Tell DC we want Rail

[Slick Vik]

Cool so the will of the voters is meaningless as long as this moronic congressman is alive

Amazing how he keeps getting reelected isn't it? Almost like it's voters that do it.

Was the 2003 referendum open to only his district?

[livincinco]

It's not exactly a secret that Culberson is against the University line. If you're in his district and you vote for him, it's pretty reasonable to expect that he will take an anti-rail stance.

As a Congressman , his job is to represent his district, not the city.

[Triton]

On mobile right now:

"Thank you so much for joining over 1000 of your fellow Houstonians in issuing the urgent call to our congressional delegation to support Houston transit.

Unfortunately, Representative Culberson succeeded in convincing the US House of Representatives to bar funding for the locally preferred alternative for the proposed University and Uptown light rail lines. Representative Ted Poe gave an impassioned speech and proposed an amenment to remove the bar on funding, but it lost on a voice vote. However, later in the day, Representative Sheila Jackson Lee added an amendment that she believes negates the Culberson measure.You can see our coverage of everything that happened here.

The transportation bill now moves to a conference committee that will include Senators and Representatives to resolve differences between the Senate and House bill, including this anti-transit language.

We believe that we have a shot of removing the language during this conference committee process. Houston Tomorrow plans to launch a second phase of this campaign soon, once we know what members will be on the committee. We will keep all of you updated and hope that you will join us in spreading the word and getting even more Houstonian voices to Washington.

Houston Tomorrow is a small nonprofit and we are going to have to raise some funds to sustain this fight. The size and scope of the campaign we can wage will be determined by how much we can raise very quickly. I hope you will consider contributing at this link."

[Slick Vik]

It's not exactly a secret that Culberson is against the University line. If you're in his district and you vote for him, it's pretty reasonable to expect that he will take an anti-rail stance.

As a Congressman , his job is to represent his district, not the city.

So the rest of the city is held hostage by one district? That makes so much sense.

[IronTiger]

It's almost certain that Culberson is backed by a larger force, one that helps him stay re-elected and one that doesn't want rail. I find it difficult to imagine that Culberson is rubbing his hands together and twirling his mustache (that is, if he had one) to prevent rail on Richmond, despite what the more pro-rail of us think otherwise. It's common knowledge that most politicians have some deep-pocketed friends that help them stay on (NRA and other big interest groups)

[Slick Vik]

Sheila Jackson Lee said she was especially proud of an amendment she offered, which received no opposition, that allows transit authorities to proceed with projects eligible for grants and formula funds doled out by the Secretary of Transportation.

[livincinco]

So the rest of the city is held hostage by one district? That makes so much sense.

 

It's exactly the way that the federal government is designed to work.  Read Federalist #10, it talks about why Congress is designed this way in depth.

 

The problem is that Congress is designed to deal with issues of national interest, not local projects.  You have one individual in the House that is passionate about this and a vast majority of the house that could care less because It has no relevance to them.  Projects like this should never be discussed at a federal level for exactly that reason, it's a distortion of our system of government.

 

The city is not being held hostage by Culberson.  The federal funding is being held hostage by Culberson.  He has no say if it gets funded by either the state or the local government.  If the city wants the project that badly, then fund it at one of those levels.

[Slick Vik]

It's exactly the way that the federal government is designed to work. Read Federalist #10, it talks about why Congress is designed this way in depth.

The problem is that Congress is designed to deal with issues of national interest, not local projects. You have one individual in the House that is passionate about this and a vast majority of the house that could care less because It has no relevance to them. Projects like this should never be discussed at a federal level for exactly that reason, it's a distortion of our system of government.

The city is not being held hostage by Culberson. The federal funding is being held hostage by Culberson. He has no say if it gets funded by either the state or the local government. If the city wants the project that badly, then fund it at one of those levels.

State level? Is that a joke?

Federal funding is a big part of the cost of local infrastructure projects and culberson is doing his best to kill it.

[livincinco]

Federal funding is a big part of the cost of local infrastructure projects and culberson is doing his best to kill it.

 

You're right.  He's consistently acted to kill funding for the University line and he gets consistently re-elected.  He's up for re-election again this year.  If he gets re-elected again, it's pretty hard to argue that his constituents don't understand what they're doing.

 

[mollusk]

You're right.  He's consistently acted to kill funding for the University line and he gets consistently re-elected.  He's up for re-election again this year.  If he gets re-elected again, it's pretty hard to argue that his constituents don't understand what they're doing.

 

 

Or perhaps that his constituents are looking at more than just this one issue (he mused idly...)

[Slick Vik]

You're right. He's consistently acted to kill funding for the University line and he gets consistently re-elected. He's up for re-election again this year. If he gets re-elected again, it's pretty hard to argue that his constituents don't understand what they're doing.

So again one district congressman can shut down progress that has effects on many people that don't live there? Is that right?

[mollusk]

It is true.  Whether it is right is another issue.

 

Members of Congress routinely defer to the member whose district is directly affected by a given spending line item.  In this case, Culberson has a bit more stroke because he's a member of the Appropriations Committee.  Since we do now have two members from adjacent districts pulling on this, though (one from each party), perhaps it can get worked out in the conference committee.   

[livincinco]

It is true. Whether it is right is another issue.

Members of Congress routinely defer to the member whose district is directly affected by a given spending line item. In this case, Culberson has a bit more stroke because he's a member of the Appropriations Committee. Since we do now have two members from adjacent districts pulling on this, though (one from each party), perhaps it can get worked out in the conference committee.

From what I could see, SJ Lee's amendment does nothing to impact the language Culberson put into the original bill.

[ArchFan]

I live in Culberson's district and I don't feel he represents my interests.  Considering that so many people don't bother to vote, I would say its not clear that he represents the majority of the people in his district.  

 

As has been said before, for democracy to work requires an educated populace.  As a society, we are slipping in that regard.  Perhaps worse, people don't seem to bother to vote unless they feel threatened and want to elect someone who appears strong and will vigorously oppose whatever bogeyman is convenient.  This situation provides many opportunities for venal political types.

[rellott]

He has the Villages and river oaks in his district... Guy has deep pockets. I say eff him and build rail west on Washington. Is not in his district.

[C2H]

The only way I see lightrail even being remotely successful on Washington is if its tunneld. Knowing houston, thats a pipe dream. But washington is far too narrow. I do wish metro would start considering some other urban streets though since this mediocre plan on richmond cant even get tread.

[IronTiger]

He has the Villages and river oaks in his district... Guy has deep pockets. I say eff him and build rail west on Washington. Is not in his district.

At the risk of using a phrase found elsewhere in this thread, THAT would be "cutting off your nose to spite your face".

[rellott]

I just think it could work and have it connect to the transit center at the loop and ten. Then build south using the uptown line, which IMO, has a better chance than Richmond. Once the people come to, build on Richmond. Rail needs to go west asap if it wants more support. People out west aren't convinced and don't understand why two lines went east.

[IronTiger]

My point was Washington is too narrow and we shouldn't build rail elsewhere in less-well-equipped roads just to screw over Culberson. However, Richmond is relatively poor-equipped (also too narrow) to build rail and one wonders if Richmond was very wide if Culberson would support it. (Probably yes as he seemed to support Westpark south of 59, unfortunately that ROW is too narrow and contact nothing--that is, the part that's right between houses and 59)

[nativehoustonion]

METRO did a study to present to the federal government and Richmond is not to narrow.  Look at the Main street line.  You must live in Humble.  We need a east west line duh!

[livincinco]

We need a east west line duh!

 

Just when I thought the level of conversation couldn't go any lower, you had to go ahead and prove me wrong.  Duh is a brilliant conclusion to any argument...that is being held on the playground of a middle school.

 

[nativehoustonion]

You have no issue on this topic.  METRO already did study funding for the University Line.  I think you live outside the loop.  Make a comment before you have your facts. 

[livincinco]

You have no issue on this topic.  METRO already did study funding for the University Line.  I think you live outside the loop.  Make a comment before you have your facts. 

 

If you ask for federal funding than I get just as much of a say as you do and so does every other US voter.  If you fund it at city level, then I get no say.  However you might want to remember that only about 25% of the population of the city lives inside the loop.  Living inside the loop has no impact on this discussion.

 

[mollusk]

While we could probably cram a rail line down Washington, which is approximately the same width of North Main and Fulton, it might fit better on Center Street, one block north.  Either way, it would easily be pointed toward the Northwest Transit Center and connect with a Gold Line running from there down North Post Oak, etc.

 

I suspect that there would not be anywhere near the pushback there is from Afton Oaks, where as best as I can tell the argument is that "icky people will be right across the freeway from my McMansion."

[Slick Vik]

If you ask for federal funding than I get just as much of a say as you do and so does every other US voter. If you fund it at city level, then I get no say. However you might want to remember that only about 25% of the population of the city lives inside the loop. Living inside the loop has no impact on this discussion.

That funding is happening whether you want it or not, it's just that another city will get it now instead of houston. This is anti houston masochisim.

[nativehoustonion]

I agree, I think it should go down Washington and that will take years to get it approved for funder finding.  But the federal study had already done at Richmond and Culberson wanted it down Cummins to avoid Afton Oaks to build a bridge across over 59.  Then he blocked the whole rail line.  What a fool!  Sheila Jackson Lee wants Obama to exclude his rail  and Ted Poe to block it when he signs it.  She is in a fight now and we have to get him out of office. He  is giving money to other cities.  Sheila will not give up! 

[IronTiger]

Public safety warning: Smug levels seem to be "high" in inner loop Houston today... 

[lithiumaneurysm]

The Chronicle had an editorial piece about the issue in today's paper:

 

Of all the planned inner-loop routes, rail on Richmond makes the most sense. Metro's proposed University Line along that path would connect a dense corridor of employment centers, stretching from downtown to the Galleria area via Greenway Plaza. There is admittedly little room in the budget for this route anytime soon. Depending on how the upcoming bus rapid transit system works in the Galleria area, Metro may even eye an alternative to rail for the Richmond route.

 

If Culberson wants to be deeply involved in mass transit decision-making, then perhaps he should run for local office or seek appointment to the Metro board. If he wants to help Metro from Washington, then he could send down the federal dollars necessary to build elevated rail. But by trying to interfere far away from the ongoing debate, Culberson shows that he cares more about his D.C. image than local needs.

 

http://www.chron.com/opinion/editorials/article/The-D-C-party-5551531.php

[Subdude]

Note a sidebar discussion on redistricting was moved here:

http://www.houstonarchitecture.com/haif/topic/30512-redistricting-or-gerrymandering/#entry464506

 

 

Carry on.

[livincinco]

Lastly, my original post shouldn't have been moved from the rail discussion. Far less than a quarter of Culberson's district lives near the rail or proposed U-Line or Post Oak Line so nobody should be surprised he doesn't support METRO. This is especially true when you consider a huge swath of District 7 sprawls out along 290.

 

The problem with the whole discussion of Culberson though is that, once we get past the blind hatred, he does have a point.  METRO has a very poor track record with managing large projects and I think pretty much everyone agrees that they did a poor job managing the funds that they were allocated from the 2003 election.  I'm also not overly impressed with the job that they're doing on the current projects either. 

 

There's a school of thought that since this is federal money, it's "free" money, but there's a fiduciary responsibility to spend it effectively and I don't think that it is wrong of Culberson to demand that accountability.

 

NOTE - this is not related to Culberson's stance regarding rail on Richmond.