Let the candidates know: (Cape Cod, Fall River-NB,etc.)

Robert Paniagua wrote:

Pete wrote:He can't. The T can't afford them.

Well, I feel he has the power to restore and promote extra CR service, maybe someone else has another opinion here, but I'm hoping one can do things to improve CR.

The Lieutenant Governor has not yet been empowered to change the laws of economics.

midnight_ride wrote:Pete, I fear you are probably correct in your assesment. Forward funding is far too attractive politically to be done away with. But let's be clear: while forward funding may be a friend of your state legislator and mine, it is not a friend of public transportation. I'm not sure what a "sustainable funding structure" is or would look like. Nor am I quite sure why the T must "set a budget and live by it." These, to me, are mystery terms that smack, with all due respect, of equivocation.

In spite of the charming cynicism exhibited in parts of this thread, I wonder how many of us would be willing to have our taxes raised for the sake of better public transit? I certainly would, but before that happens, I would propose this: establish a transportation authority in Eastern Massachusetts much like the MTA in New York City-- an authority that issues its own bonds at will and maintains its own debt. This authority, which would look a lot like the Mass. Turnpike Authority (whose major problem, I would note is one of competence, not structure) could take over bridges and tunnels in the Boston area in addition to current rail assets. This is one vague idea. I'm sure there are many more out there and nearly all of them are better than "That's the reality. It won't change."

The MBTA does now issue bonds and maintain its own debt. It's presently paying debts, however, that it did not agree to finance when they were incurred. This is the 900-pound gorilla that more than anything is crippling the T's ability to do its job right now. No candidate is addressing this now. No office-holder is addressing this now. With regard to "That's the reality. It won't change," it is the reality, and probably ultimately will change (because the T will eventually run out of capital to liquidate, and will reach a real fare ceiling), but there needs to be leadership on the issue from somewhere in the political realm, and that leadership has not yet shown itself.

For a good comparison, look at the current non-debate over Social Security. No one in a position to do anything about it is offering any real solutions because every solution that will work will involve some difficult and unpopular decisions. And so the consequences grow worse as the gorilla in the room grows larger.

If this sounds laced with cynicism, I counter that there is too much candy-coating of these issues. Our elected officials need to be told that they are dropping the ball, and we are all going to pay dearly if they don't start facing the real issues.

Pete, I couldn't agree more and I think your comparison with social security is particularly apt. You seem to have some expertise in the area, so I'll ask: can the T issue bonds at will or are their bond issues subject to legislative approval? I made the MTA comparison because when that agency was founded Robert Moses made sure he could issue all the bonds he wanted without having to go Albany for approval, thus allowing the MTA to finance its own expansion. Of course a totally unchecked MBTA wouldn't be desirable, but maybe some kind of a balance can be struck.

As for paying dearly, I believe we already are. MBTA service is simply abysmal in comparison to almost any other city. The leadership, I think, will come from a politician who is able to divorce to T from the vagaries of the political process. It needs a stronger, more independent organization. We don't ask fire or police departments to pay for themselves. We shouldn't ask public transit to do so either.

As for paying dearly, I believe we already are. MBTA service is simply abysmal in comparison to almost any other city.

Not to take away from the main thrust of your agrument which I basically agree with, but least Boston has service. How many other cities the size of Boston (or larger) have four subway lines? Baltimore? Milwaukee? San Antonio? Houston?

Again, I agree with that the 'T' is mired in poor management and debt, but a bad system's better than no system, but a good system would be best.

Chicago and San Francisco/Oakland/Berkeley are probably the best cities to compare with Boston. Maybe Philly, too.

Well, this election may change things. Maybe if Patrick wins, he'll actually do what needs to be done; raise gas taxes to finance the T. A 10 cent gas tax increase, with proceeds to go to the T, would go a long way. That's not far-fetched; the gas tax hasn't been raised
since 199, according to a good Globe editorial this Sunday. It would take some kind of electoral mandate, plus the sense to do it early on when he has some political capital to spend, but it's not that far-fetched.

I agree with portions of what most of you have said, thus far. The MBTA has elements of both good and bad, as the fact that the Boston area at least has service, as compared to San Antonio, etc.
However, I don't think that the battle should be "East vs. West", rather I think it would be better if a unified effort should be pursued. After all, the highway lobbies are united. That's why they are strong. As you all know, a contiguous rail system is one that's the most viable. Perhaps the Cape Cod Rail Advocates could join forces with the Fall River-New bedford group, and so on.
An example of this is a while back when the Danbury and Waterbury branches of the MN commuter rail in Connecticut were threatened with closure. For a while there was the "my branch is more important than yours" scenario until someone suggested that the local citizens' groups join forces, and fight for both lines. The result was that both lines were not only saved but are also on the state's long-range plans for expansion at some point.
As long as an advocacy group is assertive and respectful of others' goals, that's when it's most effective,IMHO