CTA Tattler

No, of course you don't care where it comes from. I'm sure you firmly believe that you are *entitled* to spend the hard-earned cash of some group of people out there any way *you* choose.

I know -- let's make it a group we don't like! A tax on "the rich", yeah, serves 'em right! Or maybe on downstaters! We don't want their kind here anyway!

After watching passengers struggle with their giant luggage on the Blue Line,I am convinced the C.T.A. should sell those spring clip rings and rope[such as used as dog leashes or mountain climbing equipment],to help secure wayward cargo.Selling umbrellas,rain ponchos,or plastic bags at kiosks or vending machines,would be a good idea too.

No, he is not saying the right things. You are wrong about this one.

He is not talking about revising the 25-year funding structure.

He is rejecting a sales tax increase for the RTA region.

He is not yet talking about long-term improvements that would benefit the CTA, Metra and Pace--better planning, for instance, or a stronger RTA.

He is talking band-aid, not long-term fix.

We will be back again next year, same situation, with the suburban people lined up more strongly against us unless we talk about RTA funding improvements, not just CTA.

People who complain about taxes (I'm looking at you, grrr) should be thrown in the ocean. It's abundantly clear at this point that we need more taxation, not less.

I don't think Bla-goy-toy (as my uncle calls him) is doing the right things. He's making the right motions, but he doesn't seem to be planning to follow through. He's threatened to veto any taxation scheme that might help because his own ideas have been tossed out. But I'm willing to be surprised if it does work.
But I'm saying here & now, he's already lost my vote--I didn't vote for him last election. If this keeps up, he'll lose more votes in 3.5 years. We voters can have a long memory when we want to.

I live in Chicago. I ride the CTA and Metra. And I VERY MUCH care where the money comes from and how.

Blago's plan is to shovel some cash to the CTA this year. Metra and Pace will get nada. That means trips to the suburbs and Hyde Park will be slower (use CTA buses or less frequent Metra/Pace service).

The RTA needs to have a change in the funding formula -- so they know there won't be another crisis next year. The reform bill gives them the muscle to stop the CTA and Metra competing (e.g. cut most south lakefront buses and increase service on Metra Electric) -- and to plan for a truly useful *integrated* transit system.

You should care where the money comes from as well. Otherwise, you'll be writing about the same issues next year and your transit service will not have gotten any better. Shame on you for not actually caring enough to agitate for a better system of transit!

Rod isn't saying shit. What happens next year? Or in five years? We all should care where the money comes from. They might as well book all they same rooms that they used for the public hearings this year for the same time next year because next year at this time we will be dealing with the same funding crisis, with very little improvements to the existing infrastructure. But next year, I imagine Huberman will have to ask for even more money. I am with vise and DR on this one.

And how come the city can dump 120 million dollars into harbors for a possible 2016 Olympic bid using bonds, but cannot do the same for the CTA? I do not understand.

Right after big government apologists like you, KM.

Go brush up on your basic finance: income = revenue - expenses. Believe it or not, there are two variables you can control in that equation. (Oh, and have you noticed how federal tax revenues increased when the marginal rates were cut? Neocon heresy, I'm sure.)

I prefer "big-government evangelist", grrr. Longest sustained economic expansion in US history--1950-1973, when marginal tax rates were -way- higher than they are now.

Do you ever actually -read- this blog? CTA service is comically inadequate in any number of ways--spending less money is not going to solve any of that.

Citing the Laffer curve was cute, too, by the way. So retro--do you know you can get the complete Miami Vice on DVD now?

KM, I think you may have caught a bit of hypoxia at the top of your ivory tower. Out here in the real world, adding money to a comically inadequate government agency just results in a comically inadequate government agency with nicer furniture. It'll make it much easier for you to find a cushy do-nothing job, though.

Well put, grrr--we should totally farm out mass transit to private companies.

Oh wait--we tried that, and they all went bankrupt, resulting in the formation of the CTA. Scratch that, I guess.

And I'm apparently a tenured academic now-- safely ensconced in my ivory tower, i hear. My mom will be so proud!

erika,
Bonds for building harbor improvements would be backed by the revenue generated from leasing fees for the new slips to be constructed. CTA is of course, not revenue-positive; fare revenue doesn't even cover operations. So the opportunities for bond issues are much fewer. In fact, CTA has already done many bond issues to pay for immediate capital needs, using expected future federal capital funds as backing, thereby also reducing CTA's expected future capital budget. Bond issues aren't an end-all, since in CTA's case it usually means borrowing against your future. IF there were a bond issue, it would need to be backed by some form of a new revenue, e.g. a tax increase.

This is part of NYC is in such a better position transit-wise; since the bridges and tunnels and subways are all under the same authority, the revenue from the bridge and tunnel tolls (revenue which is much greater than the expense of maintaining the bridges and tunnels) can be used as backing for bond issues for transit projects. Toll money in the Chicago area goes towards.....well, not towards transit!

Looks like the Metra now is crying that they will raise fares.. Metra goes all over. Looks like they need some from a lot of people's pockets.