We’ve been saying this for years. It gets cold in Boston over the winter. Why does our transit system get caught flat-footed every single time?
Riders left out in cold as frigid temps wreak havoc | Boston Herald.
The season’s first cold snap left MBTA riders shivering in their boots after a commuter train derailed and the tracks broke on two parts of the Red Line yesterday, snafus that had state transit officials pledging that their $90 million winter prep plans haven’t gone off the rails.
“I want people to understand that being prepared for winter does not mean that there will be no service disruption whatsoever,” Secretary of Transportation Stephanie Pollack said. “The problems with the system did not occur in the space of a year or two and they can’t comprehensively be solved in a year or two either.”
It’s been nearly a year since last year’s catastrophe, but we all know this has been happening much longer than that. The incompetence continues. So far no results for Team Fixit.
Lest I seem to be unduly partisan: The Patrick administration asked for, and mostly got, political accountability for the T. Although Patrick did ask for a significant funding bump, several times, and did get some new cars funded, the incompetence part sticks to them as well. This has implications for Patrick’s future (Vice President? Head of HHS?).
But Deval Patrick isn’t governor anymore, and impatience is still justified. We had reason to believe things would be at least somewhat better.
As I’ve said, the MBTA’s woes are a systemic failure of oversight by our entire political culture. For example, look at the auditor’s webpage, and do a search on “MBTA”. You will find precious little, and nothing from the last 12 months. The auditor found they could have saved $11 million from station repairs, but missed out on the $1 billion Green Line overrun. Yeah, oops. Why do we have an office of the Auditor again? If they aren’t robust enough, interested, or qualified to do this job, then we should just eliminate the office. I can’t say that Bump has done much more than the nickel-here/dime-there job that DiNucci was doing.
Is there legislative oversight at all? What did Tom McGee and Bill Straus know about GLX overruns? What about our MBTA Caucus — Garballey, Eldridge, Jehlen — progressive faves all? Why is this not like Congress, where you get called to sit behind an enormous desk that comes up to your neck before a panel that berates you for hours on end?
It would be one thing if Bob DeLeo said “We’re not going to throw good money after bad. Let’s get on top of this, weed out the waste, reform contracting and employment — and then we’ll talk revenue.” But for years he simply didn’t give a damn. He’s “surprised” by the labor costs. “My first thought was” — wait, wait, why is this your first thought?
I don’t think anyone gets out of this blameless. But on operational matters like cold preparedness, that’s on the administration to fix. The results are discouraging, to say the least. It’s barely snowed yet.
We’ve *been* patient.
Peter Porcupine says
There IS no legislative oversight. And THAT is entirely Deval Patrick’s doing.
When he structured MassDOT, he created an independent transit board appointed by the Governor with no direct oversight. Instead of getting rid of the crony-ridden Pike structure, he swept all of the other state transportation agencies – RMV, Mass. Aeronautical, MassHighway, etc. –
INTO a NEW crony ridden management structure and made it even better by making the entire thing bond funded. That hasn’t come home to roost yet as interest rates have been artificially low, but wait until THAT changes! Look in the state budget – see any appropriation?
And you people mocked Carla Howell when she exposed the TRUE size of the MA budget.
So that is why Bob DeLeo gets to be ‘surprised’. Like Pilate, his hands are clean. It’s all the fault of that doggoone independent board.
centralmassdad says
That’sanother way of saying that if this were a priority of the majority party, something would happen, but it is not, so it does not.
It was noted here, or the predecessor site, that the function of the Patrick reorganization was to insulate the legislature from political liability and risk associated with a host of the Commonwealth’s most problem-ridden agencies. And lo, so it has come to pass.
____________
Independently, I have acquaintances with involvement in DCF, and at least anecdoatally, the Team Fixit rep has been very well-deserved, especially by comparison to the last administration.
Charley on the MTA says
… and actually porcupine acknowledges it — that the legislature *wasn’t* performing the necessary oversight, and that at least with everything folded under the executive branch there would be some centralized political accountability: It’s the Governor’s job to make it right. That’s the case I’m making — it was true for Patrick and now for Baker.
Glad to hear about DCF – may it be so.
centralmassdad says
I know I come back to this again, and again, and again, but the Coakley election cycle and its aftermath has really caused me to wonder– what on earth is the point of having a majority anyway?
That’s exactly the thing that has made me decide that the best thing for the Commonwealth in the long run would be that the majority be lost– because I think it would eventually be regained in a way that would make it both far less powerful and far more effective.
Charley on the MTA says
on party labels. It’s a big tent party. There are many Dems who are DINOs so that they can get committee assignments and goodies for their districts. Makes sense.
What’s the solution? Should progs/goo-goos/etc vote R instead of voting for their representatives who ostensibly share their views but vote for DeLeo/other hacks for leadership? Stay home? Primary challenge? Serious q.
centralmassdad says
What you describe is a party that doesn’t stand for anything at all.
Yes, I would advocate turning out DINOS, even if, horror, that means supporting a Republican with whom you disagree, because, strategically, you will actually have an impact on the priorities and agenda of the majority party.
This, in essence, is exactly what the insurgent right-wing has done in the GOP over the last few years. They took an entrenched majority– nationally, no less– and systematically targeted those whom they perceived as insufficiently ardent. They gave up two years of majority to do this, but the Dems so elected were sitting ducks from the start, and were wiped out by candidates far more likely to march to the insurgent tune.
In so doing they have had a massive influence on the politics of their party. After years of watching the various fart-sniffers here rationalize DeLeo et al. (Well, he would have had consequences if he didn’t vote for leadership, so I don’t blame them. The leadership aren’t real Dems anyway because PLATFORM, baby, is where its at) one realizes what a truly massive and impressive political achievement this has been.
Charley on the MTA says
Does a party “stand for something”? I mean, apart from a boutique Green Party or whatevs.
Parties exist as an organ to get people elected, and they’re populated and used by, well, whomever shows up. They’re not ideological affinity societies, in spite of the mystique.
I would like to know your advice for constituents of (purported or real) progressives – people who say they agree with us — who nonetheless vote for a Bob DeLeo (eg) for leadership, because Bobby D has his boot in their backs.
thegreenmiles says
At some point you need to invest.
jconway says
The modest gas tax increase getting overwhelmingly voted down in the vast majority of MA communities should be an indicator that the investment first argument is falling on deaf ears. The T is an investment and an asset that should be transformed. All three editors here understand that, I am surprised other progressives are still reluctant to call for the sacking of incompetent employees, the end of patronage, and the end of perks and benefits that simply aren’t sustainable in this fiscal climate. Not when we are considering raising fares or axing critical projects like the GLX.
Oversight, accountability, transparency, and good management will create the constituency for increased investments. Those things on their own are not enough to save the T, a reality the Baker admin and Control Board are willfully blind to. But it would be nice if the DeLeocrats stopped using government as a dumping ground for their relatives to get on payroll. It may be a drop in the bucket, but there’s a reason people are outraged about it, that is not a sign of a healthy and functioning government.
Charley on the MTA says
Yes, but apparently we’re not done bleach-cleansing the place. Raising fares is another way of raising revenue, and we’re not falling over ourselves to allow that.
Yes we need to invest — let’s make sure it’s in something where we’ll get a good return.
centralmassdad says
The problem is that the available evidence indicates that new investment will not be invested in the MBTA, but would instead be mulcted by legislative patronage. This problem was detailed at some length and in quite a bit of detail just a few summers ago, and was essentially met with a shrug by the entirety of the MA Dem Party, including the so-called progressives, and had no consequences at all. Why would anyone choose to give this government more revenue, without some evidence that they will actually use it well?
fredrichlariccia says
the 800 pound gorilla whose name was NOT mentioned once in this latest T debacle ?
Why does Charlie get a free pass when commuters get left out in the cold ?
Fred Rich LaRiccia
merrimackguy says
There’s a chance he did it on purpose because Republicans don’t like the working person.
SomervilleTom says
There’s a better chance that he (Charlie Baker) joins the legislature in wanting to KILL public rail transportation altogether. Everyone will continue wringing their hands and cluck-clucking about the “waste” and “abuses” and “lack of oversight”, and sooner or later somebody like the NTSB will come and order the state to either fix the rail portions or stop operating them.
Since we will still lack the funding to do the needed repairs, Mr. Baker and Mr. DeLeo, after more public hand-wringing (no doubt with some whining about the intervention of the feds), will “have no choice” but to shut it down.
The immediate goal of Mr. Baker and the Massachusetts GOP is to dismantle the MBTA — shut it down. One reason that motivates that goal is that, indeed, Mr. Baker and the Massachusetts GOP has zero affection for or loyalty to the working people who depend on the MBTA.
merrimackguy says
MA GOP hates them as well. If only Republicans could figure out a way for LGBT people to be identified so they could abuse them. Have I missed anyone? Maybe the Republican should mandate that public buildings have smaller bathrooms for women to make certain they are put in their place.
SomervilleTom says
Indeed, the MA GOP (like the national GOP) has a long history of scapegoating people of color, LGBT people, women, immigrants, and a long list of others.
The practice is to blame those scapegoats for the pain and suffering of the GOP base (especially “angry white males”), with the apparent intent of distracting attention from the utter failure of the GOP mythology and dogma to actually solve anything.
merrimackguy says
care about them, when really it’s just a scam to get their votes and then gain power and funnel government funds to themselves and their allies.
SomervilleTom says
I think there’s far more truth in that than I wish.
SomervilleTom says
We Democrats certainly failed — utterly and abysmally — to solve ANY of the MBTA woes during the eight years of the Deval Patrick administration.
To the contrary, we made things worse on our watch.
centralmassdad says
Is that I would restrict that to Massachusetts Democratic politicians (or at least entrenched Democratic politicians). In places where there is some actual opposition, there seems, at least anecdotally, do be at least a vestige of interest in good government.
SomervilleTom says
Surely my town (Somerville) is a bastion of liberal Democrats.
In fact, as far as I can tell, pretty much ALL of my elected representatives are passionate about good government. Denise Provost, Pat Jehlen, Joe Curtatone, Mike Capauano — each cares deeply about good government and each has done everything humanly possible to improve the MBTA.
I think it is more helpful to start at the top of the House food chain (Mr. DeLeo) and work downward, asking which of THOSE towns (a) have “at least a vestige of interest in good government” and (b) have actual opposition to entrenched Democratic politicians”.
I think we in Somerville are, in fact, doing our share to address this issue. That’s one reason I enjoy living here — I think this town actually has reasonably good government, and I think the town benefits as a result.
fredrichlariccia says
Republicans don’t like the working person.
Sometimes cynics stumble on the truth accidentally. 🙂
Fred Rich LaRiccia
merrimackguy says
per the Washington Post.
SomervilleTom says
I think an examination of self-identified supporters of Donald Trump, GOP party backers, GOP candidates, and so on is fascinating.
Perhaps it’s a distraction from this thread about the MBTA performance during cold weather.
merrimackguy says
is the lemming like thinking of many on this blog. It has created a state that while doing well economically is actually a mess. One party has abused the public trust- school children are suffering, people are victimized by the police, the poor don’t have enough, the infrastructure need serious money, I could go on and on. But go ahead. Blame the super minority party and a governor who can’t veto anything or pass any legislation without the super majority.
SomervilleTom says
Some of us are more interested in solutions than blame.
The supermajority party (the Massachusetts Democratic Party) has not solved the issues. The minority party (the MA GOP) has not solved them and not offered solutions.
Deval Patrick was governor and failed to fix it. Charlie Baker is governor had has failed to fix it.
jconway says
I do think there is a false binary between tolerating patronage and corruption while expanding essential government services and cutting essential government services to root out patronage and corruption. Surely there is a middle path that allows us to make honest and fiscally sensible investments in our future?
I have been on the record as open to third parties and Republican candidates for legislature that agree with these goals. Some here may weep for DiMasi or tolerate DeLeo, but this progressive doesn’t. Sadly, if my choice is between a DeLeocrat and a tea partier like Diehl, I won’t vote.
And far too often those are the kinds of Republicans your party nominates. You want a majority you should push people that are socially tolerant and committed to good government, not just tax cuts and service cuts and demonizing illegals and refugees. And we have to do a far better job getting our own house in order. Dissatisfaction with this false binary is probably the biggest reason why local election turnout is abysmal and the majority of voters have rejected both parties in their registration preference and say a pox on both their houses. It’s why we gotta do something different and something new.
centralmassdad says
That in most constituencies, deposing the DeLeo, even if in favor of a Diehl, would be better in the long run, by far, unless you have so little faith in the Commonwealth that you think that the state that elected Sen. Warren comfortably is going somehow morph into a tea-party red state long-term.
“Staying home” means “supporting DeLeo.”
Bob Neer says
MA is one of the best states in the union by many measures. But it could be much better. States run by the working person- minority- women-hating GOP, to use your characterizations, are significantly worse both in terms of the quality of services and the freedoms they provide their people, not to mention their positioning for the future. What we need to do is significantly strengthen the progressive wing of the Democratic party and get rid of the drags on success like Baker and DeLeo.
centralmassdad says
was expecting Sith reference, and was quite disappointed. 🙁
merrimackguy says
and why a state is good or bad could be a whole host of factors, even agreeing with what that means. Also the development of those factors might have begun with some actions years ago and the current political establishment might benefit.
NH ranks high by many measures yet is completely different from MA in almost every way.
Another factor is whether you’re looking at an average or understanding that a state is homogeneous or has pockets of greatness that bring up the average.
Also why a particular party might have dominance in one state also could have many reasons.
I think it’s great MA is doing well, but IL has similar political control and it’s a mess. CT is also a mess.
My view on why MA is doing well is the high percentage of college and post-college people in the the state. Once the US moved from an industrial to an information economy MA was poised to prosper. Making further my point about states vs regions within a state, Austin, TX, Raleigh-Durham, NC, Boston, San Fran/San Jose, and Manhattan are all prosperous and I don’t think government has anything to do with it. Each is part of a larger state with considerable disparities.
Al says
This wasn’t that cold, and it wasn’t even for that long. It was only cold in comparison to the unseasonably balmy weather we have been getting.
stomv says
It was colder than average on Tuesday. The normal is 25 – 38. Monday evening to Tuesday afternoon was below the low, reaching a low of single digits.
Here’s the data, though I don’t know if it will break at a later date:
petr says
… a significantly shortened time between ‘balmy’ and ‘cold’ is more deleterious than simply ‘cold’. In the interstices of physics and chemistry in the MBTA’s use of material lie different triple points of various fuels, coolants and lubricants, as well as those of differing metals, and gaskets and hoses of various composition.
When subject to temperature changes such things react at different rates and with different affect upon adjacent materials, etc. When the temperature change is too rapid there are a host of possible problems not seen in a less rapid change.
We are, in fact, coming up on the 30th anniversary of the Shuttle Challenger explosion of ’86… which may have been an example of this sort of rapid temp change causing unforseen difficulties…
SomervilleTom says
Single-digit (F) temperatures do not cause a properly-maintained properly operated modern rail system to fail. Period.
The fact that these failures occurred in our first taste of winter weather strongly suggests — not surprisingly — that the MBTA remains as unable to withstand New England winter this year as it was last year.
stomv says
I don’t think it’s that simple. As petr pointed out, a dramatic change in temps is different than a more gradual change.
Single digit temps don’t cause the system to fail, sure — but individual components, including parts of an entire line? Sure, temporarily.
The question then becomes: how does the system adapt and respond? Gracefully? Poorly? Is the problem contained to a small time period, small amount of delay, impact a small number of people? Or does it cascade to significant delays system-wide?
Obviously, a transit system with both resilient infrastructure and resilient operating policies and procedures allow for single digit temp-related failures to be minimal and minimized… and the (T) has neither resilient infrastructure, nor apparently, resilient operating policies and procedures.
SomervilleTom says
I intended my “Not cold enough to fail” comment to be a top-level comment, rather than a response to petr.