JULY 27, 2015, 10:53 PM LAST UPDATED: MONDAY, JULY 27, 2015, 10:53 PM
BY HERB JACKSON AND CHRISTOPHER MAAG
STAFF WRITERS |
THE RECORD
U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx urged Governor Christie and New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo on Monday to meet with him in the next two weeks to talk about replacing the century-old Hudson River rail tunnel that is frequently the cause of delays for commuters.
Foxx’s call comes after a week in which state and federal officials traded increasingly harsh words about delays on trains entering and leaving New York City.
In a letter to the two governors obtained by The Record, Foxx recounted how the federal government put up $3 billion for a new NJ Transit tunnel that was begun in 2009, then canceled by Christie in October 2010.
Amtrak, which owns the existing tunnel and Northeast Corridor tracks used by many NJ Transit commuters daily, has proposed the Gateway project, which includes building two new tubes under the river. If Gateway were built and the existing two-track tunnel were overhauled to replace failing electrical systems and structural damage caused by flooding from Superstorm Sandy, rail capacity under the river would eventually be doubled.
Foxx said that Amtrak was in discussions with the Federal Railroad Administration about financing, but that Washington would not bankroll the project by itself.
“Neither Amtrak nor your individual states, acting alone, can replace these tunnels,” Foxx wrote. “It will take all of us working together. To that end, I would like to meet with you within the next two weeks to discuss the project, especially your states’ roles in getting it completed.”
That will be whenever our Gov comes back to N.J.
@8.17am: I know you post as anonymous, but you are clearly the repeat poster who seems to have this fixation on Governor Christie being out of State. If this were 50 years ago, I’d say you have a point, but in the age of communications technology we have today, just like President Obama, the Governor is fully equipped with the means to do his job from wherever in the world he might be.
Do you honestly believe things would be any different if he sat in his office every day?
The feds balk at the investment even though the northeast corridor is actually profitable. Why aren’t our reps going to bat for us here?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/01/amtrak-loses-a-ton-of-money-each-year-it-doesnt-have-to/ ….mentions the profitability of the northeast corridor….
The only way to fix the mess as it exists today is to de-balkanize (un-balkanize?) the half dozen transit authorities in the NE corridor. Let’s count them, shall we?
DC Metro
M(Maryland) Transit Authority
SEPTA
NJ Transit
Metro North
LIRR
CT Transit
PIPTA
MBTA
NYMTA
PATH
and last but not least, our beloved AMTRAK, saved by GWB about a decade ago.
I might have missed one, not sure. Anyway, each of these organizations has its executives, board of directors, and middle management pulling six figure salaries, some of which only exist for the purpose of coordinating with the adjacent transit authorities. In addition to the superfluous organization costs, these Authorities dilute their equipment purchasing power by negotiating separately with equipment manufacturers.
There are lots of good reasons to collapse this mess and send lots and lots of management fat out to get real jobs, while doing the same to the Union bureaucracy.
Talk to your local Senator or Governor! Oh wait…those are the ones who don’t want change. They need these little fiefdoms to reward their friends with the same jobs we are trying to eliminate.
Oh well.
To use a pun, you’re on the right track 11.10am. However, as we are fully aware, this is where the political patronage jobs are allocated, and rail transportation is just a small slice of it.
Declan Harrison using your logic then why do we pay for his big office in Trenton. We could save a lot of money on his office and staffers if he would just work from home. Wherever that is. Yes I do believe that things would be different because I believe in the old fashion method of communication FACE TO FACE for people in Government. I want to see their faces up close. Their body language. Not some talking head on a video monitor,e-mail or phone call. Yes he should say in his office everyday or at lest stay in the state after all that what he was elected for. To run N.J from N.J. Not running around the country on some dream of being president.
And to add to my above post. I think that of any politician R or D not just our Governor.
I only hope, 1.13pm, that you consistently maintain your attitudes towards the whereabouts of people in positions of high authority across the board, and do not conveniently attack those who do not meet your standards due to political preferences.
When our absentee governor ever returns to the state just give him a shovel to start on the tunnel because he will be unemployed. It will also help him to loose a few pounds.
Declan Harrison. You can count on that. I voted for our governor twice. I disagreed with some of his policy but still voted for him. It has nothing to do with political preferences. Just do the job you were elected for and that means stay in the state most of the time.
This Governor really has only one job. That’s to do whatever he is empowered to do to stop the Democrat-controlled legislature from completely ruining this State financially. There’s no face-to-face negotiating to be done. There’s no middle ground. I say that he has made progress. Had his job gone to someone like any of the previous Dem Governors, we would be toast.
“There’s no face-to-face negotiating to be done. There’s no middle ground”. What a closed mind. No one is right all of the time.
Negotiating Advice for Politicians
May 7, 2015
67 views6 Likes0 Comments
Share on LinkedInShare on FacebookShare on Twitter
On the day this blog is published the population of the UK vote in elections for their next government. Opinion polls put the two main parties neck and neck, with neither commanding a strong enough following to win an outright majority. So the result is likely to be a minority government which will have to form a coalition or make deals with the handful of minor parties in order to be able to govern. Even if there is an outright majority for one party the margin will be so small that alliances will need to be forged for effective government to survive.
Do we have a cadre of politicians who can rise to the challenge of creating these deals through effective and inspired negotiating? Based on the debacle when they tried to do the same thing in 2010 the answer is likely to be ‘No’. Most self-confessed negotiating experts in business talk a better game than they play, and politicians are no different. Look at the sparkling performances in negotiations between the EU and Greece, between the P5+1 and Iran, between the Quartet, Israel and the Palestinians, between Indonesia and Australia. (For those readers who don’t recognise irony, this is irony.) The list is shamefully long.
So, with suitable humility and an expectation that it will all be ignored, I offer some advice to the politicians who find themselves over the next few weeks trying to do what we mere mortals do every day of our working lives – turning situational problems into workable solutions using simple and effective negotiating techniques.
Wait a few days before you start.
If you are already meeting other parties within 48 hours of the end of polling you are being premature. Let the dust settle, the final result be known and analysed, and give yourself some time for preparation. The country will not descend into anarchy for the want of a weekend, nor will the global bankers drive the currency into oblivion during that time.
Get over yourselves.
The people have spoken, and if nothing else their common message is that they do not like nor trust any of you. If you approach the negotiations with an objective of getting your own way on behalf of the 30% or so who voted for you then you have failed to see the bigger picture. Voters are telling you to stop being prima donnas and start to be effective managers of the country, dogma or no dogma.
Enough with the Red Lines and Tablets of Stone already.
All they do is box you into a negotiating corner, which isn’t helpful at all. Voters have as much belief in their long-term validity as they have in you, which based on the result of the election is not very much. We all know there will have to be compromise; what you need to be able to do is look for nuances in the way that issues which are important to you are treated so that you can allow them to be included in the negotiated settlement. And if your counterparty continues to bang on about a policy you simply can’t live with, insist that either they change their team, or you change your prospective partners.
Don’t grandstand.
The public want to be kept informed of progress, not dazzled by bombast or harangued by derogatory comments about everyone else. The real constituency who needs to be convinced is your fellow Members of the House of Commons – elected by the millions to represent them in just this type of situation. So save your consultations and explanations for them, and involve them regularly.
Don’t believe the rumours.
In 2010 one of the two main parties was suckered into making concessions to the Lib Dems on proportional voting because they believed rumours that the other main party had already offered it. Negotiators sometimes misspeak, politicians frequently misspeak, so I expect that negotiating politicians do little else but misspeak.
Be Constructive.
An indecisive election result does not mean that the electorate are dithering wastrels. It means they don’t like all of any of the manifestos, or that they are so divided in their views that any mandate you think you have to impose your manifesto will not represent a sensible form of democracy. Which means that you have to construct something new out of the ashes – a set of implementable ideas which have broad appeal, a realistic degree of achievability, and the creativity which comes from an analysis of the problems to be dealt with, not the power which is wielded.
Good luck.
Stephen White
This post was originally published on the Scotwork Negotiation Blog
About Stephen White
Raised and educated in Leeds, England, he read Commerce and Law at Leeds University, graduating in 1970. He acquired his business negotiating skills in sales and marketing management positions with Metal Box (later acquired by Crown Holdings) and Reed International PLC, over a period of 12 years.
Stephen has acted as a negotiating adviser to a number of corporate clients, including advertising agencies, government departments, broadcasters and many multinational companies in more than 40 countries. He is regularly asked to speak at conferences and share his views and insights at senior executive committee meetings.
Since 2001, Stephen has been Managing Partner of Scotwork UK LLP. He also leads global sales initiatives for the Scotwork network and acts as senior project manager for complex client assignments.
My “There’s no face-to-face negotiating to be done. There’s no middle ground”. comment was based upon observation, not my personal philosophy. I can only liken it to Obama and the Congressional Republicans. Both sides are so far apart from an ideological perspective that negotiation is basically futile. It comes down to each side trying to out-maneuver the other by reverting to procedural grey areas.