Petersen Jumps On the Train
State Sen. J. Chapman Petersen (D-Fairfax), who just the other day sent a letter to the Federal Transit Administration urging a "time out" on the approval process for a proposed Metrorail extension to Dulles International Airport, has now signed a letter urging "immediate action" to approve the project's final design.
The more recent letter, dated today, was signed by a bipartisan collection of Northern Virginia lawmakers, including Del. Joe T. May (R-Loudoun), Del. James M. Scott (D-Fairfax), Del. Thomas Davis Rust (R-Herndon) and Sen. Mary Margaret Whipple (D-Arlington).
"The Commonwealth has made extraordinary commitments to this project and to Metrorail generally. We have committed our most robust toll road to this project and just last year committed $50 million in new, dedicated Metrorail funds -- on top of the approximately $100 million that Virginia provides each year to the Metrorail system. We know you are aware of the $400 million private sector contribution to this project.
"If we do not act quickly, all of these public and private commitments will be lost. There will be no foreseeable future for rail in the Dulles corridor.
"Please take the necessary, immediate action to advance rail in the Dulles corridor."
The urgently worded letter represents a sharp contrast from Petersen's early letter, which bore a striking resemblance to another piece of correspondence sent to the FTA by Fairfax County Supervisor John W. Foust (D-Dranesville) urging the agency to call a "time-out" on the approval process so a tunnel option through Tysons Corner can be studied and competitively bid.
Petersen could not be reached for comment, so it's not clear if he sees no contradiction between the two letters or if he had second thoughts about his earlier demand for a "time out," which angered rail advocates including those within the administration of a fellow Democrat, Gov. Timothy M. Kaine.
By Amy Gardner |
January 18, 2008; 2:48 PM ET
| Category:
Amy Gardner
Previous: House Republicans and Democrats Continue Squabbling |
Next: Winners & Losers
Posted by: Anonymous | January 18, 2008 3:50 PM
I figured that Sen. Petersen was tilting at windmills given that all of the other elected officials had caved to the FTA on this, but I was hoping against hope that some accountability might come out of his letter.
It still would be interesting to know just who at the FTA wielded such power that they alone could thwart politicians of both parties while they were trying to act responsibly.
The 1:35 pm post on 01/17/08 by "A VA commuter" seems even more on target now.
Oh well, next issue!
Posted by: ViennaVoter | January 18, 2008 4:18 PM
I was hoping it would be scuttled, at least long enough to PUT IT OUT FOR BID and re-examine a tunnel option. I'm not the only one who won't be surprised when this goes a billion over budget if it starts this way. And FYI to the first poster, development in Tysons is only one small part of this project. It's a very important project for the entire region, but no one is going about it intelligently.
Posted by: Dennis in Arlington | January 18, 2008 6:09 PM
get the feds out and let tysons pay for it
Posted by: Anonymous | January 18, 2008 6:49 PM
First Petersen said "Rail for trucks on I-81 was the number one solution for traffic congestion in Fairfax."
Then Petersen was "no tunnel, no Dulles Rail."
Then Petersen was for "time out."
Now Petersen is for "Immediate Action."
His own words and actions. No spin here, just his own private mental tennis volley.
Keep up the good reporting Amy.
Posted by: Whiplash Chap | January 18, 2008 10:31 PM
So what position is Chap espousing on rail to Dulles. Is he advocating a time out? Is he calling on the Governor to actually open the contract up to open competition? Or does he also want it to be approved by the FTA and for the project to move ahead as currently designed? Useless...
Posted by: Frustrated in Fairfax | January 20, 2008 2:19 PM
In 1992 within two weeks of President Clinton's Inauguration GOPer's were calling him a failed President.
Looks like the same people have been laying in wait for Sen. Peterson.
Posted by: Anonymous | January 22, 2008 11:47 AM
Chap Petersen's problems are his contradictory statements and lack of understanding of issues. Blame Chap, not those who question his confusing comments.
His proposals seem to be half-baked. Petersen's slayer insurance bill was criticized by the ABA & Virginia bar as not thought through with terrible unintended consequences. There was a better proposed bill already out there to be found with some research.
No, Chap is not a Bill Clinton, but maybe he is closer to George Allen? Won on family name & switch the football with the bowtie, and the fake southern accent and chewing tobacco?
Posted by: Petersen is no Clinton | January 22, 2008 2:15 PM
every politician who is not of my party is a failure, that is why one of the longest economic expansions in american history is a terrible economy
Posted by: average partisan | January 24, 2008 12:58 PM
Fake Southern accent?
Pray tell where is Sen. Petersen from?
England? Nope, that would be Sen. Devolites.
North Dakota? Nope, that would be Rep. Davis.
Massachusetts? Nope, that would be Rep. Moran.
Pennsylvania? Nope, that would be Rep. Wolf.
Let's see, born in Fairfax and a graduate of Fairfax H.S. Those are not just South of the Mason-Dixon Line, but South of the Potomac also.
He would seem to qualify.
Posted by: Anonymous | January 24, 2008 3:51 PM
Two bills coming up, any guess how Chap Petersen will vote:
The Virginia State Senate will vote soon on these two dangerous bills that jeopardize public safety. The first bill, SB 436, would allow Virginians to legally carry a handgun in the glove box of their car, regardless of whether they have a permit to carry a concealed weapon. The second bill, SB 476, is even more egregious and would allow concealed carry permit holders to carry handguns into all establishments that serve alcohol, including bars and restaurants.
Posted by: Chap pro gun or pro safety? | February 8, 2008 5:45 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.
there is no good reason for the federal government to pay for the development of tysons corner