http://ift.tt/1y5H3gT
The Washington Post has a very interesting article on the failure of an Oregon company named United Streetcar, which builds streetcars ... well, has built a grand total of 18 streetcars, and will build more if it can find any customers.
The article describes the Obama administration's promotion of the company, from a 2009 photo-op by Ray LaHood (you remember, the transportation secretary who acknowledged "I don’t think they picked me because they thought I’d be that great a transportation person") to "a glowing Department of Transportation-produced marketing video" posted on the White House website in 2011.
The department was happy to fund streetcar projects as well as other transit projects ("with $48 billion in transportation projects as part of the economic stimulus, 'we didn’t have to pick and choose,' LaHood said."). "Buy America" clauses limited the potential sources, and if foreign companies bid and made a commitment to build in the US, the administration, in at least one case, leaned on purchasers to pick United Streetcar anyway ("District officials took the unusual step of simply throwing out the Czech firm’s higher-scoring bid. 'The wrong folks kept winning,' said D.C. Council member Tommy Wells (D-Ward 6), adding that federal officials were 'very clear. They wanted Oregon to get the award.'").
LaHood also modified existing rules on the funding of transit projects through program called New Starts. I'm not sure I have a very clear idea of what the changes entailed based on limited Googling, but I think I have the gist of it. Apparently the Bush administration spoilsports insisted that projects meet some reasonable cost-effectiveness criteria based on what transportation services would be provided, so streetcars (which cost more per rider than buses at no speed advantage) tended not to win out. (United Streetcar's first project, in Portland, received a Congressional earmark and so did not have to abide by those rules, as far as I can tell.) Under the Obama administration rules, though, transit agencies could pad the benefits of their projects by assuming that streetcars have a unique ability to drive development yada yada yada multiplier effect yada yada yada tens of billions of dollars in benefits for streetcars, at least, what a steal!
Even so, the company has only won three contracts in its history, was late in delivering to all three, and has no new orders.
The Washington Post has a very interesting article on the failure of an Oregon company named United Streetcar, which builds streetcars ... well, has built a grand total of 18 streetcars, and will build more if it can find any customers.
The article describes the Obama administration's promotion of the company, from a 2009 photo-op by Ray LaHood (you remember, the transportation secretary who acknowledged "I don’t think they picked me because they thought I’d be that great a transportation person") to "a glowing Department of Transportation-produced marketing video" posted on the White House website in 2011.
The department was happy to fund streetcar projects as well as other transit projects ("with $48 billion in transportation projects as part of the economic stimulus, 'we didn’t have to pick and choose,' LaHood said."). "Buy America" clauses limited the potential sources, and if foreign companies bid and made a commitment to build in the US, the administration, in at least one case, leaned on purchasers to pick United Streetcar anyway ("District officials took the unusual step of simply throwing out the Czech firm’s higher-scoring bid. 'The wrong folks kept winning,' said D.C. Council member Tommy Wells (D-Ward 6), adding that federal officials were 'very clear. They wanted Oregon to get the award.'").
LaHood also modified existing rules on the funding of transit projects through program called New Starts. I'm not sure I have a very clear idea of what the changes entailed based on limited Googling, but I think I have the gist of it. Apparently the Bush administration spoilsports insisted that projects meet some reasonable cost-effectiveness criteria based on what transportation services would be provided, so streetcars (which cost more per rider than buses at no speed advantage) tended not to win out. (United Streetcar's first project, in Portland, received a Congressional earmark and so did not have to abide by those rules, as far as I can tell.) Under the Obama administration rules, though, transit agencies could pad the benefits of their projects by assuming that streetcars have a unique ability to drive development yada yada yada multiplier effect yada yada yada tens of billions of dollars in benefits for streetcars, at least, what a steal!
Even so, the company has only won three contracts in its history, was late in delivering to all three, and has no new orders.
U.S. effort to help build homegrown streetcar manufacturer falls short
0 commentaires:
Enregistrer un commentaire