| From: | Larry Kaufmann |
| Sent on: | Monday, August 23, 2010 2:12 PM |
OK, let me jump into the fray here and second Roberto’s
generally excellent comments.
First, train proponents love to compare total dollars spent on
transport options, but this is fundamentally misleading. It’s not a
perfect example, but to see why consider the amount of money spent on bread
with the amount spent on diamonds by US consumers. I don’t have the
numbers in front of me, but I’m guessing bread purchases are much, much
greater. Does this mean that bread is more ‘costly’ than diamonds?
Obviously not (bread will never be a girl’s best friend – or maybe
it will, but it’s a different kind of bread…but I digress).
But when you compare total dollars spent on a product that almost everybody
purchases on a regular basis, with the dollars spent on something that gets
purchased much less frequently and on special occasions, it’s an apples
to oranges comparison.
The way to make it apples to apples is to compare unit costs,
which in this case is dollars per passenger mile (i.e. total passengers * total
miles traveled by each). Now everything is standardized and expressed
relative to a common denominator. And now, obviously, that billion spent
on roads looks very different than the billion dollars spent on trains, because
it is going to support much more travel, for both commuters and commercial transport
(which Roberto mentions below – although, just a quibble, rail freight
actually is an important source of transport for some products, especially bulk
products like coal and wheat. Freight trains are also privately owned and
non-subsidized – although the entire industry was almost driven into
bankruptcy by regulation in the 1970s, but has registered incredible
productivity gains since it was deregulated... transport dereg was a combined Ford-Carter
achievement, BTW)
So, to make this very simple for your friend - roads are like bread,
commuter trains are like diamonds.
Second, you could mention to your friend that there was a time
when railroad passenger trains were common and, in fact, the primary mode of transportation.
This was the age before autos became commercially affordable to the masses in the
first several decades of the 20th century. As this happened,
people switched their transport choices from trains to cars. This was not
because of a grand conspiracy, but simply because cars are cheaper, more
convenient and much, much more flexible (trains take you from point A to point
B, cars can pretty much take you anywhere). The expansion of roads grew
in line with the growth in auto ownership, and this was a natural development
that, almost from the beginning, was mostly (but not entirely) funded by gasoline
taxes. Thus the financing for the road infrastructure came largely
from the car owners who were demanding it. Your friend apparently wants
to go “back to the future,” when trains were the only game in town –
but that genie’s been out of the bottle for about a century now.
Third, it is true that roads receive some general taxpayer funding,
and I’m with your “liberal pinko” friend (your words –
but I’m kind of a recovering pinko myself, although my recovery was completed
a long time ago) on decreasing these subsidies. This can be done by
increasing user fees, particularly the use of toll roads with electronic
monitoring and, ideally, prices that vary by time of day (to encourage people
to switch their driving to off-peak hours, and decrease rush hour
traffic). I’m all in favor of user fees like these, and IT has now
made toll roads more feasible and a more efficient means of funding road
construction and maintenance than general tax revenues.
If your friend wants to read more, I would recommend Driving
Forces by James Dunn. In spite of its somewhat provocative title,
this is actually a very balanced account of the history of transportation
development in the 20th century (take it to the beach - talk about
an exciting read!). Another fine, more recent book is Gridlock
by Randal O’Toole – lots of information, but somewhat less detailed
history.
From: [address removed]
[mailto:[address removed]] On Behalf Of Roberto Dean
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2010 12:31 PM
To: [address removed]
Subject: RE: [glennbeck-wi] Two Updates from Mike Thomsen re: Commuter
Rail Referendum
I was
hoping you would jump into the fray
From:
[address removed] [mailto:[address removed]] On Behalf
Of Larry Kaufmann
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2010 8:55 AM
To: [address removed]
Subject: RE: [glennbeck-wi] Two Updates from Mike Thomsen re: Commuter
Rail Referendum
Good
points Roberto – FYI, I will expand and add my two cents later this
afternoon, right now I’ve got an important commitment on the day
job….
From:
[address removed] [mailto:[address removed]] On Behalf
Of Roberto Dean
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2010 8:51 AM
To: [address removed]
Subject: RE: [glennbeck-wi] Two Updates from Mike Thomsen re: Commuter
Rail Referendum
1)
Don't look at it by comparing relative costs because it overlooks essential
issues in the debate. Train proponents will argue that there is no
payback on roads but everyone uses them. They are vital to commerce. Almost all
our goods and services implicitly depend on roads and highways. It's a cost
effective means delivering goods and services unlike rail. Can you imagine Best
Buy or Sears delivering your new refrigerator, washer and drier on the train?
Businesses supplies a huge tax revenue stream for government, and without roads
businesses would not be able to survive. We spend so much on roads because we
have to, and mobility is essential to prosperity and freedom.
2)
Ridership will be insignificant enough where the subsidy is much higher per
mile than any road. Again, what business is going to depend on the train.
3)
Cost of ridership for Doyle's train will make it's use not only inefficient,
but cost prohibitive even with the proposed fare and subsidy.
4)
Your friends argument is that by comparison it is not as much money. Tell your
friend to tell that to people like me that just had a huge chunk taken from
their annual salary. Then we'll ask him where we are expected to get the money
to pay for it. It is a total waste of resources. Government has no business
building wasteful legacy projects that will take people like me, that are at
the fringes of fiscal calamity and cast us of into bankruptcy. It's never
a good time to build a project like this, but now more than ever, not only is
it wasteful, it's selfish and shameful.
There
are a zillion more arguments, and there are others that can make a better case
that I have. Go to the rail meeting tomorrow night. There is so much you can
learn.
Roberto
From:
[address removed] [mailto:[address removed]] On Behalf
Of Aaron Childers
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2010 3:27 AM
To: [address removed]
Subject: Re: [glennbeck-wi] Two Updates from Mike Thomsen re: Commuter
Rail Referendum
In
discussing rail with a pinko liberal friend of mine he said that
Wisconsin spent more than $1.1 billion last year just on highway rehabilitation
and maintenance. Then there was another $323 million on new highway construction
and major upgrades and more than $293 million on debt service
( I checked it out) http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/about/docs/budgettrends2008.pdf
Why is it that we must be so unified in opposition to rail in Wisconsin?
Because the price tag on rail doesn't really seem that large when compared to
anything but the cash in my pocket. Further, if we can indeed afford the
roads we build now, why so much in DOT debt service?
Can anyone help me out with some answers?!?!?!
On
Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 8:30 AM, Kirsten L <[address removed]>
wrote:
Friends,
The
following two messages from Mike Thomsen concern the commuter rail/RTA. MIke
has launched a rather interesting contest. I would encourage you to
participate. Also, he notes some important information about upcoming meetings.
Kirsten
Begin
forwarded message:
---------- Forwarded message
#1 ----------
From:
Mike Thomsen
Date: Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 5:46 AM
Subject: Commuter Rail Referendum update - 1) Kathleen Falk's Reality, 2) photo
contest
To: Mike Thomsen
Dear Friends,
Thanks
again for all of your hard work gathering signatures and calling and writing
Kathleen Falk, Scott McDonell, Matt Veldran, Dianne Hesselbein and others who
are doing their working day and night to keep our commuter rail referendum off
the November ballot. Remember that we are in Phase 2 of the petition drive and
have until the September 16 county board meeting to convince them that we need
a referendum on the ballot in November. Key contact info is at the end of this
letter.
If
you're written to Kathleen you've probably received a reply similar to the one
I've copied below. More or less, it says that the RTA has to develop a
"plan" for the voters to vote on and when this "plan" is
ready there will be a referendum.
Yesterday
I attended the RTA meeting downtown at 3:00PM. Why they held it at 3PM is a
mystery to me (wink wink) but suffice it to say there were only a small handful
of the public at the meeting and all but me and Bill Richardson seemed to be
Trainiacs. Just 5 of the 9 RTA members attended the meeting but this was
enough to conduct business under their rules.
Kathleen
says in her letter that the RTA is developing a "plan" for us to vote
on. My question for Kathleen is, How can 9 individuals none of whom are
engineers or economists or transportation experts of any sort possibly prepare
a detailed "plan" especially if only 5 of the 9 bother to attend the
meetings? It's incredible to me.
Yesterday's
meeting focused on the "Principles for Transit Plan". Dick Wagner
presented a list of 10 principles (I don't know who prepared these for him
since he doesn't seem like a details sort of guy. I can send these to you if
you'd like to see them). NONE of the principles involved explicitly the costs
of building or operating a transit "system". I raised my hand and
suggested that they include a statement on cost and subsidy in the principles
but Mr Wagner shot that down saying it was too early to know and that cost and
the like would be part of the financial analysis. I don't know who will conduct
the financial analysis since none of them are financial people capable of doing
such a large analysis. And they don't have the money to hire experts to prepare
one more study.
What
this all tells me is that the RTA plan Kathleen talks about is a bad joke being
played on us. The RTA members are political hacks picked to fumble and bumble
around for a while then recommend the Transport 2020 ( http://www.transport2020.net
) "plan" and try to bamboozle us with more illogical baloney about
how 4 trains all operating through the isthmus will move us one more step
toward Utopia.
PHOTO
CONTEST
Let's
have a photo contest to show just how good a job city and county governments is
doing their jobs here in Madison and Dane county. As you go about your day you
probably encounter dozens of examples of various government agencies not doing
their jobs well. The first one that comes to mind to me is that enormous pot
hole at the edge of the street by Vintage Pub on S Whitney Way. I nearly lost a
wheel in that two days ago. Get out your camera, large and small, and
photograph examples of government already not doing it's job. Send those to me
and I will find a way to post these so that viewers can vote on their
favorites. The winner will get something cool (but of no substantial value).
Thanks
for all of your help. Keep working and keep in touch!
Mike
PS
attached is the Phase 2 petition with the new date of September 14. Please get it
to all of your family, friends and neighbors and help build our network. We
have until the September 16 county board meeting to convince the county board
that we need to vote on commuter rail in November.
If
you want to be removed from my list please drop me a line.
******************************
Kathleen
Falk's reply to one of us:
"There
is a lot of work to be done before any kind of a regional transportation system
proposal will be produced by the new RTA for us to vote on: deciding the
components and how they interconnect; what state and federal funding is
available; whether to create a sales tax within the region that charges those
who come to our area and utilize our transportation system to mention a few.
Several years ago it was myself and the Madison Mayor who proposed a
referendum -- and I continue to pledge my support for a referendum -- to decide
if a half-cent sales tax should occur to implement a transportation system.
My two appointees to the RTA have pledged their commitment to hold a
referendum before any sales tax is made by the RTA; the RTA itself voted to
hold a binding referendum before it decides if a sales tax should be
adopted."
********************************
Kathleen Falk (county
executive) [masked], [address removed]
Scott McDonell (board
chair) [masked], [address removed]
Matt Veldran (public
works committee) [masked], [address removed]
Dianne Hesselbein
(personnel & finance committee) [masked], [address removed]
--
Dane
Advocates for Transportation Efficiency
in
the 21st Century
---------- Forwarded message #2 ----------
from:
Mike Thomsen
date:
Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 6:35 AM
subject: Commuter Rail Referendum - County Board meeting tonight August 19,
7:00PM & some progress
6:35
AM (1 hour ago)
Dear Friends,
Just a quick note to remind you of the Dane County Board meeting tonight August
19 at 7:00PM. The meeting is at the City County Building, 210 Martin Luther
King Jr Blvd.
The commuter rail referendum resolution is not on the agenda but I'm hoping
that it might be brought up at the end of the meeting. Trainiac chair of the
County Board Scott McDonell is in control of things so we'll just have to see.
I rec'd some indications that Matt Veldran may put the commuter rail referendum
on the agenda for the August 24 meeting of the Public Works committee. I will know
more by August 20. If he does put it on the agenda we will want to pack the
room to let them know in no uncertain terms that that vast majority of people
in Dane county want to vote on commuter rail in November. So please, be
prepared for a call to attend that committee meeting on the 24th.
Finally, here's a short letter one of us received from Scott McDonell after
writing to ask for the November referendum. It oozes with arrogance and anger
that we have dared to challenge him.
> The RTA is the entity with the power to levy a sales tax, not the county
> board, and it will call for a referendum when it has put together a plan
> with cost estimates. Buses will get the lion's share of any new tax,
but is
> conveniently left out of an referendum question posed by those who oppose
> transit. When there is a plan, there will be a vote. That is
what the RTA
> passed in their bylaws on a 7-0 vote. Thank you. Scott
So, the RTA will write a plan even though none are engineers or economist or
transportation experts of any kind. It's just not credible. And, buses will not
get the lion's share of the new sales tax. They will need all of the sales tax
and more to subsidize the commuter rail line.
Thanks for your hard work. We're making progress.
Mike
PS Please continue to gather signatures and writing and calling your
county board supervisors and elected officials.
Kathleen Falk (county executive) [masked], [address removed]
Scott McDonell (board chair) [masked], [address removed]
Matt Veldran (public works committee) [masked], [address removed]
Dianne Hesselbein (personnel & finance committee) [masked],[address removed]
and other county board supervisors We need to get this through all three
committees.
--
Dane
Advocates for Transportation Efficiency
in the 21st Century
http://www.StopTheTrainTax.org
http://twitter.com/StopTheTrainTax
--
This message was sent by Ross Brown ([address removed])
from We the People of
the Republic.
To learn more about Ross Brown, visit his/her member
profile
Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York,
New York 10163-4668 | [address removed]
--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone
on this mailing list ([address removed])
This message was sent by Kirsten L ([address removed])
from The
Wisconsin 9/12 Project.
To learn more about Kirsten L, visit his/her member
profile
To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click here
Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New
York, New York 10163-4668 | [address removed]
--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will
be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])
This message was sent by Aaron Childers ([address removed]) from The Wisconsin 9/12 Project.
To learn more about Aaron Childers, visit his/her member profile
To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click here
Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York,
New York 10163-4668 | [address removed]
--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will
be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])
This message was sent by Roberto Dean ([address removed]) from The Wisconsin 9/12 Project.
To learn more about Roberto Dean, visit his/her member profile
To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click here
Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York,
New York 10163-4668 | [address removed]
--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will
be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])
This message was sent by Larry Kaufmann ([address removed]) from The Wisconsin 9/12 Project.
To learn more about Larry Kaufmann, visit his/her member profile
To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click here
Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York, New
York 10163-4668 | [address removed]
--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will
be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])
This message was sent by Roberto Dean ([address removed]) from The Wisconsin 9/12 Project.
To learn more about Roberto Dean, visit his/her member profile
To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click here
Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York,
New York 10163-4668 | [address removed]