Posted on 07/03/2006 5:37:03 AM PDT by A. Pole
50 years ago President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed into law the 1956 National Federal-Aid Highway Act and since 1990 referred to as the Dwight D. Eisenhower System of Interstate and Defense Highways. He authorized the connectivity of 41, 000 miles of high quality highways across the United States. It would be financed by a combination of the Highway Trust Fund, federally imposed user fees on motor fuels and state user fees.
Eisenhower was prompted to persuade the nation’s people to build the interstate highway system, as a matter of national security. Although not at war at the time, he believed it was imperative the interstate be designed for mass evacuation of cities in the event of a nuclear attack, in the era of the Cold War. The Act dictated that one out of every five miles must be straight, in order to use as airstrips in times of war or other catastrophic emergencies. And to that end, the success of national defense was dependent upon the navigability of large numbers of military personnel and their equipment during such a crisis. And even today, 75% of the interstate highway system represents the Strategic Highway Corridor Network (STAHNET) utilized by the U.S. military.
And while in 1956 there was the fear of nuclear threat from the then Soviet Union, today’s national security, often referred to as homeland security, remains similarly threatened in an era where the threat of terrorism looms. Yet, at such time that it would appear imperative that U.S. strategic infrastructure such as the interstate highway system remain under American control, it is but one more public asset available for sale under the guise of Public-Private Partnerships. Unlike domestic privatization, however, states throughout the country are negotiating contracts solely with foreign corporations and conglomerates, primarily in Europe, Australia and Asia, in order to finance the maintenance, modernizing and extension of U.S. interstates.
As funding from federal gas taxes and state user fees have fallen behind the inflated costs associated with road construction and maintenance, more and more state governors and lawmakers no longer see the operation of roads solely as a public responsibility. However, the reason states initially took over handling roads at the beginning of the 19th century was because many roads, bridges and canals had previously fallen to bankruptcy in the hands of private owners.
According to the Secretary of the Department of Transportation, Norman Mineta, “We are like a poker game. We are inviting people to the table and saying, ‘Bring money when you come.’” And Mineta believes, “A big part of the answer is to involve the private sector more fully – not just as a contractor or vendor, not merely as a financier, but as a partner in the funding, management and expansion of our transportation infrastructure.” Yet when those partners are exclusively foreign entities, a whole new dimension is added to the management of the U.S. interstate highway system. It is unprecedented.
The deal which started a flurry of more than 18 proposed foreign financed interstate highway projects across the nation over the past year in amounts of over $25 billion was in Chicago, IL in December 2004. Chicago Mayor Richard Daley proposed an agreement to lease the Chicago Skyway for $1.83 billion dollars to Cintra-Macquarie Consortium, a Spanish-Australian conglomerate, doing business as State Mobility Partners in the U.S. The deal, finalized in January 2005, gave Cintra-Maquarie a 99-year lease for which it is responsible for the maintenance and structural quality of the 8-mile elevated structure.
In exchange for its upfront payment, Cintra-Macquarie will collect and keep all money from tolls from the Skyway and will be able to raise tolls as incorporated under the terms of the agreement. The company is modernizing toll collection with an electronic transponder system. Until the technology is fully operable, toll collectors have been newly but temporarily recruited. But instead of earning an average hourly wage of $20.00 as their predecessors did, they are paid a $10.00 to $12.00 hourly wage. And as contracted, the Skyway offers the buyer an asset without having to deal with improvements or debt.
Following the situation in Chicago, Indiana Governor and former Office of Management and Budget Director for President Bush in his first term, Mitch Daniels, explored a similar arrangement for Indiana’s $2.8 billion shortfall in its transportation budget over the next ten years. Daniels was able to get his highly contested proposal through the state legislature as well as the courts where it was challenged by a citizen advocacy organization.
A bid was accepted by the state of Indiana in the amount of $3.8 billion and an agreement was arrived at with Cintra-Macquarie, the same operator of the Chicago Skyway. The lease agreement will provide for the operation and maintenance of the 157-mile Indiana Toll Road, a part of the interstate highway system, for a period of 75 years. The deal is expected to close on June 30, 2006. The Indiana Toll Road will also have an upgraded electronic toll system installed, eventually ending the need for toll workers.
Here are just a few of the many other projects either approved or proposed across the country. In Virginia, the rights to manage, operate and maintain the Pocahontas Parkway, an 8.8-mile toll road outside of Richmond, were bought for $611 million by the Transburban Group, also an Australian entity in its first foray into U.S. road management. A lawmaker in New Jersey has proposed selling a 49% interest in the New Jersey Turnpike and Garden State Parkway to a private investor.
In August 2005, the same Macquarie Infrastructure Group took over operations of the Dulles Greenway Toll Road which operates between suburban Virginia and Washington, D.C., for the amount of $533 million. And the anticipated widening and extension of the Trans-Texas Corridor which runs 316 miles and parallel to I-35 in Texas, is slated to be built by Cintra, the Spanish company, and Zachry Construction, out of San Antonio, TX, who plan to invest $7.2 billion.
But windfall upfront payments while attractive to states to reinvest in other transportation projects, have their limitations and pitfalls too. States will need to learn how to enforce and write explicit contracts. And the proceeds from the sale or lease of roads should be earmarked for specific projects. Non-compete clauses are often inserted in such contracts such as inducing lower speed limits on parallel free roads to drive traffic to the toll road. Others fear that operators will only maintain those parts of the route which remain profitable.
Other issues which are arising more often after the fact is the increasing worry that the public will have less and less input over the use of its public assets. Such is the case in Colorado and California where the enforcement of maintenance matters have already become problematic. Immediate increases in tolls and applied on a perennial basis, with higher tolls applied at rush hours have not sat well with commuters.
However, questions will continue to arise in a process still in its in infancy. Yet states must have the ability to learn from mistakes made in doing business in this brand new way. Will a private firm maintain the roadways as well as the U.S. government? Will a foreign corporation care about the needs of the American people? And will selling off public assets to pay debts now be regrettable down the road? One would think that Eisenhower would have thought so.
Copyright 2006 Diane M. Grassi
contact: dgrassi@cox.net
So, there is a way to "fix" (actually more accurately termed, reconstruct) a crowded freeway (by which I assume that you mean a limited access, divided highway - note that the Ohio and PA TPs have been "fixed" during the last few years and they are not freeways and can be quite crowded at least at some points on some days). I'm beginning to think you need to get out more.
One can also cut off subsidized water (think LA) or zone for less density so people just can't be so crowded together like a bunch of Rats.
That wasn't what I meant by "fix." I meant "fix" in the sense that the traffic congestion is "fixed." There's simply no way to address traffic congestion without providing a financial disincentive for people to travel during peak periods -- which is exactly how electric and gas companies address problems related to excess usage of power during peak periods.
There are plenty of places where there was traffic congestion prior to building the interstates that have been successfully relieved by an interstate built in the 1960's. The congestion is still gone 40 years later while the number of lanes hasen't been increased. Think of Iowa, North and South Dakota, Montana, Nebraska. Especially river crossings.
Montana works great.
It's simply the nature of how things work. It's a principle in economics called "The Tragedy of the Commons."
Haven't you ever wondered why littering along a highway warrents a special statute in most states? It's because many people who wouldn't even think of dropping a single cigarette butt in their own back yard think nothing of littering in a place that "nobody" (or "everybody") owns.
Montana works great because its population and employment have been stable or declining for years. The highway system was over-designed in the first place (since it was financed primarily by taxpayers in other states), and with very little change in population it still works just fine.
How is cutting off subsidized water any different than cutting off subsidized roads?
$3.00 per axle
And here I was led to believe that all that excess capacity would be soaked up in no time flat.
It is the UN who is running the whole North America Union stuff.
There are many illegal immigrants from Mexico, but there are also many legal ones, too. Furthermore, except for the waves of immigration, Mexico is practically as much of an ally of the United States as Canada (which could be not much or a lot, depending on your opinion).
The country is Mexico, just as this country is the United States and another neighbor country is Canada.
There's no point in you being needlessly rude and offensive.
How much did you say it costs to cross the Mackinac Bridge?
Although it could be that you have another reason for lowercasing the country, but the most logical one is that you intended to be rude. if that was not the case, then sorry for comment 155.
How can you just give up and say "sigh?" I guess there's enough rebel in me to want to fight for America. My family has buried too many who fought in past wars, and I'm just not ready to let them have died in vain.
We've fought wars before, but never against our own government. Domestic enemies are going to take control if we don't stop them. If they get total control, we will kiss our Internet news groups good bye because they are a threat to them. McCain/Feingold have already proved how easy that will be. Right now, it isn't so bad, but there's coming a day, when they're going to want everything we have. They've already gone after our homes (Imminent Domain). THAT was a gift from the USSC! When there is tyranny in Congress, the White House and the USSC, we are in serious trouble.
It's time that America's Patriots gather to formulate a plan. Let them know we're aware of what they're doing and we're not going to take it any more. We could probably get the Minutemen, the NRA, GOA, and probably many other groups would join them. I would think individual Americans would come out in mass. IF we lose it now, it's over. They would love it if we would all just sigh and give up. We've just got to cowboy up and kick their a$$es! Our Founders whipped another country for our independence! We all need to think about that tomorrow.
Bush is clearly running a Going-Out-Of-Business sale.
His prices are INSANE!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.