A Blog For All - Comments - Keep it civil
I live in LA, and if the standard following our next quake is going to be "Let's rebuild it so it can't get hurt next time" the feds are going to be on the hook for a lot more than $700 million.
Good post. As a West Virginian and conservative I have wrestled with this for 25 years. The bottom line: Is it in the national interest?
Interstate railways are in the national interest. Rebuild it better
Of course, we could just save our money until (if?) the track is damaged some time (never?) in the future and rebuild it then, couldn't we?
Over on instapundit, a commenter says:
>> I think what this shows is that Trent Lott has become an ineffective advocate for his constituents' needs. The relocation of the railway may be a good idea or even necessary, but Mr. Lott's support for it obscures the merits. If his first priority were serving the needs of the citizens of Mississippi, he would either (i) take a strong stand against pork, including specific pork for Mississippi, to (hopefully) demonstrate that he is against pork, but the railway project isn't pork or (ii) step aside. I doubt that will happen and I think the failure to do so implies that Mr. Lott's real motivations as a Senator are not necessarily in line with the needs of the citizens of Mississippi.
-----------------------
... To which I have only one response.
So the story about Lott supporting pork is fake, but accurate?
I live on the Ms. Gulf Coast and some of your facts are wrong. I10 was not badly damaged. There were no I10 bridges (in Ms) damaged. The bridges that were destroyed were on Hwy 90. The story you link to concerns the CSX railroad bridge in Hancock county, a county which is not,to my knowledge involved in this boondoggle.
Gulfport has wanted a new east west corrider for decades and could not come up with the money to fund it.
Relocating the CSX railroad and using the right of way for a new road will not take all of the traffic off of Hwy 90, the casino's are located there.
So Hwy 90 will still be a vital road, you are just adding another road to be rebuilt in case of another Katrina.
And I could mention that the railroad acted as a dam preventing the devestating storm surge from going even further inland.
The project has enough merit that Gulfport has been looking into it for years. They have just come up with a clever way for you (the federal tax payers) to pay for it.
Sounds like pork to me.
Well, Lisa, partially right. It's true that Biloxi and Gulfport have wanted a new East-West corridor for years, and have been eyeing the CSX right-of-way. And it's also true that Katrina's destruction of Hwy 90 and the CSX railroad are helping this become reality. But pork? Come on. This isn't a highway to nowhere. This is a real project, with real benefits. 250 million dollars was spent on repairing the railroad. Sure, it'll cost 3-4 times that to move it, but can you or anyone else guarantee the Coast won't get another huge storm next year? This could save way more money in the long run.
Paul,
CSX paid to have the railroad restored. Cost to the taxpayers $0. If a road is built there instead, the government (meaning the tax payers) will pay to have it rebuilt in the event it is destroyed by a hurricane.
Or did you somehow think that changing from a railway to a roadway was going to make it hurricane proof?
The only rebuilding cost you have saved would be CSX's. I'm sure they will be grateful.
Lisa
Let's see, you keep talking about how the new relocated rail line will provide economic benefits, but the only specific benefit that you mention it will provide is to help the Gulf Coast residents rebuild faster after the next hurricane destroys their communities. If you move the rail line inland, and build a auto road on the RR right of way, the next hurricane just's going to wreck the road. But if you build the road, more people will find it easier to live on the Gulf coast, meaning more people will be at risk of destruction from hurricane.
Seems like you want the rest of the country to foot the bill so that you can live on the Gulf Coast without risk. You want us to pay for a rail line so that you can spend our money faster after the next hurricane. You want a road so there will be more economic activity, making it easier to make a living on the Gulf coast. You get all the benefits of Gulf Coast living, we get all the risk.
I've got an alternative suggestion. Maybe we should provide no Federal help to the Gulf Coast residents. If you want to live there, be our guest, but don't expect us to bail you out if the hurricane smashes your property. That way, the only people living on the Coast will be the people who can afford the risk, and the easy come/easy go people. Everyone else will do the sensible thing and move inland. Just like it's crazy to provide Federal flood insurance to people who live in floodplains, we shouldn't offer insurance and an commitment of help to people who build on the hurricane swept coasts.
Sounds like pork to me. You want to exercise the coercive power of the Federal government on the rest of us to make your life better, to shield you from the hard choices of life.
We probably have three thousand miles of inhabited coastline in the U.S that is vulnerable to hurricane damage....from the northeast states to Texas. And it's not only "easy come/easy go" beachfront property owners who are affected. Just how far back from the sand should we move them all?
If the Gulf Coast states need transporatation infrastructure, let them get together and sell bonds to build it. Get CSX on the hook for at least some of the debt service.
Generally, we try to finance long-term infrastructure with incremental revenues that result from the improvement. I see no reason why that shouldn't apply here.
John,
I assume you are in favor of abandoning all of the West Coast states(earthquakes, mudslides, wildfires, flooding, tsunamis,volcanoes), the entire eastern seaboard, including New York City (hurricanes, earthquakes and terrorism) and you'll have to relocate everyone from the middle of the country as well (earthquakes, tornadoes and the mother of all vocanoes under Yellowstone) and of course everyone, anywhere who lives anywhere close to a river.
Maybe Arizona will take us all, but I think we'll have to bring our own water.
Fotunately, most of the American people don't feel the way that you do. They have been generous with their money and their time. They have been down here by the thousands helping remove the rubble and helping our citizens recover something, anything of their former possessions.
We still have great needs in this area, and I believe that our fellow citizens and neighbors are going to help us (as we would them.)
I just think labeling this particular project as Katrina relief, when to me it is clearly not,is an abuse of their generosity.
Being from the Mississippi Gulf Coast, I do not think that moving the CSX railroads will solve anything. Hwy 90 and it's bridges should be the main priority now. I-10 was closed down in Pascagoula after Hurricane Katrina for a brief period because a boat hit one of the bridges over the Pascagoula River. It was re-opened shortly.
The casinos are on Hwy 90 and even thought they can move 800 feet inland now, they would still be on Hwy 90. A better solution than trying to move the CSX raillines would be to expand Hwy 90. Most of the houses and business along it are gone.
Though some places on Hwy 90 were washed out and the two bridges were destroyed, on the whole it remained in good shape. It was closed for three months after Katrina but that was prmiarily to allow for clean-up.
The only section that remains closed is in Pass Christian were most of the washouts occured.
Moving the CSX rail lines has been the pet project of the MS Dept of Transportation and some county and city leaders for years.
If Mississippi needs this road, then why don't the elected representatives simply ASK for it? You know, actually go to the floor of the House and Senate and argue that it's needed. Maybe bring a couple charts and pictures. Isn't that what politicians are supposed to do? This Congress has never failed to write a check, so Mississippi would probably still get it.
Instead, they're taking the easy way out: attach it as an earmark, that way they don't have to justify it. That looks shady to me.
If they can't stand in front of all 12 viewers on CSPAN and clearly articulate the need for it, it's pork.
Here's where I sheepishly admit I'm wrong. I let emotion override good judgement. Lisa, Ben, others, you're right. This is Pork. It's still a worthwhile project in my mind, but who should pay for it? I was conflicted on my views of this project, as I'm sure that the road would help traffic flow. And God forbid a train ever comes off the track in Biloxi. But that doesn't make it right to push the cost of this project onto the Federal Taxpayers.
Commenting by HaloScan
