Understanding the Republican Party’s Reluctance to Invest in Transit Infrastructure

[marmar]

from the Transport Politic blog:





Understanding the Republican Party’s Reluctance to Invest in Transit Infrastructure
Yonah Freemark

January 25th, 2011 |


» Conservatives in Congress threaten to shut down funding for transit construction projects and investments in intercity rail. One doesn’t have to look far to see why these programs aren’t priorities for them.

Late last week, a group of more than 165 of the most conservative members of the House of Representatives, the Republican Study Committee, released a report that detailed an agenda to reduce federal spending by $2.5 trillion over ten years. Spurred on by increasing public concern about the mounting national debt, the group argues that the only choice is to make huge, painful cuts in government programs. With the House now in the hands of the Republican Party, these suggestions are likely to be seriously considered.

Transportation policy is prominent on the group’s list, no matter President Obama’s call for investments in the nation’s transportation infrastructure, expected to be put forward in tonight’s state of the union address. Not only would all funding for Amtrak be cut, representing about $1.5 billion a year, but the Obama Administration’s nascent high-speed rail program would be stopped in its tracks. A $150 million commitment to Washington’s Metro system would evaporate. Even more dramatically, the New Starts program, which funds new rail and bus capital projects at a cost of $2 billion a year, would simply disappear. In other words, the Republican group suggests that all national government aid for the construction of new rail or bus lines, intercity and intra-city, be eliminated.

These cuts are extreme, and they’re not likely to make it to the President’s desk, not only because of the Democratic Party’s continued control over the Senate but also because some powerful Republicans in the House remain committed to supporting public transportation and rail programs. But how can we explain the open hostility of so many members of the GOP to any federal spending at all for non-automobile transportation? Why does a transfer of power from the Democratic Party to the Republicans engender such political problems for urban transit?

We can find clues in considering the districts from which members of the House of Representatives of each party are elected. ............(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2011/01/25/understanding-the-republican-partys-reluctance-to-invest-in-transit-infrastructure/

[eleny]

1. Meantime, the Swiss in "old Europe" are building the Gotthard Base Tunnel...

"The Gotthard Base Tunnel (GBT) is a railway tunnel beneath the Alps in Switzerland. With a route length of 57 km (35.4 mi) and a total of 151.84 km (94.3 mi) of tunnels, shafts and passages,<1> it is the world's longest rail tunnel, surpassing the undersea Seikan Tunnel in Japan."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotthard_Base_Tunnel

[Gaedel]

4. The US has massive private investment

in freight railroads. The US has the most modern and up to date freight rail system in the world.

Deficit hawks (who tend to be Republican) look at most public transit funding as money going down a "black hole". AMTRAK will never be profitable and the question each year is how much money AMTRAK will need this time. None of the funds "invested" in rail or bus passenger transit will ever return a profit.

[BadgerKid]

2. The Alaskan "Bridge to Nowhere" comes to mind.

I wonder if the GOP wanted to prevent funding for such programs *in order to* be able to take the position that the rural areas shouldn't be funding urban areas.

[Johonny]

3. Republicans don't like jobs

[RC]

5. They just want the money that would go to pay for those jobs.