This will be my last protestation blog before the Executive Council vote on item #75 on Wednesday.
I'm thinking about making one last phone call to Executive Councilor Ray Burton who has said he "is leaning in favor of voting for this." Some $3.86 million for consultant's fees which leads to over $350 million dollars in new spending which New Hampshire does not have.
But before I make my last argument I was hoping in the realm of politics and the "art of the possible" that Executive Councilor Colin Van Ostern being an MBA graduate from Dartmouth might take some time to consider the sheer financial impact of this whole flawed idea and his office then becomes the swing vote and New Hampshire could be (lack of better words) saved for another day.
It isn't to be the case.
Councilor Van Ostern is a cheerleader for this massive spending program I don't believe Lying Lozeau could even better his public relations skills in this area.
Let's move on.
I'm going to try to tell Councilor Burton that Vermont and Maine face the similar situation as does New Hampshire except there're doing it correctly. Building a railroad infastructure around the profitable movement of freight and then advancing passenger rail once this is completed.
Build the freight first and the rest will come.
And here is the interesting point. What Vermont and Maine are doing isn't raking the taxpayers over the coals the way New Hampshire is. Acually it isn't affecting the taxbase at all. These states are working in concert with both the users and potential users of rail and then picking small infastructure improvements: $5-$10 million dollar range and advancing jobs and policy from there.
And it's working.
The New Hampshire Rail Transit Authority, Lying Lozeau and Political Peter don't want to do it the way Vermont and Maine are doing it.
They want to do it their way.
Executive Council Item #75.