that to get some rough figures.
So I think the evidence is there and there is a lot of evidence but your refusing to accept it.
The original 2001 study (Phase 1) was never carried out. The mention of a potential Phase 2 study is moot. You mention a purely hypothetical study as though it were real to justify your specious position. None of this is on Metra's timeline. The need is not there. You contend that Metra is horribly interfering with the Hiawatha Service. When evidence to the contrary is cited, you attack the facts or attack those who point this out by saying they are trolling. Get a dictionary?
charlie hebdoSince you mentioned it, it is normal courtesy and practice to specify precisely where in this study is Part II, etc. discussed? Page number will suffice. Add
It's throughout the document, just search on "phase II" vs "Part II" I believe it is mentioned more than once between pages 20-30.
n012944Which is a nice cover for "I have no idea what I am talking about" The routing is on the internet, and a quick Google search turned it up. Maybe do some researching before "guessing".
So I am held to a higher standard than you hold yourself too as indicated above....you just like to troll.
n012944t has been single tracked since the MILW days, and traffic does not warrent adding a second track.
CMStPnPNever saw the study until now but you probably didn't read the part where it says the study is only phase I of a 2 part study and that phase II of the study will have to account for HSR plans for the Corridor of shifting all the frieght from the existing CP line to the CNW new line.
1. The study is from 2003, 16 years old.
2. Since you mentioned it, it is normal courtesy and practice to specify precisely where in this study is Part II, etc. discussed? Page number will suffice.
CMStPnP n012944 he Wadsworth extension proposal has nothing in it about a connection track to the CNW. Thats why I said I guessed at the routing...
n012944 he Wadsworth extension proposal has nothing in it about a connection track to the CNW.
Thats why I said I guessed at the routing...
Which is a nice cover for "I have no idea what I am talking about" The routing is on the internet, and a quick Google search turned it up. Maybe do some researching before "guessing".
CMStPnP I think that is true of the whole METRA corridor over the ex-Milwaukee Road.........they do not have the track capacity to handle a simple issue such as noted below. APPEARS TO ME TO BE LACK OF RESILIENCY IN TRAIN SCHEDULES ON THIS LINE..........PERIOD. https://chicago.suntimes.com/2019/4/23/18619999/mechanical-failure-delays-metra-milwaukee-district-north-trains
I think that is true of the whole METRA corridor over the ex-Milwaukee Road.........they do not have the track capacity to handle a simple issue such as noted below.
APPEARS TO ME TO BE LACK OF RESILIENCY IN TRAIN SCHEDULES ON THIS LINE..........PERIOD.
https://chicago.suntimes.com/2019/4/23/18619999/mechanical-failure-delays-metra-milwaukee-district-north-trains
Nor should they. The incident you linked to happened on the single track section in Long Lake. It has been single tracked since the MILW days, and traffic does not warrent adding a second track. I understand those facts do not fit with your rants, but facts seem to get in your way quite a bit.
n012944he Wadsworth extension proposal has nothing in it about a connection track to the CNW.
Never saw the study until now but you probably didn't read the part where it says the study is only phase I of a 2 part study and that phase II of the study will have to account for HSR plans for the Corridor of shifting all the frieght from the existing CP line to the CNW new line. Additionally it expresses doubt it will be able to build a coach yard at the proposed Highway 173 location given the encroaching suburbia. Also, states that the additional congestion on the line by the new service would severely constrict the corridors use as HSR line.......on that issue alone the proposal probably will not go forwards as it is outlined. Last they stated double-tracking the Fox Lake line probably has priority over this project.
They are too cheap to even fund a third track North of Roundout. They want to attempt to do it with third track passing sidings and pointe out a third main track would be expensive due to existing bridges where the ROW has to narrow to two tracks. Which should tell you it's not a very serious proposal in phase I format anyway. I have serious doubts Amtrak, WisDot or MnDot is going to agree to this in it's current form.
They honestly admit that between Rondout and Tower A5 is already congested now without the addition of new service but then never suggest how they would fix that issue. So back to the issue of METRA attempting to run too many trains on not enough track and slowing everyone else that uses the track down or just being an obstacle.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.