Build Back Better: MA’s Share of (Hoped for) Fed Bucks

F-Line to Dudley

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2010
Messages
8,871
Reaction score
7,561
Under Biden's Infrastructure proposal, AMTRAK would extend corridors "branching from Boston to Manchester and Concord, N.H. A new railroad service outlines a route that extends from Rockland, Maine, through Boston and Providence, to Roanoke or Norfolk, Virginia."

It also appears there would be a new service between Boston and Albany.
See:
http://media.amtrak.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Amtrak-Connects-Us-Fact-Sheet-for-Statement.pdf

Service between Jacksonville and Mobile would be discontinued. That is Rep. Gaetz's district.

:eek:

Discussed in greater depth here. Beware the optics presentation on Concord + Rockland in particular are not all what they seem by their inclusion on one map.
 
Under Biden's Infrastructure proposal, AMTRAK would extend corridors "branching from Boston to Manchester and Concord, N.H. A new railroad service outlines a route that extends from Rockland, Maine, through Boston and Providence, to Roanoke or Norfolk, Virginia."

It also appears there would be a new service between Boston and Albany.
See:
http://media.amtrak.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Amtrak-Connects-Us-Fact-Sheet-for-Statement.pdf

Service between Jacksonville and Mobile would be discontinued. That is Rep. Gaetz's district.

:eek:

The whole "Amtrak Moonshot" is half-assed until the letters N, S, R, L are included, in that order.
 
The whole "Amtrak Moonshot" is half-assed until the letters N, S, R, L are included, in that order.

Uhhh...and who is going to step in line for Moonshot Bucks in Massholia right now? Baker the transactional austerian who's expended more transportation energy over the last 2 years slipping whoopie-cushions into his state's own intercity transit studies to make them all self-fulfilling no-build prophecies???

I said it in the other thread: this isn't a "Federal Daddy" issue. If the bucks get hustled, they'll be distributed to states that join the Coalition of the Willing. If a bunch of Legislative nihilists (Ohio, looking your direction) want to point the gun straight at their own foot and blow out a part of the map...that's on them. If the zero attention-span shitshow that is the NH House wants to squabble its way out of taking any stance whatsoever...that's on them too. More fun bux for the Virginias of the country who have their act together and are ready to make hay. The PRIAA legislation re-stacked the deck in favor of the states on implementation planning, and that's the structure we're living under until some election far from now masses up Congressional majorities big enough to actually do the committee work amending PRIAA. Fed largesse was always going to contour with who the Coalition of the Willing is. It's not straight-line party line where every GOP nihilist in the Senate reflexively backing the filibuster against it can expect to not have to deal with significant blowback from their own state-level Party, because state legislative stances under the "Home" team parse this way more heterogeneously than McConnell's whip count. There will be Red states willing to play ball locally where their leadership-whipped Congresscritters will not. But it's also absolutely true that the Feds cannot expect to be in the driver's seat at the individual corridor level if individual states don't want to play ball. Flip a coin for best odds on whether NH will play ball, because if there's a squirrel outside the window the People's Legislature is fair game to spazz completely out. And be outright pessimistic about Ohio not knowing what's good for itself.


What's very clear is this impending legislation was the driving force behind the unprecedented rebuke Baker just got from his entire Congressional delegation over the T service cuts. And the fact that the delegation's most fiscally conservative and Baker-friendliest member (Lynch) was the one annointed mouthpiece for them all to lob the not-so-veiled threats of retaliation at him if he didn't walk back the cuts to meet the spirit of the fed funding relief. It's mortal sin to the 11 of them if we get lapped by some willing-er Coalition of the Willing state on the Build Back pork awards because Baker refuses to govern in good faith. He just got a very loud shot across the bow to start behaving more like a team player or else.


State's NSRL portfolio is too big an incoherent mess right now to be fair-game for Build Back bux, anyway. That's quite clearly going to be the stuff of follow-on funding pulses like the Progressive wing of the House is calling for now rather than a sales pitch they could feasibly load up for this year and a one-and-done bill. They have too many more years of hard work to put into the Service Development side of the NSRL plan (if we even had an Admin willing to go to that effort) before there's a blueprint in-hand that's ready for national lobbying. Even at somewhat urgent pacing no one expects that effort to be doable at any less than 1 decade's time given how unfleshed some very major aspects of NSRL still are, and for jury still being out on whether they'll commit to priming the NSRL pump with no-excuses full Rail Vision enacting of Regional Rail. Build Back, on the other hand, would be a perfectly good opportunity to re-launch East-West Rail as "NNEIRI Redux" and try to clean up the utter incoherence of it by making the last two studies' conclusions agree with each other instead of dividing-and-conquering through willful direct contradiction. That kind of refactoring is the stuff that can be done quickly enough for this bill if internal forces were so willing. And you could say Baker just got read the riot act to prepare to Go Big for exactly such a pivot.
 
Last edited:
Uhhh...and who is going to step in line for Moonshot Bucks in Massholia right now? Baker the transactional austerian who's expended more transportation energy over the last 2 years slipping whoopie-cushions into his state's own intercity transit studies to make them all self-fulfilling no-build prophecies???

I said it in the other thread: this isn't a "Federal Daddy" issue. If the bucks get hustled, they'll be distributed to states that join the Coalition of the Willing. If a bunch of Legislative nihilists (Ohio, looking your direction) want to point the gun straight at their own foot and blow out a part of the map...that's on them. If the zero attention-span shitshow that is the NH House wants to squabble its way out of taking any stance whatsoever...that's on them too. More fun bux for the Virginias of the country who have their act together and are ready to make hay. The PRIAA legislation re-stacked the deck in favor of the states on implementation planning, and that's the structure we're living under until some election far from now masses up Congressional majorities big enough to actually do the committee work amending PRIAA. Fed largesse was always going to contour with who the Coalition of the Willing is. It's not straight-line party line where every GOP nihilist in the Senate reflexively backing the filibuster against it can expect to not have to deal with significant blowback from their own state-level Party, because state legislative stances under the "Home" team parse this way more heterogeneously than McConnell's whip count. There will be Red states willing to play ball locally where their leadership-whipped Congresscritters will not. But it's also absolutely true that the Feds cannot expect to be in the driver's seat at the individual corridor level if individual states don't want to play ball. Flip a coin for best odds on whether NH will play ball, because if there's a squirrel outside the window the People's Legislature is fair game to spazz completely out. And be outright pessimistic about Ohio not knowing what's good for itself.


What's very clear is this impending legislation was the driving force behind the unprecedented rebuke Baker just got from his entire Congressional delegation over the T service cuts. And the fact that the delegation's most fiscally conservative and Baker-friendliest member (Lynch) was the one annointed mouthpiece for them all to lob the not-so-veiled threats of retaliation at him if he didn't walk back the cuts to meet the spirit of the fed funding relief. It's mortal sin to the 11 of them if we get lapped by some willing-er Coalition of the Willing state on the Build Back pork awards because Baker refuses to govern in good faith. He just got a very loud shot across the bow to start behaving more like a team player or else.


State's NSRL portfolio is too big an incoherent mess right now to be fair-game for Build Back bux, anyway. That's quite clearly going to be the stuff of follow-on funding pulses like the Progressive wing of the House is calling for now rather than a sales pitch they could feasibly load up for this year and a one-and-done bill. They have too many more years of hard work to put into the Service Development side of the NSRL plan (if we even had an Admin willing to go to that effort) before there's a blueprint in-hand that's ready for national lobbying. Even at somewhat urgent pacing no one expects that effort to be doable at any less than 1 decade's time given how unfleshed some very major aspects of NSRL still are, and for jury still being out on whether they'll commit to priming the NSRL pump with no-excuses full Rail Vision enacting of Regional Rail. Build Back, on the other hand, would be a perfectly good opportunity to re-launch East-West Rail as "NNEIRI Redux" and try to clean up the utter incoherence of it by making the last two studies' conclusions agree with each other instead of dividing-and-conquering through willful direct contradiction. That kind of refactoring is the stuff that can be done quickly enough for this bill if internal forces were so willing. And you could say Baker just got read the riot act to prepare to Go Big for exactly such a pivot.

Can you tell me again how many passengers per day would the Commonwealth benefit from the "NNEIRI Redux"?
 
Can you tell me again how many passengers per day would the Commonwealth benefit from the "NNEIRI Redux"?

No...we are not having that utter s***show of an circular argument again. Leave that dead in the last thread where freak flags last flew, please.

You said. . .
The whole "Amtrak Moonshot" is half-assed until the letters N, S, R, L are included, in that order.

. . .like it was a funding pitch they could crank out tomorrow. No it isn't...not even close. The state doesn't even agree amongst itself WTF North-South Rail Link is supposed to do for themselves yet because they're too afraid to couple it to Regional Rail-ification of all Purple Line service levels as implementation prereq. The Governor's people are expending more energy self-trolling their own studies, and the advocates (at least the more politically-loaded ones) are at war with each other over "ONE-MILE GAP" vs. "It's the frequencies, stupid" to mutual exclusivity. The official sales pitch right this moment is a fucking mess. B.B.B. bill is being loaded up for a one-time splash. NSRL would fare terribly in the funding sweepstakes vs. any near- shovel-ready projects or projects with locked-down Service Plan documentation given its currently very self-confused state of progress.

I offered up an East-West cleanup as an *example* of something they could dust off quick enough to get in on the bang-bang nature of these funding sweepstakes. It's not the only such example. There are many others. But there's enormously more to it than who can shout the "NSRL or GTFO!" the instant-gratification hardest. It is one thing if this is the first salvo to priming the pump for a series of fed infrastructure spending binges...but we're not there yet. B.B.B. is anything but a sure thing even as a one-shot deal. So the states jockeying are plying their shovel-readier projects. You can't make NSRL shovel-ready in time for this. It doesn't have any service plan. Its waters have been muddied-as-f*** by the state's incoherent recent Alternatives Analysis. We haven't even narrowed down which Purple Lines are going to get a seat at the table. The notion that sheer overbearing will can catapult ourselves through hashing out all of this project's bread-and-butter details in short enough 4D time to cash in on the sweepstakes is a near-delusional misread.

Pick something else for this round. It's not going to be that one no matter how righteously loud someone screams for it.
 
The question of how many passengers the NNEIRI is central to the value proposition. Objective data. How many passengers per day would this put on a choo-choo? It doesn't have to be a fancy four paragraph pretzel.

Asked/answered in between episodic poo-flinging and generally covered to death in that other thread. Look it up there instead of re-litigating here.

And, yes, I agree with you that the pol-luddites have completely muddied the waters for the NSRL. My point is that everything is half-assed until the man-made obstacles can be overcome. If it could ever get done it will positively affect tens of thousands of passengers in both cars and trains per day (not to mention, the transormative effect it would have on some towns/cities north of Boston like Portsmouth, NH and Portland, ME. having direct links to NYC, Philly,and DC.
I don't disagree. But "Can/Can't Do" operates as a function of time. We haven't exactly been putting nose to the grindstone for the last decade advancing that megaproject to Implementation Plan. The last 18 months in particular have been a cripple fight of self-obfuscation and faction-splitting amongst political advocates...some of them (*evil-eyes* in Moulton's direction) seemingly having no skin-deeper interest in it than cudgel for torpedoing not-very-related SSX.

Charlie can't wake up tomorrow, claim to have been chastened by visits from 3 ghosts, and simply turn on a dime and shout "FAST-TRACK IT!" from the church tower as if that's going to cut it. The billion-dollar price tag projects its competing with like Gateway are so cosmically more fleshed-out it defies comparison. The eight- and nine-figure projects with ready-serve service plans or even outright shovel-readiness are stacked like cordwood. We've yet to take the marbles out of our mouth to even point-blank within 4 touchdowns a projected TPH through that thing much less which corridors of Eastern MA will get to participate in it. You can't cover that much service development ground before the '22 midterms when this political capital needs to be allotted. *Maybe* if we acted with five-alarm urgency we can flesh out a Fed funding-qualified package for NSRL by some follow-on dump in Biden's second term...if there is one. But it's nigh impossible to pivot right this second.

The projects that are being offered up here are ones with years if not decades of granular planning behind them. Concord: full-build service plan vetted over a decade (again...inclusion on an Amtrak-sourced map doesn't mean it's necessarily going to fly an Amtrak flag by fiat). NH could for-real advance that tomorrow just like they could've 5 years ago if so inclined. Scranton: 15+ years of development embedded inside NJT's Lackawanna Cutoff restoration plan. Reading and Allentown: for chrissakes studied ever since the day SEPTA pulled the plug on its diesel routes. Even Rockland, cart-before-horse misguided as it is, has full broken-out service dev plans dating to 2015. Gateway: as terrifying a horror showcase of NYC politics as it is, still nose-to-grindstone at refining every last detail. CAHSR: total self-parody at this point for worst-practicing, but not for lack of granular detail!

NSRL doesn't compare. East-West (AGAIN: *example* not mandate): two dueling complete studies that merely need to be synthesized to agree without mutual contradiction. You can do that in a matter of months because the datasets are complete and dueling variables spelled out. Rail Vision bootstraps catering to NEC capacity enhancement: you can do that in months because the wishlist has been on-file T vs. Amtrak for over a decade. SSX, if we could get over our petty infighting?: sure, the scope & details are fully fleshed out. Cape Cod: so well-studied for so long you can probably spin up that one quick synthesizing past sources and leaning on the South Coast Phase I work angle. And on and on with other cases from the priority pile.

We got multiples cards to play in multiple combinations. But all of them already have clear identities on what they want to be, which is why they're fodder for a quick-strike sweepstakes like this. NSRL doesn't yet know what it wants to be; it's self-grappling with too many existential questions yet undecided/unquantified about where it wants to lean. Absolutely that's on us and the failings of our leaders that it's still stuck in that muddled state...but what's the solution to that? Can't very well start the grad thesis all your student loan debt is riding on the night before the due date and expect presentable results. That's where NSRL's fleshing-out sits right now. Some other time if we work at it honestly and diligently, but not this round.
 
Asked/answered in between episodic poo-flinging and generally covered to death in that other thread. Look it up there instead of re-litigating here.


I don't disagree. But "Can/Can't Do" operates as a function of time. We haven't exactly been putting nose to the grindstone for the last decade advancing that megaproject to Implementation Plan.............


Not blaming the infrastructure bill for being half-assed because of the state level feet dragging. The bill is half-assed, not because of Biden-Buttigieig, etc. but because of Baker and the other Massachusetts versions of Louis DeJoy. I didn't mean to insult the infrastructure bill. It is held back by others at the state level.

So what's your beef? These tens of billions of fed dollars are, indeed, half-assed because they will be going to puny passenger-affecting projects (like the NNEIRI family picnic project) instead of projects that would affect millions of people. Our political leaders have deep-sixed the big issues - - "Hey guys, let's go back to the moon instead of exploring the outer cosmos, it's "shovel-ready!"

Nobody is disputing the REASON why it is going to these low-hanging (but pretty dried up) fruit. There is universal agreement on that (even from the luddites like Baker, etc who don't seem to be in the least ashamed of what they're doing).

In a better world, these trillions in "infrastructure" largesse would be returning $2-3 on the dollar. Instead it will be spent on things bring back 50 cents on the dollar - - hopefully a dollar.

You seem to be arguing purely for the sake of arguing. No one is saying NSRL is shovel-ready or even NEAR shovel-ready. The goal is we get state leaders in the nearest of futures (2023) who can begin the important building-blocks process. The NEED for the NSRL is great.

American infrasture is HALF-ASSED because of bureaucrats with no vision who have been riding the brakes since the 1970's. That is all.
 
Last edited:
I have no idea anymore what you're even ranting about. You chucked out a post in response to the B.B.B. bill news saying more or less "NSRL or GTFO". I explained how it's not possible to time a pitch for that project with this bill sweepstakes given all the unfinished work on the pitch, suggested some example substitutes. You wanted to re-litigate a prior aB argument about that example (which was not the point). I expanded further on what makes up a ready-pitch B.B.B. funding candidate to generously expand the project candidate fodder. Now...whatever T.F. this rant is trying to pigeonhole. Righteous indignation about the bill itself when its very trajectory through Congress hasn't even started??? Some broad-strokes tantrum on American anti-exceptionalism??? I can't even tell anymore. It's a million miles from the original question of "Why can't Project X taking Y time to get its fastest pitch together fit inside a project selection timetable of Z < Y time".

I'm not participating in this incoherent screaming-past. I can't even parse what it's about anymore because your story keeps changing with every reply. So...you be you, OK.
 
I have no idea anymore what you're even ranting about. You chucked out a post in response to the B.B.B. bill news saying more or less "NSRL or GTFO". I explained how it's not possible to time a pitch for that project with this bill sweepstakes given all the unfinished work on the pitch, suggested some example substitutes. You wanted to re-litigate a prior aB argument about that example (which was not the point). I expanded further on what makes up a ready-pitch B.B.B. funding candidate to generously expand the project candidate fodder. Now...whatever T.F. this rant is trying to pigeonhole. Righteous indignation about the bill itself when its very trajectory through Congress hasn't even started??? Some broad-strokes tantrum on American anti-exceptionalism??? I can't even tell anymore. It's a million miles from the original question of "Why can't Project X taking Y time to get its fastest pitch together fit inside a project selection timetable of Z < Y time".

I'm not participating in this incoherent screaming-past. I can't even parse what it's about anymore because your story keeps changing with every reply. So...you be you, OK.


This is hilarious - - no one breathed the term "NNEIRI" until YOU exhumed it ('relitigated' as you would say) in post 172, after writing " I said it in the other thread: ......". .

Honestly, do you even read what you write?

The strange thing is that there is absolutely no argument. I clearly stated the bill isn't the source of the problem. But, evidently, you needed an argument. God bless.
 
Last edited:
So better question: what are the transit projects that we could reasonably expect under B.B.B.?
I think SSX has a good chance there if our pols would cut the infighting because scope-of-work is fully fleshed. Broad-based enough in userspace.

We don't know yet how much rapid transit projects are going to factor, so it's hard to peg priorities with the news drip thus far being intercity-exclusive. Whole different/broader ballgame if we could check off Red-Blue on this tab, for instance.
 
What transit projects are shovel-ready?
I don't think they need to be shovel-ready. The monies are spread over like 8 years in the bill, and many of the listed projects on the Amtrak map are well short of shovel-ready. I think you need stuff with well fleshed-out Purpose & Need, at/near a Preferred Alternative pick, and some mid-progress service development planning in order to fashion whole-enough pitch for the sweepstakes. But the AMTK projects map had a 2035 cutoff for service starts on all of the sampled projects, so some of them quite clearly won't be turning first shovels until late this decade.

So...Red-Blue, SSX, anything of that caliber where we pretty much know what their final form is going to look like: very likely fits. NSRL where we're still navel-gazing about broad existential stuff: no. Green-Transitway/SL III replacement or Urban Ring where the Major Investment studies haven't been touched in 15 years and need an update before getting pitched: probably not this time. South Coast Rail Phase II's sitting DEIR: *maybe* if we want to go bang-bang quick at appealing the Army Corp's environmental conclusions, because the documentation (bones of contention aside) is complete...but we'd have to clear up the question marks *STAT* to make it happen.

We're not going to have any problems whatsoever coming up with candidates for our fair share. It just isn't going to capture some ones that still don't know at a fundamental level what they want to be (like NSRL)...function of time isn't elastic enough for those.
 
What transit projects are shovel-ready?
I would say the BLX to Charles (Red-Blue Connector) is about as ready as any transit project. The BLX to Lynn is less ready due to the ambiguity about which route to take between Wonderland and Lynn. Extension of the Silver Line west from Chelsea to Sullivan could become ready once route options are resolved.
 
I would say the BLX to Charles (Red-Blue Connector) is about as ready as any transit project. The BLX to Lynn is less ready due to the ambiguity about which route to take between Wonderland and Lynn. Extension of the Silver Line west from Chelsea to Sullivan could become ready once route options are resolved.
What about OLX to Rossie?
 
GLX to Needham?
Package deal with OLX if you're severing Needham Line service rather than just +1'ing OL to Rozzie alongside it. Similar criteria: straight-line relationship to implementing the Rail Vision on the NEC, and plenty of former studies to lean. So even though the study datasets would have to be refreshed, we already have crystal-clear Purpose & Need and (shy of maybe a "Will-they/won't-they" with 1 of the proposed intermediates) a very well-defined picture of what the build would entail and what service levels it would run.


You can also backfill a lot of systemwide initiatives that don't fit neatly into any one project area. Like Purple Line level boarding...we could probably fill up a lockbox fund under the guises of "renovate XX many stations for accessibility + level-boarding interface before Year 202_" without knowing to the individual station level what the priority bucket list is in advance. That's enough fixed-cost accrual math that you can break it out place-nonspecific but financially stepped-out. Same for anything that has even a *hazy* dashed-line relationship with NEC performance/capacity improvements. Remember: the single-biggest intercity project for Massachusetts benefit of them all...doesn't reside in Massachusetts at all. It's Gateway NYC. That's the big enchilada that blows the lid off Amtrak NEC service levels to Boston. Gateway + a bunch of secondary window-dressing of couple $B's in bridge replacements mostly shoved Connecticut's way. Not $1 of it gets spent in MA, but it doubles our 2035 Acela + Regional service levels. So anything tangiental to accommodating NEC service increases you can pile onto that spigot like raising CR platforms for lower dwells (or...creatively argued: Needham Line rapid transit) will ride the wave.
 
Needham Line replacement (Orange + Green extensions), Red/Blue Connector, SSX, and RR (electrification, emus, high-level platforms, etc) would be a pretty big game-changing set of projects.
 

Back
Top