Still one more federal government takeover

jimpeel

jimpeel

Well-Known Member
Now Obama wants to regulate state subway systems.

SOURCE

Updated December 04, 2009
Obama Administration Seeks Federal Regulation of Nation's Subways

FOXNews.com

Brushing aside tradition, the Obama administration is pushing for federal authority to regulate the nation's subway and light commuter rail systems following last summer's subway crash in Washington, D.C., that left nine people dead.

Next week, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood will formally ask Congress to give his department authority to regulate and oversee those rail systems, a move that some Republicans on Capitol Hill worry is another alarming example of an ever-expanding federal government.

"In this case, it sounds good, safety and enforcement over transit systems, but it may not be that effective," Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., told Fox News. "It could be costly but not that effective."

Nearly 10 million people across the country rely on subways and commuter rail systems each day. Experts insist it's safer to ride a subway in a major metropolitan area than to drive to work. But as systems age and budgets tighten, there are concerns that local subway systems are becoming more prone to accidents.

Historically, the federal government has left oversight of the subway systems to the states, unlike other forms of transportation.

But after the subway collision in Washington, LaHood decided it was time for the federal government to get more involved.

In June, a Metro transit train smashed into the rear of another at the height of the capital city's evening rush hour, killing nine people and injuring 76 others as the front end of the trailing train jackknifed violently into the air and fell atop the first.

It was the worst accident in the Metrorail system's 33-year history. The National Transportation Safety Board is still investigating the cause and will hold public hearings in February.

LaHood has the unqualified support of the NTSB.

"We believe there needs to be standards established, whether it be for track inspections or crash worthiness of their cars, putting recorders on the cars," said Deborah Hersman, chairwoman of the NTSB. "We really think that there needs to be some federal oversight to make that happen."

Surprisingly, subway system managers around the country initially seem open to federal oversight -- but worry about how they will pay for the things that federal regulators would require.

"When recommendations come up that you ought to take such and such sort of action, sometimes those can be costly indeed," said William Millar, president of the American Public Transportation Association.

"Let's make sure that the mandate's sensible, that the mandates are fundable," John Cataoe, general manager of Metro, said.

Fox News' Brian Wilson and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Click to expand...
 
Looks like LaHood wants safer subway systems and the NTSB supports that idea. :shrug:

Why Faux news insists on putting this onto Obama's shoulders yet again is another story. Seems that Fox has ODS..in Spades.
 
Jump in the hole Comrade.

There is no reason we can’t have a command and control economy
it worked great in the former Soviet Union.

Where should we construct our versions of Siberian Gulags?
 
catocom said:
it doesn't say 'a member of'. it says the admin.
misreporting?
Click to expand...

It's Fox.... gee d'ya think?

One guy who's job it is to take care of public transport is trying to bring the subway to the same level as other modes of transport...basically increase his purview. It's not currently covered by federal minimums re: safety etc.. he (not Obama) wants to change that.

Specifically, he wants to ask Congress if that's okay.
 
Did Obama specifically speak on this matter? Frankly, he's got more important things to think about than subways.
 
so are you saying LaHood doesn't reflect/speak for the admin?
He should be fired then. Oh he's still there? I guess he does speak for um then huh?
 
I'm saying that he's got a job...maintain public transportation and safety thereof. If he's not doing his job, he'll get fired for it, but it sounds like he's doing his job.

Are you saying that the POTUS should be babysitting each and every decision of all the thousands of members working for his administration and make ALL their decisions?
 
it all should go through him, yes.
He said himself that the buck stopped with him.
Either take the responsibility, and the consequences, or get out.
He seems to want it both ways...have his cake and eat it too...so to speak.

same old Chicago politics/gang mentality/thugocracy
 
golly, the government has never had anything to do with transportation infrastructure before.

WOE! WOE!

and it's all unconstitutional!

[rigging parachute.]
 
The Federal government should run the country, top to bottom.

I for one sleep far more soundly at night knowing
the magic (_____) is in charge of every facet of my life.
 
2minkey said:
golly, the government has never had anything to do with transportation infrastructure before.

WOE! WOE!

and it's all unconstitutional!

[rigging parachute.]
Click to expand...

Post roads....where is the authority to tax, fund or otherwise finance state, county or city level infrastructure? It'd probably be better to lower our federal taxes & let the locals handle the local problems (where do I get these nutty ideas)
 
Gonz said:
The Buck Stops Here.
Click to expand...

Yeah..he'll take the blame for whatever goes wrong. So far, nothing re: adding subways to public transportation dept has gone wrong.

I suppose that if someone's secretary mis-spells a word in a press release that he should take the blame for it because he should be checking everything?
 
MrBishop said:
Yeah..he'll take the blame for whatever goes wrong. So far, nothing re: adding subways to public transportation dept has gone wrong.

I suppose that if someone's secretary mis-spells a word in a press release that he should take the blame for it because he should be checking everything?
Click to expand...

so, you have trouble distinguishing between 'major', and 'minor' situations?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top