Join the discussion on the following article:
New Hampshire scraps commuter rail plan
Top Ten Cash Poor States ----- Charity Search Engines.
Fiscal reality is difficult to live with. New Hampshire has had a record of being able to spend within it’s means, and what they spend on the “Downeaster”, was hotly debated. The end result was favorable for them, unlike most states that spend and spend without regard for where the funds came from. Being vigilant with ones money is not easy. It would have been a “sexy” thing to have commuter service to Boston from Nashua, possibly even Manchester, but responsible fiscal policy has prevailed. Saying no is tough.
Gas must be a lot cheaper in New Hampshire than it is here in West Virginia!
The short fall is also in foresight.
I’m not sure what some want for tomorrow’s transportation. Perhaps a return to horse and buggy would satisfy it.
What the hell…New Hampshire is getting a free ride on the Downeaster trains, paid for by Maine, and one stop on the Vermonter.
Looks like the highway lobbiest and Republicans have teemed up once again to keep us tied to our autos.
This leaves me somewhat confused. According to the Concord Monitor, the legislature failed to override the governor’s veto of legislation that would have emasculated the Rail Authority. Has something else transpired?
Maybe the Sates of Maine and Massachusetts can take care of this for you folks living in the 'live free or die" state. Sort of like the Amtrak Downeaster service that has to cross part of such hollowed ground with resultant high ridership from New Hampshire to Boston.
New Hampshire, the “Live Free and Die” state, frantically trying to become as backward as Mississippi and Alabama. Without neighbors Massachusetts, Maine and Vermont building and maintaining adjacent rail and highway facilities, they wouldn’t have many transportation options at all.
Ah, yes, Mr. Clement is looking at transportation through the tail of a horse. Moving people other than by roads and bridges is significant, but he doesn’t seem to see that through all the horse hair.
New Hamphire, as it has my whole lifetime, has relied on the states around it to support any limited public transportation. Amtrak right now–Vermonter and Downeaster, supported primarily by Vermont and Maine, respectively, with only local (as opposed to State) support in New Hampshire… Even intercity bus service in the state primarily (though not completely) originates in another state, travels through NH, and ends in a 3rd state…
In response to ALLEN GRAETZ from MINNESOTA’s comments:
I agree with you in that the budget gap needs to be closed. Deficit spending is poison to the financial soundness of government, and so you should only spend what funds you have, and do so on a strictly importance-based criteria.
That said, 1500 commuters a day is not something to sneeze at. That’s 1500 people who aren’t driving to work. 1500 cars that aren’t wearing out the roads and bridges. 1500 cars that aren’t spewing tailpipe emissions into the air.
And that 1500 is not even a fixed number. Adding commuter service to Nashua opens it up as a convenient location for people to live and still work in Boston (or any of the towns in between). Nashua thus could get a population boost. More residents, more tax income. More money being spent in Nashua instead of a town in Massachusetts.
If the service is balanced in both directions, that might encourage businesses to build or relocate in Nashua, further boosting the economy.
So, while 250 million is hard to justify with a 1.5 billion shortfall, it is equally hard to argue against the potential benefits that could come with the service.
It’s a hard call. I am glad I am not the one making it, and I hope the ones that are are doing so with keen foresight.
For those poo-pooing this move, exactly what projects would you cut? The tiny state of NH is short $1.5 billion just for all the transportation projects in it’s DOT’s 10 year plan. They had to make cuts. This wasn’t and is not will be the only one. They axed a project that was taking up over 5% of the budget and was projected to serve less than 1500 individuals on the typical weekday.
So if they didn’t axe the commuter rail, what projects should they have cut instead of this one? Exactly what projects?
I notice no comments from anyone living here in NH. The mind set of the majority of the people in this state is one of “The hell with everyone else because I only care about myself”. The state has no sales or income tax so it heavily relies upon personal property taxes so this state has the 4th highest property taxes in the US. The state is currently controlled by a Republican legislature that is constantly cutting funding for just about everything by either removing funding of shifting the funding burden to the local level. The end result is every municipality will “screw over” every other municipality to gain any advantage.
The current big push is to widen I-93 from the NH border to Manchester NH and it is being done by taking funding from the toll roads to pay for I-93. Even with tricks like selling a mile of I-95 to the toll road authority of I-95 for 100 million and then using that to pay for other road work in the state to divert 100 million to work on I-93 that state is still several hundred million short of the needed funding.
Despite meetings about rail the idiots in power do not realize the growth that occurs around transportation hubs is a boon to area construction and a business draw it is never counted or looked at. Check paragraph one for the reason. Instead the majority of workers that live in this state that have good paying jobs work in Mass because that is where the majority of the good jobs exist. This state relies upon retail malls to generate low paying jobs which explains why Wal-Mart is the number one private employer in this state. The only other big employer is low paying jobs in tourism.
The naysayers against rail often claim this state is to rural to ever need a passenger train service yet at Dover and Durham you need reservations to get on the Downeaster because of the high load factors. I often point out that the state of Utah has 8 times the area and only twice the population and they have both heavy and light rail transportation.
I guess people living in New Hampshire will continue to clog Massachusetts highways when they come down to work here…
Perhaps the Commonwealth of Massachusetts should give more careful consideration to the money it spends on the roads that link it to New Hamshire. Given the retail revenue lost to New Hamshire’s state run liquor stores and the need to provide adequate funding for our own transportation infrastructure - public and otherwise - the business of providing highway service to New Hampshire is a dubious priority for those of us on this side of the state line.
Personally I think passenger train service to Nashua in really not in the best interest of the New Hampshire traveling public. First off there is NO convienent place for a railroad station in Nashua or the surrounding area. Currently if you want to take the train into Boston you can easily drive to Lowell, Billerica or Ayer and take the train from there.
Gasoline is almost as addictive as nicotine.