From: cfmpublic@ns.sympatico.ca   
      
   On Wed, 1 Jul 2015 23:57:15 +0000 (UTC), John Levine    
   wrote:   
      
   >>Correct me if I am mis-remembering--he cancelled at least one of them   
   >>because it was grossly over-budget and certain to get worse, and nobody   
   >>thought enough about the project to fund it it.   
   >   
   >You are misremembering.  He cancelled it for the short term benefit of   
   >putting some money in the empty state highway fund, which of course is   
   >now empty again.  Perish forbid NJ should raise one of the lowest gas   
   >taxes in the country so road users can pay to fix the roads they drive   
   >on.   
   >   
   >ARC was supposed to be fully funded.  Like any giant infrastructure   
   >project, it probably would have run over budget, but so what?  The   
   >current six rail tunnels, five highway tunnels, and one bridge (maybe   
   >two if you count part of the S.I. bridges) are completely full at rush   
   >hour.  ARC wasn't perfect but it was a lot better than what NJ has now   
   >which is nothing.   
   >   
   >http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/albany/2014/10/8553855/ch   
   isties-other-transit-scandal-could-be-big-one   
      
   That is debatable.  The ARC went off track because NJ had to cater to   
   New York real estate interests and became an expensive kludge that   
   would have provided no redundancy if the original tunnels were to go   
   out of service.  As a former New Jersey resident I also bitterly   
   resented the fact that New York state was getting most of the benefits   
   (non-resident state income tax money, sales tax money from   
   expenditures in New York City, etc.) while not only not putting in any   
   money toward it but also putting up obstacles.   
      
   Clark Morris   
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)