VT unlike NH is making it happen.
Saturday, June 18, 2011 at 04:11PM
It's my intention to offer some more experience and analysis behind the recent Governor Lynch veto of H.B. 218. This includes a political response that I received from Councilor Ray Burton regarding the NH Rail Transit Authority and the reasoning for its existence.
But that will come later.
Recently, I got this e-mail message about Vermont and what this state is doing in rail. If you notice that unlike New Hampshire they are quietly and decisively making things happen; whether this is the expansion or re-establishment of Amtrak service to Montreal or the development of freight rail corridors that lead to economic development and jobs. And if you notice Vermont doesn't have an appointed 'Rail Transit Authority' with reaching powers like bonding and contract authority everything in Vermont is done as it should be with the approval of the Legislature.
H.B. 218 is a dangerous piece of legislation and now it's the law.
Source: Rail Vermont.org
On Wednesday afternoon GMRC equipment was used for a special train from
Essex Junction to Burlington for the Chittenden County Metropolitan
Planning Organization's annual meeting. Among the many dignitaries was
Secretary of Transportation Brian Searles.
In his remarks on the train, Joe Flynn mentioned that getting Amtrak to
Montreal is now the agencies #1 priority and the Western Corridor (VTR,
Rutland - Burlington) is the #2 priority. He mentioned how the agency
had 16 rail projects under construction (mostly bridges along the VRS),
an increase from the past. He also noted that Vermont Rail System
(especially on the Washington County RR Connecticut River line) had been
hit hard by the floods and had 44 separate FEMA sites (for which
restoration will be 75% paid for by FEMA). He sounded impressed by how
much work and how quickly Vermont Rail System had returned the lines to
service.
Jeff Munger, Transportation Staffer from Senator Sander's office spoke
about continuing to try to get funding for the Western Corridor. I am
really pleased to hear that he is thinking about this creatively.
Dave Wulfson announced that the Vermont Rail System is spending $750,000
on the Vermont portion of the CLP this summer to improve the track
conditions, returning train speeds to the advertised timetable speed.
He also announced that the Vermont Rail System is launching a website,
http://vtwesternrailcorridor.com that focuses on the Western Corridor.
--
Christopher Parker
Executive Director, Vermont Rail Action Network
www.railvermont.org
(
Reader Comments (9)
– C. dog places penny on rails to stretch tax dollars
Amtrak. Since its formation in 1971 this carrier has never turned a profit sans its operations on the Northeast Corridor, (Boston-Washington,D.C). Amtrak still does better than many other mass transit systems including socialistic Europe. So why should Amtrak in Vermont be funded? First the market area Washington-Montreal is a needed corridor and second the investment in the trackage on this route will improve rail freight operations which will in turn, lead to economic development and jobs.
The Western corridor in Vermont is currently profitable, but lacks the 263,000 standard weight requirment for modern rail cars there are also some bridge clearance issues as well. So the issue here is making a profitable rail line, even more profitable. In addition this rail line also will create economic development and jobs in areas ranging from technology exports to the import of commodities like road salt and canola oil for things like salad dressings which are manufactured in Vermont.
New Hampshire isn't doing this. Instead their simply building hierarchy and big government with no clear idea of where it is headed. New Hampshire should be using the Vermont model and build the rail around the community instead of the other way around.
NH should do whatever it can to keep any Vermont rail out our state. Montreal is a great destination for Vermonters.
Tax and charge the people who use the system to make it "profitable" and leave NH alone.
Let NY's Bernie Sanders go begging to Washington for the money to start the project.
That should be interesting.
Somehow I see Bernie Sanders and Charles Shumer striking it up.
The strength of my economic arguement lies in the freight rail portion which in included in the Amtrak proposal; it's the only way it can be justified. If rail and trucking can work in concert then there will be some real opportunity in our area of the world. As it's done out west. Lastly, the cost for the taxpayers won't be that significant either as the infastructure is already in place--just needs to be upgraded.
Why are you opposed to New Hampshire and Vermont working together?
1. Amtrack not profitable for nigh on 40 years, and going, going ... gone the way of the USSR?
2. Washington/Montréal corridor needed? Need, as in no one willing to pay for it? Need rises to new level of urgent necessity.
3. Is the 263,000 weight upgrade sufficient to support the heavy cream content of VT's #1 X-port: Ben & Jerry's feel-good faux-value ice-cream? Or the NYC immigrant's hubrisly high opinion of themselves?
– C. dog pours on his self-made vinegar-infused dressing with gusto – No Vermonters needed!
Or is that mad dog?
Does good policy always have to show a profit or is this just a mere consequence of living in a free capitalistic society?
A transportation system that helps families and individuals lead better lives. Imagine that for an idea.
BTW Ben & Jerrys operates one of the most spohisticated supply chain systems in this world, a model for others to follow....
-Steve Sez: Keep on Truckin. Thank a trucker because if you got it a trucker brought it.
Check the fumes in your truck cabin, shouldn't block the exhaust.
How does a free society set "good policy"? There is no way to rule innocent men.
I guess you could call anyone who wants to spend their own money a criminal for not attempting to stimulate the economy.
The strength of an economic argument is measured in people handing you money of their own free will. "Cost to the taxpayers won't be significant"... sure.
Perhaps we might have a discussion about the deployment of aircraft carriers, submarines and the new one: joint strike fighter.
Last I checked the U.S. is now paying for the aviation fuel for the NATO sorties into Libya, most of the ammunition as well. From what I've heard Russia is now canablizing parts from aircraft just to keep them on the tarmac.
And your complaining about Amtrak.
Here's a query: exactly what constitutes one of these hallowed "policies"? And where do they fit in to a constitution, and this nebulous "free society" of which – or is that of whom – you speak? Are they even constitutional, and therefore legal? Think, think, think Pooh-bah Bear.
By the way, I deftly avoided your NATO flypaper because I concur with the constitutional provisions that steer Uncle Sammy clear of foreign entanglements. Let Libyans do what Libyans will do – qué sera, sera, n'est-ce-pas?
– C. dog rolls up the tarmac to sow some "freedom weed"