Garrett helps Corzine

Representative Scott Garrett and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood (a Republican) are not the closest of friends, at least in the media. I had written about one dust up two years ago between Garrett and the unapologetic moderate. Recently, they revisited their "good will" toward each other. From The Hill:

LaHood got into a heated argument over the $787 economic stimulus package Friday with Rep. Scott Garrett (N.J.) while offering testimony to the House Budget Committee.

The debate was related to attempts by some Republican governors to refuse stimulus money, and ended up with LaHood offering praise to New Jersey’s Democratic governor, Jon Corzine, who faces an uphill reelection battle this year.

[snip]

"Sen. Kyl is not in charge of the money, congressman," LaHood told Garrett. "The governor is. I wanted to be sure that the governor was not in the same line of thinking."

When Garrett wondered whether his state would receive a similar letter, LaHood backed Corzine, the embattled New Jersey governor, noting that he had secured millions in stimulus funding from Congress. Corzine this year is facing a tough re-election race against Republican Chris Christie.

"Your governor has been a real leader in this, by the way," LaHood said during an exchange in which the two former GOP conference members talked over one another.

Garrett and his people were so pleased by the exchange, they made a video of it and put the testimony up on Garrett's YouTube Page:



By Garrett persisting as he did, and feeling it was worth posting, Governor Corzine was able to get this nice little web video made:



Nothing like a respected moderate Republican sitting and giving sworn testimony that a Democratic Governor has created jobs during an election year. Corzine should probably call and thank Garrett.

NJ Transit Cuts

For those that hadn't seen it, it looks like the Governor is about to cut $62 million from the budget of NJ Transit. State officials are saying it's part of a larger group of cuts, but one has to hope this was a misquote.

"In that $4 billion, of 2,400 line items in the budget, 36 are reduced and NJ Transit is not immune from this," said Tom Vincz, Treasury Department spokesman. "We have asked all stakeholders to share the burden, and this is in line with the efficiencies we've asked of all agencies."

Out of 2,400, 36 are reduced? Even if it was 240 lines, it hardly seems like all stakeholders are taking a hit.

I've written before about my frustration with parking and the elimination of half of my night time trains. Now, it looks like they may have to cut more service. Although NJ Transit said they're going to try and avoid it, having their funding reduced 17% may make it impossible to avoid.

The State is not being smart about this. It costs the state less in terms of road repair, emergency services, and lost productivity (sitting in traffic) to have people use mass transit. Now is not the time to make it harder to use mass transit, and that's exactly what the Governor's proposal seems to do.

Let My Spaces Go

This has been a growing frustration of mine, the parking garage at the Ramsey Rt. 17 station. Granted, far too few people had discovered how great a set-up it is, and to offset some expense the top floor and a half have been rented to car dealers. I didn't agree with that, but could understand.

Now, it seems they're getting ready to block off more spaces for non-commuters and it's getting packed in there. This is a park and ride, and the harder NJ Transit makes it to park the less people are going to ride. With the new lines going into the Meadowlands, appropriately scheduled trains could make the park and ride an integral part of the bigger picture of reducing traffic into the Meadowlands.

Adding insult to injury, NJ Transit decided to eliminate the 8:13, 9:17, and 10:15 evening trains from stopping at the station. While there may not have been the ridership to justify trains every half hour, why would NJ Transit choose to eliminate the trains with the shorter trip?

Ten (scheduled) to fifteen minutes (reality) may not seem like a lot to NJ Transit schedulers, but you're talking about an extra hour out of the lives of commuters every week.

The Rt. 17 Station has the potential to be the gateway point for north Bergen county transit. More express trains, and less difficulty finding a space are the keys to success there. I can't believe I'm alone in thinking this.

Taxpayers didn't put up a corporate parking lot, they put up a park and ride.

Update: Even worse, some of the spaces have been blocked for parking, others seem to be blocked because the ceiling is falling in. Unbelievable.

Is Garrett Joking?

I understand that Representative Scott Garrett wants to vote for off-shore drilling in the House. However, try and follow this logic for being one of 29 to vote against funding bridge construction and road maintenance:

The bill is headed to the White House, where President Bush has said he would sign, reversing a veto threat earlier this year.

All but one of New Jersey's 13 House members voted for the bill. Rep. Scott Garrett, R-Wantage, voted "No," arguing Congress should instead vote on a broad energy package.

I understand that Garrett's idea for reforming transportation dollar appropriation is never going to get out of committee, as well as opposed to by major heads of mass transit. However, when we've had massive bridge collapses, as well as our own studies here in NJ saying we have major problems, what kind of Representative votes against fixing things? Furthermore, what kind of Representative makes up some lame/disingenuous reason for doing so?

There's a world of difference between doing what is right for the people you're supposed to represent and being an ideologue (read: sore loser). Garrett seems, on this vote at least more than any other recent vote, to have put his ideology above his constituents.

Garrett vs. Standing Bridges

Well, Representative Scott Garrett certainly does make it easy on those being paid to write the ads that are going to be run against him (no, I'm not one of them).

I'm not actually talking about the Housing bill that Garrett voted against yesterday. Sure, he's going to get beat up on some of the stuff in there. But, if any of us are truly honest, his opposition to yet another bail out bill probably works in his favor.

No, I'm talking about this:


See, that is the fatal I-35 bridge collapse, and Garrett was one of 37 Members of the House to vote against restoring money to the Highway Trust Fund yesterday.

In the event, with everything else going on you forgot in what dire shape our roads are in, you can get a refresher here.

MTA to Garrett: Um, No

Representative Scott Garrett was given the opportunity to explain his transportation opt out bill on Fox Business the other day. After laying out the plan, and saying he believed mass transit operators would likely prefer his plan, the head of the MTA basically said "no, no we wouldn't" (that's a paraphrase).

One has to wonder if Garrett will continue to pursue the bill so openly after being told by the head of the MTA that it's a bad idea. That's the difference between an ideologue and someone seeking real solutions to issues.

You can watch the interview here.

Garrett vs. Train Safety

Well, our Representative Scott Garrett was one of 38 Representatives to vote against making the trains so many of us rely on safer. Almost needless to say at this point is that once again Garrett was the only Representative from New Jersey to vote against this bill. By voting against the Federal Railroad Safety Improvement Act of 2007, Garrett voted against a bill with the following purpose:

To amend title 49, United States Code, to prevent railroad fatalities, injuries, and hazardous materials releases, to authorize the Federal Railroad Safety Administration, and for other purposes.

It's kind of odd to think about the campaign last year, seeing Garrett down in the Hoboken Train Station shaking hands with people. What's he going to say to them next year? "Of course I was one of only 38 Representatives who voted to make your ride home less safe. Have a nice trip." I'm sure the 252,400 daily NJ Transit rail riders won't appreciate Garrett's lack of support.

I hope Garrett doesn't think those voters on the Bergen/Main, Pascack Valley, and the Hackettstown lines won't find out. After all, my understanding is that they're all leased to freight lines by NJ Transit and that fall under this bill.

I'm also fairly certain those that live along our dedicated freight lines won't appreciate Garrett's lack of support, especially for the provisions regarding hazardous waste accident preparedness and response.

If Garrett said anything about the Bill, I'll put it up.