WI & OH Rail Projects Killed by US DOT

[Green Maned Lion]

They could never have built highways or done anything but what the money had been earmarked for-- I think that has been clear since day one.

One never knows. What Congress earmarkeths, Congress can unearmarketh.

Did Kasich stuff the ballot with 1.8 million votes all by himself? If anyone's to be blamed its the voters who put him in office.

Let me give you a choice of two candidates from two political parties.

Candidate Adolf H. Söhn of the MascuBovus Fecus party is strongly in support of: Rail, seggregation, the ku-klux-klan, and the extermination of all Italians, Jews, Muslims, Irish, Indians, Africans, and Albinos. He is against: Women's Sufferage, freedom of speech, and the silly idea of personal freedom.

Candidate M. L. King of the Mick E. Maus Party is strongly in support of: Freedom of speech, Freedom of religion, and having A. H. Sohn comitted to a mental institution. He is against bigotry and rail.

Which would you vote for?

Now logically follow this away from the extreme. Understand now, Dax?

 

[Blackshirt Husker]

This could be a good thing in the long-run IF the government sticks to its guns and redirects the money to other states as promised. It will then serve as a lesson and warning to other Republican incumbent governors (Branstadt in Iowa) that this ridiculous political posturing against Amtrak will not stand.

The money was not alloted for bridges, it was not alloted for roads, it was alloted for passenger rail expansion, PERIOD. Let the governors of Wisky and Ohio explain to their constituents that they turned down billions of dollars and countless new jobs because of partisan politics and their own arrogance.

 

[Anderson]

To be fair, Branstad seems to be taking a reasonable tack on this. I can at least respect being jittery about having to match a nine-figure rail grant right now, but he hasn't killed anything yet (and yes, I know "yet" is the operative word). That said...Branstad's been around almost thirty years, and I think he's not the type to kill projects for the hell of it.

On another topic, there's a dog that didn't bark here which just bit me: It was more or less known that Walker was probably going to win (he'd been up in every poll for several months) and I don't think it was any secret he was anti-rail. I'd kinda like to know why Ray LaHood announced an appropriation under those circumstances before the election. If anything, prudence ought to have dictated waiting until Nov. 8 or 9 and making some phone calls. I know, I know...some of this was election season "vote buying" in the form of timing an appropriation announcement, but still. In Ohio, I'll grant you could make a case it was close...but WI? Good grief.

 

[George Harris]

Let me give you a choice of two candidates from two political parties.
Candidate Adolf H. Söhn of the MascuBovus Fecus party is strongly in support of: Rail, seggregation, the ku-klux-klan, and the extermination of all Italians, Jews, Muslims, Irish, Indians, Africans, and Albinos. He is against: Women's Sufferage, freedom of speech, and the silly idea of personal freedom.

Candidate M. L. King of the Mick E. Maus Party is strongly in support of: Freedom of speech, Freedom of religion, and having A. H. Sohn comitted to a mental institution. He is against bigotry and rail.

Which would you vote for?

Now logically follow this away from the extreme. Understand now, Dax?

Thanks. Excellent explanation. Also a point I was trying to make. If people do not get it now, they never will.

By the way, this also explains why quite a few high-seniority congress critters remain in office. No matter how repulsive you are personally, and dubious politically, as long as you earmark for your home constituiency, you will find 50% plus one or more of the voters that can hold you accountable voting for you even if they havve to hold their nonse and get their gag reflex firmly under control to do so. Bringing home the bacon can cover a lot of sins in other areas.

 

[Eric S]

To be fair, Branstad seems to be taking a reasonable tack on this. I can at least respect being jittery about having to match a nine-figure rail grant right now, but he hasn't killed anything yet (and yes, I know "yet" is the operative word). That said...Branstad's been around almost thirty years, and I think he's not the type to kill projects for the hell of it.

On another topic, there's a dog that didn't bark here which just bit me: It was more or less known that Walker was probably going to win (he'd been up in every poll for several months) and I don't think it was any secret he was anti-rail. I'd kinda like to know why Ray LaHood announced an appropriation under those circumstances before the election. If anything, prudence ought to have dictated waiting until Nov. 8 or 9 and making some phone calls. I know, I know...some of this was election season "vote buying" in the form of timing an appropriation announcement, but still. In Ohio, I'll grant you could make a case it was close...but WI? Good grief.

Well, the grant was announced in January, before Walker had even won the Republican primary, so it was certainly plausible (at that time) that things had a long way to go until the election and much could have (should have, in my opinion) changed before November. Plus, the MKE-MAD Hiawatha extension was a project studied and supported by Republican and Democratic governors for 20 years.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Let me give you a choice of two candidates from two political parties...Which would you vote for?

Thanks. Excellent explanation. Also a point I was trying to make. If people do not get it now, they never will.

If you wait until there are only two candidates remaining and then complain that you don't have any good choices left to vote for then you're simply waiting too late to get involved. Your citizenship is active 365 days a year, not just once every two years when a national referendum is being held. Every phone call, every letter, and every dollar can be a vote for or against something important to you. Or you can just put your feet up and relax while the system narrows your options all the way down to bad and worse. Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil.

By the way, this also explains why quite a few high-seniority congress critters remain in office. No matter how repulsive you are personally, and dubious politically, as long as you earmark for your home constituiency, you will find 50% plus one or more of the voters that can hold you accountable voting for you even if they havve to hold their nonse and get their gag reflex firmly under control to do so.

The pork doesn't impress (or help) the voters. It impresses (and helps) your current and future financial contributors who get a slice of the action. Then you use the (legal) kick-backs they provide to fund your campaigns with managers and marketers who can make the other guy look even just a little worse than you. Rinse and repeat and you will eventually end up as part of the majority party presiding over America's partisan gerrymandering process and lock-in your gains for the next few decades. This more than anything explains why our infrastructure is based on politics more than need and why the rich get richer while the poor get poorer. For a few lucky Americans that's a good thing that just keeps getting better. For most of us it's a bad thing that just keeps getting worse.

 

[Anderson]

To be fair, Branstad seems to be taking a reasonable tack on this. I can at least respect being jittery about having to match a nine-figure rail grant right now, but he hasn't killed anything yet (and yes, I know "yet" is the operative word). That said...Branstad's been around almost thirty years, and I think he's not the type to kill projects for the hell of it.

On another topic, there's a dog that didn't bark here which just bit me: It was more or less known that Walker was probably going to win (he'd been up in every poll for several months) and I don't think it was any secret he was anti-rail. I'd kinda like to know why Ray LaHood announced an appropriation under those circumstances before the election. If anything, prudence ought to have dictated waiting until Nov. 8 or 9 and making some phone calls. I know, I know...some of this was election season "vote buying" in the form of timing an appropriation announcement, but still. In Ohio, I'll grant you could make a case it was close...but WI? Good grief.

Well, the grant was announced in January, before Walker had even won the Republican primary, so it was certainly plausible (at that time) that things had a long way to go until the election and much could have (should have, in my opinion) changed before November. Plus, the MKE-MAD Hiawatha extension was a project studied and supported by Republican and Democratic governors for 20 years.

I'd seen the announcement in October; I wasn't sure how much had been out there prior to that (in terms of actual commitments), that's all. And the problem, in some ways, is that something did change between January and November...in the wrong way (it's a decent trip from Scott Brown's upset to Sharron Angle and Joe Miller).

 

[George Harris]

Let me give you a choice of two candidates from two political parties...Which would you vote for?

Thanks. Excellent explanation. Also a point I was trying to make. If people do not get it now, they never will.

If you wait until there are only two candidates remaining and then complain that you don't have any good choices left to vote for then you're simply waiting too late to get involved. Your citizenship is active 365 days a year, not just once every two years when a national referendum is being held. Every phone call, every letter, and every dollar can be a vote for or against something important to you. Or you can just put your feet up and relax while the system narrows your options all the way down to bad and worse. Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil.

You can still end up with a GML style option even if you do fight hard not to. So far as I am concerned that is exactly what happened the last presidential election go-round. It came down to a decision between the least worst, not the best of two good ones.

By the way, this also explains why quite a few high-seniority congress critters remain in office. No matter how repulsive you are personally, and dubious politically, as long as you earmark for your home constituiency, you will find 50% plus one or more of the voters that can hold you accountable voting for you even if they havve to hold their nonse and get their gag reflex firmly under control to do so.

The pork doesn't impress (or help) the voters.

Actually, it does, and that is first hand knowledge. How do you think Daddy Gore remained a senator for Tennessee long after he became completely out of step with the majority of his constituency.

I will after this say no mre on this whole issue. This last is for the rest of the readers. As for Mr. D, I give up. If the GML and I are together on something politically, that should tell you something.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

As for Mr. D, I give up. If the GML and I are together on something politically, that should tell you something.

Amen.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

As for Mr. D, I give up. If the GML and I are together on something politically, that should tell you something.

What it mainly tells me is that you've accepted the status quo. That is not in itself a bad thing. If it means we won't hear any more convoluted explanations for how folks can claim to be pro-rail while actively voting for anti-rail politicians then I'm fine with that. I don't care what ideology any given person chooses to uphold so long as they actually live up to their own ideals. The only ideology I am unable to tolerate is intentional hypocrisy.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

As for Mr. D, I give up. If the GML and I are together on something politically, that should tell you something.

What it mainly tells me is that you've accepted the status quo. That is not in itself a bad thing. If it means we won't hear any more convoluted explanations for how folks can claim to be pro-rail while actively voting for anti-rail politicians then I'm fine with that. I don't care what ideology any given person chooses to uphold so long as they actually live up to their own ideals. The only ideology I am unable to tolerate is intentional hypocrisy.

I actively involve myself in politics. While I won't say I was in the top 10, I was among the people who contributed to killing the ARC tunnel, for example. I don't accept the status quo. I think it is ridiculous.

However, I also accept that I am not going to buy a political bulldozer (and I don't mean sleeping through a speech) and run it the hell through Washington. It is not possible to exert change that quickly or efficiently, or broadly. Killing the ARC tunnel, a hilariously stupid and over-bloated project, was hard, almost impossible- to the point where most of us involved sat stunned when we actually accomplished it.

For me to accomplish change, instead, I have to accept what is possible- and what is needed to be done in order to get that change. I could set up a grand GML party to form a military and change things by force, creating a new, better democratic government- and find myself in jail. I could go in front of my officials and rant at them at how dumb they are, how corrupt they are, and how much they don't care about what I have to say- and be completely ignored with polite nods.

Instead I put in words here, other words there. Make friends with politician's aides, and politicians themselves. Change a little here, a little there with a kind word and a quiet suggestion. Move things a little. Become respected. Become listened to. Because an aide will pass on a suggestion to the big man if they think it makes sense- and the big man will listen to his trusted aide. Because a friend will listen to another friend when that friend makes sense- even if one of them is a NJ assemblyman. I get a little, very little, done quietly.

Instead of loudly accomplishing nothing.

And yes, I vote too. In primaries, as well.

 

[George Harris]

As for Mr. D, I give up. If the GML and I are together on something politically, that should tell you something.

What it mainly tells me is that you've accepted the status quo. That is not in itself a bad thing. If it means we won't hear any more convoluted explanations for how folks can claim to be pro-rail while actively voting for anti-rail politicians then I'm fine with that. I don't care what ideology any given person chooses to uphold so long as they actually live up to their own ideals. The only ideology I am unable to tolerate is intentional hypocrisy.

I should leave this alone but this last statement is not at all what the GML and I are talking about.

Ever heard that "politics is the art of the possible?" It is realism, not hypocricy that leads one to prioritize the significance of a particular politicians promises/commitments.

Hypocricy is the person that promotes gun control while keeping a gun within reach at all times. Hypocricy is the person that opposes hiring illegal workers and has a housemaid and gardener that are illegal because he knowns that he can make them work 60 hours plus a week for less than minimum wage to save himself money. And on and on.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

As for Mr. D, I give up. If the GML and I are together on something politically, that should tell you something.

Amen.

I'll third that.

 

[Long Train Runnin']

Scott Walker explains in his own words why he stopped the train.

Story is here

 

[MattW]

And just as suspected, his reasons are complete and total propagandist crap.

First, he makes millions sound like huge money. For you, or me, it quite likely is, but it's only .02% of the state budget for much greater benefit.

Second, this short segment would have formed part of a backbone of this "reliable and cost-effective transportation system" he talks about.

Third, it's called INVESTING for a reason! Spend some now, get lots more later.

Fourth, this was phase I of the project, it's an investment in more than just Southeastern Wisconsin.

This guy needs to be run out of town on a rail (well, maybe a road since that's all there will be when he's through), and someone needs to do something to get the funds back, or squeeze the funds out of Wisconsin's budget. Minnesota's idea of simple avoiding Wisconsin won't work because going through Iowa is a longer more circuitous route. What the Federal government should have done is given the funding to Minnesota and directed them to form a railroad company and build through Wisconsin just like any other railroad company could (if it's even legally/administratively possible of course).

 

[AlanB]

To get products from one part of the country to another, we need a reliable and cost-effective transportation system. We have one today, but it is in dire need of repair. Raiding funds from Wisconsin to fund questionable new “high-speed” rail lines in other states means less support for fixing crumbling roads, bridges and freight rail lines in Wisconsin.

Actually, this one quote showed that he has no clue what he's talking about and that he did zero investigating into this entire project.

To say that freight rail lines in Wisconin need money and support is one reason why he was opposed to this project, when this project not only would have improved the freight lines in Wisconsin, but would have improved one of the State owned freight rail lines shows me that he has no clue about this project. This was never about the money or anything else. This entire anti-train stance was all about getting elected and nothing more.

 

[Trogdor]

This entire anti-train stance was all about getting elected and nothing more.

Bingo. That's the way it has been for a couple of decades.

At first, anti-rail was just anti-light rail (even supposedly pro-rail Tommy Thompson was against light rail). Now, it's against any new passenger rail of any sort.

 

[saxman]

This whole rail thing has been turned into a political football. People are against it because they are not use to it, and they say is socialism or liberal. It's pretty annoying when it comes to that. In my opinion, this country can't afford NOT to build a national rail network that works with highways and airways to build our economy back up. Economies don't work without good transportation. Unfortunately, our leaders keep acting as if rail lines compete again roads, and prevents us from moving.

I know I'm preaching to the choir here but needed a little rant.