That's last year's Appropriations Committee -- still has Ted Stevens and Larry Craig on it. Who are the new members?

Here's a list of senators on the committee, in case anyone wants to place a friendly constituent call.

That list is a bit out of date. The GOP members include 4 former senators: Allard, Stevens, Domenici and Craig. (those pictures are woefully out of date as well - when was the last time Specter had that much hair let-alone have it black?)

Does anyone know if there are any new Democratic members on the committee?

Repairing current infrastructure is a losing proposition as long as traffic increases at 67% over the next decade. If you can, read the latest issue of the Washington Monthly. In his article "Back on Tracks," Phillip Longman makes a compelling argument for spending much more money on freight railway infrastructure.

Long-haul trucks, out of proportion to their numbers, are responsible for infrastructure degradation, traffic deaths, and traffic congestion. Virginia DOT estimates that $2B invested in Norfolk Southern infrastructure will eliminate 20% of current I-81 truck traffic. A ten to twelve year investment of $8B will remove 30% of future truck traffic off I-81. Compare this to the $11B it takes to widen I-81.

$250B-$500B invested in electrified rail infrastructure would get 85% of long-haul trucks off the road, reduce greenhouse emissions by 38%, and grow the economy by 13%. It's win-win for all. Truck companies want this, drivers could sleep while accompanying their containers on rail, car drivers will rejoice, highway and bridge damage would be minimized, maintenance costs would be reduced -- all because steel on steel is far more efficient by orders of magnitude than rubber on concrete -- and electricity is far kinder to the environment than diesel.

Not just rail but light rail and other forms of mass transit. I use to live in Cleveland and used their transit system nearly all the time. There was nearly no place I could not get to on the Rapid and/or buss. And compared to having to drive, it was much easier. Not having to worry about parking, rush hour traffic and not a crazy making. Especially in the winter.

If you see the car...kill the car.

C

Mass transit is the only smart way to go, and this is the time, if there ever was one, for a paradigm shift in thinking about what transportation should look like in the future. What an opportunity! But keep in mind the adjustments that would need to be made eventually to accommodate mass transit. This isn't just about highway transportation versus mass transit, it's more about autos and anything autos need, such as ....highways, oil, repairs, etc. This is the pivotal point between the old paradigm and the new one. The manufacturing base in this country is down drastically due to outsourcing, and car manufacturing is one of the big ones that is left standing so far, employing a good many people. People who have mass transit options available don't own as many cars, so car sales would likely decrease. We have far too many car manufacturers in this country as it is, and now the South is in a battle with the North on the bailout of the Big 3. And I don't imagine that oil companies are too thrilled with the discussion of new mass transit systems being built. Congress may not be saying any of this publicly, but you can bet that it's what they're thinking.

CALL YOUR SENATOR! CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN! BITCH A BLUE STREAK! NOW IS THE TIME FOR MASS TRANSIT IN AMERICA!

This goes back to the days when they tore out all the spur lines around the country, and started hauling all the grain and goods on the highways by diesel truck.

Can't imagine what special interest group might benefit from such a short-sighted policy... the gas and oil lobby, maybe?

One dayt, when we have the opportunity available, we will look back on that event as one of the bits of evidence that there were (are)some greedy billionaires managing our lawmakers.

Obviously, they are still pulling someone's strings.

Sent the letter below -- yours to use as-is or edited. (Thanks for the great info and links!)

Dear Senator ...,

Mass transit and freight rail are not receiving an adequate share of the funding in the economic stimulus bill currently being debated in the Senate. In this time of economic hardship and environmental crisis, this is a critical omission.

A 2007 paper by the Institute for Policy Studies (http://www.ips-dc.org/reports/071001-jobcreation.pdf) shows that government investment in mass transit produces more jobs per dollar than defense, tax cuts, health care, or home construction. Investment in freight rail infrastructure could considerably decrease congestion and greenhouse emissions produced by long-haul trucks.

As a constituent, grateful for your past leadership on the environment and mass transit, I look to you for leadership on this issue.

Kind Regards, etc.

Speaking as a long-time transit activist, there is a silver lining here. A very large number of shovel-ready transit projects in the pipeline for Federal dollars are literally "bridges-to-nowhere" white elephant projects. FTA cost-effectiveness guidelines in recent years have been completely thrown out, replaced by Congressional earmarks (with Madame Speaker being the primary culprit).

The danger just isn't wasted capital expenditures, but long-term disinvestment in local bus systems, since rail projects (and these are primarily rail projects we are talking about) that end up being underutilized require exorbitant ridership subsidies (which has to be paid by the local operator).

I'll let other riders report on their own metro areas, but in mine (SF Bay Area), any infrastructure stimulus would get thrown into giant Big Dig sink holes; i.e.: San Francisco Central Subway project, San Jose BART extension, and various airport PeopleMover(tm) systems. None of these projects serve a real purpose (beyond taxpayer gift to construction mafia) which couldn't be solved through more cost-effective solutions that don't involve digging giant holes in the ground.