Railway Preservation News
https://www.rypn.org/forums/

Stimulus Funds to Napa Valley Wine Train Stir Controversy
https://www.rypn.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=28835		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Alexander D. Mitchell IV [ Tue Feb 02, 2010 3:08 pm ]
Post subject:  Stimulus Funds to Napa Valley Wine Train Stir Controversy
As a follow-up to the "Trolley Museum in Wichita" item below, I present the following news item, part of a list/litany of "pork" items being enumerated by Anndrew Breitbart's "Big Government" website at http://biggovernment.com/2010/02/01/pork-report-february-1-wine-and-dine-edition/

http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20100131/ARTICLES/100139956/1033

Quote:
And in response to criticism from Republican senators who view construction of a new bridge and tracks as a [$54 million] pork-laden boondoggle, train and Napa County officials say the work is actually a boost for Napa's flood protection efforts. And they've been scrambling for weeks to make their position known.


Which was followed by this item:

http://californiawatch.org/money-and-politics/federal-stimulus-program-pours-54-million-wine-train-project

whose website also gives us a "slide show" of the train's interior, sans snark:
http://californiawatch.org/money-and-politics/slideshow-inside-wine-train
Author:  Ed Kelley [ Tue Feb 02, 2010 5:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Stimulus Funds to Napa Valley Wine Train Stir Controversy
It should come as no surprise that Speaker Nancy and her husband independently own two vineyards: one in Napa, and one in St. Helena (for those who don't know, the two terminals of the Wine Train). I don't know about you, but something doesn't sound too kosher.

And you the best pork came from Boar's Head!
Author:  Randolph R. Ruiz [ Tue Feb 02, 2010 7:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Stimulus Funds to Napa Valley Wine Train Stir Controversy
I am not too sure I get this controversy. I am not so much interested in defending the Napa Valley Wine Train as reacting to the weirdness that comes up when people start yelling "pork!" Near as I can tell, this is no bridge to nowhere. There seems to be plenty fishy with the way the contract was awarded (due to a strange law that came from Ted Stevens), but the Army Corps of Engineers is working to widen the channel for the river due to persistent flooding problems. In the process, they are replacing a the railroad's (a common carrier) bridge because it is not long enough anymore and it is in the way. How is this different from the government replacing the National Capital Trolley Museum's buildings when they were in the way of a highway?

For those of you who keep saying this has something to do with Democratic politicians, last time I was at the NVWT depot, there was a big portrait of Ronald Reagan on display. The DeDomenicos do not impress me as Chardonnay sipping liberals.

I don't have a dog in this fight, I just don't get the outrage of the supposed undue benefit to the railroad. They have a bridge, it is fine, and it works. The government has a project that will benefit the city of Napa and it requires the destruction of that bridge. As a result, the government is going replace the bridge. So what?
Author:  Newriver400 [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 12:22 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Stimulus Funds to Napa Valley Wine Train Stir Controversy
As conservative as I am, I agree with Mr. Ruiz's position about replacing the Wine Train's bridge and whatever else is necessary for the CoE to complete their project. In this sense, it is protecting NVWT's inalienable right to property (or as Jefferson finally settled on, "the pursuit of happiness"). Now whether the overall flood control project has merit is a debatable point, and certainly Ted "Pork Barrel" Stevens' ANC no-bid provisions are detestable, but the issue at hand is not about the Wine Train at all as I see it. I am no fan of Pelosi (does it hurt when she blinks as tight as her face is stretched or does the botox remove the feeling?), but I think this may be simply a case of bringing home the bacon by the local representative that could have had some help from the proximity to the speaker and her assets.

Just my 2 cents...

Mike
Author:  KevinKuzma [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 12:59 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Stimulus Funds to Napa Valley Wine Train Stir Controversy
This was covered pretty well on another board:

http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/r ... ?1,2115885
Author:  RCD [ Wed Feb 03, 2010 9:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Stimulus Funds to Napa Valley Wine Train Stir Controversy
Leave it to the usual suspects to to rant at the mouth and not know what the heck they are talking about.
Author:  superheater [ Thu Feb 04, 2010 1:03 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Stimulus Funds to Napa Valley Wine Train Stir Controversy
"A lot of the locals still hate it and every chance they get they look for a way to try to put it in a bad light to get rid of it."

Ahhhh..now I understand.

Can we be honest here? "Pork" is the mother's milk of retail politics and its a bipartisan game. There's a reason why big time contributors express their approval of candidate X over Y by giving the former a little more than latter. They are buying influence with BOTH. If you are dissatisfied with your waiter/waitress, you communicate that by giving an INADEQUATE tip, not a nonexistent one.

The cardinal rule of politics is "conspicuous benefits and hidden costs". Hence you have no idea that while bloviating about "working families" or some other amorphous group politicians routinely claim to represent; (and often when they themselves are completely unacquainted with actual work or family life) that new wrinkle in the tax code is raising just enough money according to the Congressional Budget Office to pay for a pet project.

It also explains giant novelty checks, silver groundbreaking shovels, enormous ribbon cutting scissors and the Obama insignia along the interstate. Put on a good show, ensure that the rubes will remember you. The feudal lord needs to reinforce the idea that the lord dipping into a giant pot of money is the source of prosperity. Most often in a specious attempt to claim economic validity, the pols claim their project is a "public good".

The funny thing is that there is actually a fixed definition for "public goods"

http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/PublicGoods.html

This doesn't meet the test of "public good" on a federal level. In a market based world, the aggrieved NIMBYS would form an association and quietly approach the NVWT with an offer. Of course, that's difficult because of the "hold out" problem (kind of what happened when Mexico realized it had four special six-axle locomotives with two digit road numbers) unless it was an extremely discrete offer. Also, its easier to spend OPM (other peoples money) if you have an opportunistic mercenary for a Congresscritter. That's a good bet, because its almost an occupational requirement for legislator and the occupation that most frequently becomes a legislator.

So said NIMBYS approach their Congresscritter about removing the thorn in their collective paw. Congresscritter then w**res his/her vote to get the requisite bribe approved by the other congresscritters and presto.

I guarantee you, some of these NIMBYS who might otherwise be completely opposed to their Congresscritter, will reward the expenditure of NATIONAL moneys for a specific LOCAL purpose with a bribe, er I mean contribution. Its a simple thing really-buying votes. THIS IS PORK.

Meanwhile, every drop complains it isn't part of the flood (of red ink) and we slip a little futher along the path to what deTocqueville referred to as "soft tyranny". I'll reserve my explanation about why exactly the stimulus was "shovel ready" (hint: content)
Author:  Newriver400 [ Thu Feb 04, 2010 10:29 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Stimulus Funds to Napa Valley Wine Train Stir Controversy
RCD wrote:
Leave it to the usual suspects to to rant at the mouth and not know what the heck they are talking about.


I saw a supposition that was a little off-base and very subjective and two others that were mere discussions about the fact that the issue has nothing to do with the wine train other than the fact that it owns and uses the track that the CoE wants to alter. No rants.

"Congresscritter" - That's GREAT!

Mike
Author:  superheater [ Thu Feb 04, 2010 2:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Stimulus Funds to Napa Valley Wine Train Stir Controversy
Thanks. Congresscritter conveys all the derision the fiscally irresponsible legislative autocrats so richly merit, but is so much easier to say than various monikers for the world's oldest profession one could use as a metsaphor in the company of the very young and very old.

I'd like to take credit for that neologism, alas I forgot who coined it!
Author:  robertmacdowell [ Thu Feb 04, 2010 3:01 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Stimulus Funds to Napa Valley Wine Train Stir Controversy
Ed Kelley wrote:
It should come as no surprise that Speaker Nancy and her husband independently own two vineyards: one in Napa, and one in St. Helena (for those who don't know, the two terminals of the Wine Train). I don't know about you, but something doesn't sound too kosher.

There are hundreds of vineyards in that corridor, few are near the wine train, Of those that are, most had signs out condemning the wine train. An Israeli train through Syria would be less hated.

And now I hear that a flood control project which relocates the wine train instead of violating the 4th Amendment by depriving it of its railroad line -- is "pork" FOR the wine train.

In the Simpsons, Homer went to buy a bottle of milk but found he was buying "Malk", promised to be just as good.

I think here, we're dealing with "fects" :)
Author:  Randy Hees [ Thu Feb 04, 2010 10:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Moderator's warning
I have deleted a post in this discussion, which had gone beyond discussion to an attack and political position statement.

This is clearly a politically sensitive subject, made more so by media coverage...

Let's be careful out there

Your always friendly moderator
Randy
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/