"New Deal Jitterbug Economics" II; Return O' The Luddites

[Mr. Shaman]

Once, again, those genetic-aberrations (of The Founding Fathers) abhor Change.

This time, it's that, there new ironhorse!!! ​

Round One - Weenies Arise​

"By the late 1930s, the pressure for construction of transcontinental superhighways was building. It even reached the White House, where President Franklin D. Roosevelt repeatedly expressed interest in construction of a network of toll superhighways as a way of providing more jobs for people out of work. Congress, too, decided to explore the concept. The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1938 directed the chief of the Bureau of Public Roads (BPR) to study the feasibility of a six route toll network. The resultant two-part report, Toll Roads and Free Roads, was based on the statewide highway planning surveys and analysis.

On April 27, 1939, Roosevelt transmitted the report to Congress. He recommended that Congress consider action on:

[A] special system of direct interregional highways, with all necessary connections through and around cities, designed to meet the requirements of the national defense and the needs of a growing peacetime traffic of longer range.

The president's political opponents considered the "master plan" to be "another ascent into the stratosphere of New Deal jitterbug economics," as one critic put it.

With America on the verge of joining the war under way in Europe, the time for a massive highway program had not arrived. However, the president was already thinking about the post-war period. He feared resumption of the Depression if American soldiers returned from the war and were unable to find jobs. A major highway program could be part of the answer.

As consideration of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1944 began, the highway community was divided. Rival apportionment formulas divided the States. Urban interests battled rural interests for priority. And States sought increased authority from the Federal government. The result of these disagreements was an inability to agree on the major changes needed in the post-war era to address accumulated highway needs.

Construction of the interstate system moved slowly. Many States did not wish to divert Federal-aid funds from local needs. Others complained that the standards were too high. Some of the heavily populated States, finding that Federal-aid funding was so small in comparison with need, decided to authorize construction of toll roads in the interstate corridors. Also, by July 1950, the United States was again at war, this time in Korea, and the focus of the highway program shifted from civilian to military needs.

The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1952 authorized $25 million for the interstate system on a 50-50 matching basis. These were the first funds authorized specifically for interstate construction. However, it was a token amount, reflecting the continuing disagreements within the highway community rather than the national importance of the system."

Proposal for an Interregional Highway System
1930s​

****​

Round Two - Weenies Arise; II​

"The Obama administration will rebid nearly $2.4 billion in high-speed rail grants recently rejected by Florida, one of three states to conclude "bullet train" projects are too expensive in a tough economy.

California and several Northeastern states have expressed interest in the money, much of which came from $8 billion in rail grants from the 2009 U.S. economic stimulus package.

"States across the country have been banging down our door for the opportunity to receive additional high-speed rail dollars," Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said on Friday in announcing his agency would rebid the funds initially awarded to Florida but declined by Governor Rick Scott.

A regional rail authority in Florida not affiliated with the state government is also interested in applying for the funds, according to Florida U.S. Senator Bill Nelson.

Florida had received a small fraction of the money for preliminary work on a proposed east-west line linking Orlando and Tampa.

Wisconsin and Ohio have also declined high-speed rail funds, and New Jersey separately rejected billions in federal funds for a new rail tunnel to New York City.

Florida and the other states said potential cost overruns made the projects unaffordable.

Introducing high-speed trains like those found in Europe and Asia to the United States is President Barack Obama's signature transportation priority. He has proposed to spend $53 billion over six years to further existing projects and launch new ones.

However, leading Republicans in Congress, especially in the House of Representatives, doubt the potential of high-speed rail and are wary of the massive capital investment in an era marked by budget shortfalls for existing priorities.

Stephen Gardner, Amtrak's vice president for policy and development, told a congressional hearing on Friday that high-speed rail will be expensive, take years to build and profit$ are not assured.

John Mica, a Florida Republican who has influence over rail development as chairman of the House Transportation Committee, believes building high-speed service in the heavily traveled Northeast would be worthwhile.

Mica is a strong proponent of private investment, which Gardner said was not "the silver bullet" for success that some believe.

"Not surprisingly, potential private sector participants in high-speed rail service have emphasized that significant public funding is an essential prerequisite" to their involvement, Gardner said.

LaHood said he has secured commitments from 30 overseas and domestic rail manufacturers to locate or expand business in the United States if they receive high-speed rail contracts."

$2.4 Billion In Florida Rail Funds​