Interesting synopsis of the politics of Gateway .
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/07/06/gateway-tunnel-new-york-city-infrastructure-218839
It sounds like that until its broken, it won't be fixed.
The Urban vs. Rural [or less Urban] political divide is nothing new. Its been around ever since this country began to experience high density urban areas. Of course, in PA there has always been a good reason for the non-urban areas to not trust Philly and Pittsburgh--every time we've had a governor from either of them they've worked overtime to come up with new ways to tax the other areas of the state to provide for funds for the 2 cities. The latest "grand scheme" was Rendell's plan to toll I-80 which goes across across the mainly rural northern tier of PA and have 75% to 80% of the revenue go south to his political base in Philly and much of the rest to the Pittsburgh area. Fortunately, that plan was shot down in DC. And it did come back to bite the Dems as it was a major reason for the Republicans sucess in 2010 state elections.
I do agree with the idea that the Feds agree to a fixed amount, rather than a fixed percentage, for any construction project as that puts the responsibility on the state and local governments to avoid any "Big Dig" situations. If not, they get stuck with the overruns.
The writer took two pages worth of material and jammed it into many, many more pages. He included one irrelevancy after another to the point where I gave up on it. Having said that, in between the lines he makes a compelling case for moving forward with the Gateway Project.
Given the toxic political environment in Washington, a better outcome for regional projects, irrespective of where they are located, would be for the impacted regional political bodies to do the heavy lifting.
This project is important for the NEC. Those states served by the NEC could issue tax free municipal bonds to cover the cost of the projects needed to upgrade it, including the Gateway project(s). Then, they could cover the debt service expenses through fares and fees charged to the users.
Whether it is a private toll road in Texas or a NEC tunnel, the better way might be to fund it locally and recapture the costs from the people who use the system improvement.
The federal government is in debt up to its eyeballs. Looking to it for free-flowing cash is likely to be a frustrating exercise.
Rio Grande Valley, CFI,CFII
alphas The Urban vs. Rural [or less Urban] political divide is nothing new. Its been around ever since this country began to experience high density urban areas. Of course, in PA there has always been a good reason for the non-urban areas to not trust Philly and Pittsburgh--every time we've had a governor from either of them they've worked overtime to come up with new ways to tax the other areas of the state to provide for funds for the 2 cities.
The Urban vs. Rural [or less Urban] political divide is nothing new. Its been around ever since this country began to experience high density urban areas. Of course, in PA there has always been a good reason for the non-urban areas to not trust Philly and Pittsburgh--every time we've had a governor from either of them they've worked overtime to come up with new ways to tax the other areas of the state to provide for funds for the 2 cities.
Know what you mean, alphas. A friend here in Wisconsin has had a close view of the inner workings of state transportation projects. When the dems have had the power, Milwaukee and Madison have gotten the lion's share. When the reps have had it, the rest of the state has gotten the lion's share.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.