Jaw-dropping, breathtakingly shockingly Marxist, authoritarian, and statist: What Progressives plan to do, if allowed, show absolute contempt for The People.
Amazingly, The Washington Post even did an editorial about how Obama's agenda is 'hazy', but doesn't think to ASK him: Mr. Obama’s hazy agenda for a second term - Washington Post
This story from Milwaukee illustrates why government spending is always mismanaged, seldom helps the economy much, and is, for the most part, wasted. Mark Belling of Talk Radio 1130 WISN in Milwaukee spoke on his show about this on January 19, 2012, and was brilliant in pointing out why this story is a perfect illustration of what goes on in government bureaucracy every single day across the country. I feel the need to repeat his illustration, and I thank Mark Belling for, once again, nailing it on the head! Here's the podcast of his discussion of this article, Parts 1 and 2.
The article is about the Milwaukee County Transit System's failure to move from its old system of accepting cash, cards, and paper transfers, to a new system which will use a magnetic card. It sounds like a pretty simple task: Get new card readers, install them on the buses, educate the public, and make the transition over a period of time. But three years after the stimulus funding for this program, the simple task is still not complete. Why, and what does this story have to do with the larger overall federal stimulus funding from 2008?
Why indeed. Why do well-meant government programs get more-than-adequate funding, but remain unfinished for years, sometimes never to be completed?
In the public sector, there is no market pressure. There is no pressure to get a job done in a timely manner, or at the most cost-effective price. The money for the job is already allocated, with little regard for the details in how the money is to be spent. There is very little accountability for those who fail in these two basic demands of the free market, since many of the administrators who oversee and implement government programs are appointed by elected officials. Often these elected officials are never challenged in elections, since it's usually difficult to defeat an incumbent, especially in an area where only one political party is in power. The opportunity for cronyism within bureaucracy is great, and we see it at all levels of government.
The new "smart card" fare collection system for Milwaukee County
Transit System's more than 400 buses won't be ready for two more years,
an unexpectedly long time that drew criticism Wednesday from county
supervisors and the bus drivers union. Added to the three years of planning so far, the new fare system would take about five years overall to implement. That's too
long, said Supervisor Michael Mayo Sr., who heads the County Board's
Transportation, Transit and Public Works Committee. He said he wasn't
sure of reasons for the lag time but wants to push for quicker
implementation once a vendor is picked this spring to install the new
high-tech fare gear. A long
planning period was needed to investigate smart card and cash farebox
technologies and to follow federal guidelines, according to Jackie Janz,
spokeswoman for the transit system. Officials hope a $7 million federal
stimulus grant awarded to the county for the farebox project in April
2009 will fully cover the costs. Nearly two
years ago, transit system officials said they expected to award a
contract for the new fare systems by July of 2010. But because of the
complexity of the job, an outside consultant, IBI Group of Toronto, was
hired to help MCTS with a study, to write bid specifications and to
evaluate bids at a cost of $119,000, Janz said. "We would
like this (system) to be installed today," she said. "But this is a
monumental change for us and it is going to hit us on every level and we
want to make sure it's done correctly." At least
seven revisions to the initial specifications issued by MCTS for new
cash fareboxes and smart cards also contributed to the long lead time in
the system procurement, Janz said. All seven bidders were notified of
the revisions and given extra time to respond, she said. That extended
the bid submission period by at least three to four months, she said. The new
farebox system will be based on use of cards whose value is machine
encoded. Passengers will simply wave smart cards with embedded
electronic chips near an electronic reader upon boarding a bus. The current bus fareboxes have been in place for 26 years, while the paper transfer system is even older. Contrary to
earlier plans, the venerable paper bus transfer may not be eliminated
when the new smart card systems are in place, though they would be
phased out over one or two additional years, transit system officials
told supervisors at the committee. Janz said while that was the transit system's recommendation, county officials could change that. The
recommended continuation of paper transfers drew rebukes from the
drivers union, who said disputes over validity of transfers create
stress and sometimes lead to physical attacks on drivers. "How many
assaults do we have to have before anything is done?" asked Rick
Bassler, vice president of Local 998 of the Amalgamated Transit Union. He called the 24-month time frame for installation of the new system ridiculous and warned it could be obsolete by then. Union leaders
said at least 5,000 of the 30,000 paper transfers issued daily were
stolen or used fraudulently, creating huge losses for the transit
system. At a $2.25 fare per standard adult ride, that would add up to more than $11,000 a day in lost revenue. Daniel Boehm,
director of administration for the transit system, said there was no
way to estimate losses because of transfer fraud. Bassler also
complained that drivers had not been consulted in the farebox
procurement process and he asked for driver participation in an upcoming
review of multiple bids for the new system. Transit
company officials made no commitment to that, but several county
supervisors pledged to push for union representation on a bid evaluation
panel. The two-year
projection for completing the project is an unacceptably long time frame
to add technology that has already become standard on many large city
bus systems elsewhere in the country, said Supervisor Jason Haas. Lloyd Grant
Jr., managing director for MCTS, said he'd try to prod the firms bidding
on the contract for new fareboxes to get it done faster. Though MCTS
in 2010 said it planned to eliminate paper transfers with the shift to
smart cards, a report from the firm to the county said it now no longer
planned to have magnetic card-style transfers - at least initially. Installing new fareboxes and a new transfer system at the same time would be too much change, too fast, according to MCTS. "Paper
transfers have been in use at MCTS for over 35 years," the report said.
"A hurried approach to the elimination of paper transfers is not
recommended." Adding
equipment that dispenses magnetic card transfers would add $800,000 in
costs to equip county buses and up to $875,000 a year in operating
costs. Supervisor
Nikiya Harris said the money would be better spent on a marketing
campaign aimed at educating bus riders about the new smart card system. Haas said the
fare structure should be re-examined in conjunction with the new smart
card technology with consideration given to abolishing transfers in
favor of a two-tier fare system with a cheaper price for one-way fares
and higher price for an all-day pass.
