I've been asked by an acquaintance in Boston to comment on the plan by the Governor of Massachusetts to solve the state's transportation problems. And since the issues are the same here and there, I thought I’d post and expand on my response on Room Eight as well. My general sense is that the Governor, like all politicians it seems, is unwilling to state the simple fact that the generations now in charge have demanded and received a better deal for themselves, getting more out and putting less in, at the expense of a future that has now arrived. And the damage is so great that they cannot bring themselves (and others who control our public and private institutions) to impose the sacrifices needed to put things back on a firmer (though diminished) foundation. Even as they are forced to hand out sacrifices and ripoffs, whereas prior politicians handed out special favors, deals and handouts, today’s politicians keep deferring costs and sucking up future revenues, creating more and more problems for the future. At least Deval Patrick is sort of willing to say so. Massachusetts is a state with a declining and aging population, whose leaders are deeply worried that young people — many educated there — choose to move away. Frankly, why wouldn’t they? The only question is where can you go?
“We have six different bureaucracies, some public and some quasi-public, overseen by a variety of different boards.”
He starts out with the need for coordination. Coordination is good, but is not the problem. Generation Greed is the problem.
"Let me be clear: the '23 years and out' rule, where T employees start receiving a pension earlier than any reasonable retirement, is coming to an end."
The question is, will "future hires" ie. younger generations be the only ones subject to sacrifice, because that won't upset the unions? We've had several rounds of more for those cashing in and moving out, followed by less for new hires, followed by more for those cashing in and moving out, etc. here in New York. Shouldn’t those who took too much at the expense of younger generations be required to contribute something?
Like New York, Massachusetts exempts Social Security from state income taxation no matter how high other income is, and exempts public employee pensions from state income taxes — but not private retirement income.
It should also be said that he wants MBTA employees to receive the usual state pension which itself is “earlier than any reasonable retirement” as I believe it is 25/55 in Massachusetts. At that rate and current lifespans less privileged workers have to pay two people — one working one not — for every person doing something for them. There is no way that can be afforded for everyone unless everyone had vastly, vastly less to spend both when working and when retired. So only some people get that deal, at the expense of others.
"We will follow the lead of the State Senate and look to expand public-private partnerships, particularly with respect to non-core assets where the proceeds can help us pay down debt."
They will sell assets with future revenue streams, and use all the money right now. How many times have we done that in New York? That seems to be the big idea right now. Chicago has given up all its future parking meter revenues by selling them for up front money, which it is spending. And it settled for relatively little up front in exchange for possibly massive funds lost in the future, so desperate was it to do so. Once those future revenues are gone, where will the money come from for future transportation spending? The answer is there will be no such revenues.
"We will gradually move MassHighway employees off the capital budget and back onto the regular payroll."
They were paying for operating employees with borrowed "capital" funds, just like at the MTA under TA Labor accounts. Presumably any work that is done near capital work is charged to the capital program, so it could be funded with borrowed money.
"In crucial steps towards restoring the public's trust in the integrity of their government, we will modernize the bidding process and create an Office of Performance Management and a Private Project Ombudsman to improve transparency and accountability."
We promise not to get screwed by contractors anymore, even by our campaign contributors? Let me give everyone a hint. When you do all of your building at the peak of real estate bubbles (because that’s when it’s easiest to borrow), outbidding speculators for available construction workers and materials, you get high costs and defective work. That’s when every capital project in New York in the past five years has over-run. And then when you cut capital spending in a bust, when construction workers need the work — and promise to pay them whatever peak-of-the-market deal they got in the bubble (due to prevailing wage laws) — you never get a decent deal in return.
I can tell you that the MTA has tried a zillion different bidding processes in an effort to get the price down. It still gets screwed. It looked to bring work in house, but cannot hire enough people in some skilled categories — and the TWU is unlikely to allow higher pay in those categories without higher pay in others.
"Our Plan calls for a 19-cent increase in the gas tax…if we wanted to solve all of our accumulated transportation needs, to address the full cost of neglect and inaction over the last 16 or more years, it would take a 73-cent increase in the gas tax! That is clearly unacceptable.”
There it is. Solving the problem caused by the past would require too many sacrifices today, so they won’t do it. There is no other part of the plan to make up the missing money. So Massachusetts will continue to make things worse for the future as long as it can.
“We also made choices not to fund certain needs. For example, we were not able to fully fund the gap in the MBTA's state of good repair program, or MassHighway's ‘Statewide Road and Bridge’ program."
More deterioration. Deferred maintenance is the debt that doesn’t show up on the balance sheet. I was on a college tour with my daughter this week. We took the T twice — each time with a service delay in the direction we were going.
I told my daughter that this is what is coming in New York. After all, the Ravitch Plan is to impose a payroll tax for the indefinite future, and borrow against it so all the money can be spent in the next five years, leaving New York right back where it was five years from now — except for the tax. Just like next year we will be facing an even bigger mess than five years ago, but with an extra 1/8 cent sales tax that will be paid forever but will go to spending that has already happened.
Governor Patrick doesn't want to address the elephant in the room — senior voters! He is proposing a worse deal for future drivers, future transit riders, future taxpayers, future employees. So who got the better deal? No one will dare to day.
I can tell you from writing four reports on Boston per quarter that Massachusetts is concerned that it is losing its young people. If it wants to keep its young people, it should reduce the quality of education, because it appears they aren't stupid. There isn't going to be any progress unless the older generations' sense of entitlement is exposed, and the diminished future of younger Bay State citizens, New York citizens, and U.S. citizens is described in detail. Only at that point will the future cease to be sacrificed and, if worse that the sweet deal the selfish got in the past, at least cease to be made worse by more greed in the present.
“Now, it's clear to me that there is political risk in these proposals.”
You have not begun to take political risks, Mr. Patrick, and neither has anyone else. You are looking for the support of people with power and privilege to approve half-measures, which they are likely to just sneer at, rather than frankly telling the winners and losers who they are. A decade ago, the existing interests could have decided they were satiated and attempted to manage a limited decline. Now institutional collapse is more likely. This plan, all the plans, are attempts to put it off until the Generation Greed has taken all that is left.
“Just as it is your gas tax, it's also your broken roads, your rusted bridges, your higher Turnpike tolls and higher T fares, your inadequate regional transit, and yes, your mountain of Big Dig debt. It belongs to all of us today and tomorrow.”
Not if you move away, and/or if the debts are not paid and the transportation system does not collapse until after you are gone.
“And just as our parents and grandparents sacrificed to build it for us in their time, we in ours are going to have to sacrifice to maintain it and improve it for tomorrow.”
But not too much.
Next up — because the national debt is too great, sorry, no universal health care financing, and we’ll have to phase in lower Social Security and Medicare benefits.