Railroads and the Deadlocked Transportation Act

Just before the House and Senate left for an August recess, they managed to pass a three month patch so that the government could continue to fund mass transit and highway projects. Funding highway projects used to be very popular and bipartisan. Lots of people were employed laying Rebar and pouring concrete and at one time the Transportation bill was very popular.

The current systems was set up under President Eisenhower in 1956. He supported a nationwide highway system that would allow the rapid movement of defense forces around the continental United States. The result was the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 also known as the National Interstate and Defense Highways Act. Below is the key procedural vote in the Senate (having to do with labor issues). The Senate then went on to pass the bill by voice vote.

Click image to enlarge

The 1956 Act set up the Highway Trust Fund that received money from a federal fuel tax. These funds were intended for the construction of highways. The original gas tax was $0.03 per gallon and that increased in increments over the years to $0.184 per gallon. A separate trust fund was established to fund mass transit projects.

The problem that Congress is now stuck with is the fact that cars and trucks are now more fuel efficient so that less money is flowing into the Trust Fund at the same time as the interstate system, roads, and bridges are deteriorating. Congress, especially Republicans, is loath to increase gasoline taxes. Instead they have used various budget gimmicks to transfer general revenue into the fund which only prolongs the crisis.

If this were not bad enough, the Senate bill combines the Transportation bill with the renewal of the Export-Import bank which many Republicans oppose as crony capitalism. Given these conflicting objectives it is no surprise that the 65-34 vote in the Senate shown below has no ideological structure whatsoever. Both parties are split internally over the bill which will make things all the more difficult to reach some sort of deal with the House in September.

Click image to enlarge

But inside this bill is a Time Bomb that if it goes off could quite literally shut down the US economy. That Time Bomb is Positive Train Control (PTC) which is supposed to be in place on the railroads nationwide by the end of 2015. In effect PTC would be a “fail-safe” system that would prevent accidents such as the 12 September 2008 collision of a Metrolink (Los Angeles system) commuter train with a Union Pacific freight train head-on while the Metrolink engineer was busy texting. Twenty-five people were killed and it caused Congress to pass a bill in October 2008 mandating PTC on the entire nationwide railroad system.

Congress appropriated no funds for the railroads to build this system even though the major freight railroads — BNSF, UP, CSX, NS — run no passenger trains and serious wrecks of freight trains are relatively rare. PTC requires a complex system of computers and wireless radio control so that engines can be remotely controlled. None of the major freight railroads have finished building this system (for example, Congress did not order the FCC to release spectrum on an emergency basis to the railroads!).

In the Transportation Act passed by the Senate there is a three year delay until 31 December 2018 to give time for the major railroads to implement PTC. A number of members of Congress such as Chuck Schumer (D-NY) oppose any delay regardless of the consequences. Unless the delay is passed, in January the freight railroads will have to decide to stop hauling toxic inhalation materials and close their tracks to commuter trains. This drastic step would put them in compliance with PTC but would violate the basic law that the Railroads are common carriers (see Trains magazine, October 2015, page 6 for a discussion). This would set off a major national crisis. Like it or not hazardous materials such as Chlorine and Sulfuric Acid have to transported by rail. They have to move or major industries will grind to a halt. Ditto the commuter rail. If commuter trains are stopped from using the freight rail lines massive traffic jams will be the result.

This whole sorry spectacle is yet another sign of how dysfunctional Congress has become.

Senate Medians 1789 – 2014

Jeff Lewis and Keith Poole, 24 August 2015

Below we show the Senate Chamber and Party Medians on the first DW-NOMINATE dimension for the first 113 Congresses with 95 percent credible intervals based upon 250 parametric bootstrap trials. (The Working Paper was later published in Political Analysis, 17(3):261-275, 2009).

The graph below shows the Senate Median from 1789 to 2014 (Senates 1 – 113). During the three stable two-party periods in American history the Senate Median will be in the majority party. For example, in the very early period when the Federalists dominated the Jeffersonians, the Senate Median was to the right. The changes in the Senate Median over time follow the historical analysis of Poole and Rosenthal in Congress: A Political-Economic History of Roll Call Voting, chapters 4 and 5.

Click image to enlarge

The graph below shows the Party Medians and 95 percent credible intervals for the Federalist-Jeffersonian Republican Party System (1789 – 1811). The movement to the right by the Federalists should not be over interpreted since they only had seven seats in the 11th (1811-12) Senate. The opposition of the Federalists to the War of 1812 resulted in the collapse of the Party during The Era of Good Feelings.

Click image to enlarge

The graph below shows the Party Medians and 95 percent credible intervals for the Whig-Democrat Party System (1827 – 1848). The Democrats were the dominate party through this period but the second dimension split the two parties along North vs. South lines. The conflict over Slavery and its extension to the territories caused the collapse of the Whig Party after the Compromise of 1850 and despite the efforts of Senator Stephen Douglas (D-IL) the admission of more states during the 1850s did not settle the North-South divide within the Democratic Party.

Click image to enlarge

Finally, the graph below shows the Party Medians and 95 percent credible intervals for the Republican-Democrat Post-Reconstruction Party System (1879 – 2014). The trend to greater polarization in the modern era is clearly evident at the end of the series.

Click image to enlarge

Alpha-NOMINATE Applied to the 114th House

Following up on our previous post, below we apply Alpha-NOMINATE to the 114th House. There have been 489 total votes in the House as of the August recess of which 435 are scalable (at least 2.5% in the minority). We used the R version of Alpha-NOMINATE to perform the analysis. We used 2000 samples from a slice sampler in one dimension with a burn-in of 1000. The first graph shows the Trace and Density plots for alpha.


Click image to enlarge


The mean was 0.99965 with a standard deviation of 0.0003347 strongly indicating that the Representatives’ utility functions were Gaussian.

The next four plots show the estimated ideal points for the 434 scalable Representatives along with their 95% Credible Intervals. On the left, Representative Grijalva (D-AZ) is located at -2.266. His 95% credible interval runs from -2.751 to -1.87. The five Republicans on the right end are Huelskamp (R-KS) at 2.62 (1.79 – 3.34), Sanford (R-SC) at 4.35 (4.06 – 4.61), Massie (R-KY) at 4.43 (4.20 – 4.66), Amash (R-MI) at 4.48 (4.27 – 4.70), and Jones (R-NC) at 5.27 (5.06 – 5.50).
Click image to enlarge



Click image to enlarge



Click image to enlarge



Click image to enlarge



Click image to enlarge



The Median of the Democratic Party is -1.310 with a standard deviation of 0.0284 and the Median of the Republican Party is 0.9490 with a standard deviation of 0.0224. The probabilities for the median Representative are 0.068 for Thompson (R-PA), 0.065 for Upton (R-MI), 0.060 for Young (R-AK), 0.059 for Reed (R-NY), 0.058 for Valadao (R-CA), and 0.057 for Turner (R-OH). Assuming that the Republicans vote as a bloc (highly unlikely!), the probabilities for the Filibuster Pivot are 0.049 for Rice (D-NY), 0.042 for Keating (D-MA), 0.039 for Connolly (D-VA), and 0.038 for Gabbard (D-HI), Carney (D-DE), and Delbene (D-WA). Again, President Obama will likely have the votes to prevent a veto override of his nuclear deal with Iran.

Alpha-NOMINATE Applied to the 114th Senate

Updated: 17 August 2015

Alpha-NOMINATE is a new form of NOMINATE that is fully Bayesian and is meant to replace W-NOMINATE which is now about 32 years old (the multidimensional version, written by Nolan McCarty and Keith Poole is 24 years old). NOMINATE was designed by Keith Poole and Howard Rosenthal during 1982-1983. It used a random utility model with a Gaussian deterministic utility function (see pages 14 – 15 of the linked 1983 paper) and logistic error (random draws from the log of the inverse exponential). The Gaussian deterministic utility function is able to capture non-voting due to indifference and alienation.

Alpha-NOMINATE is a mixture model in which legislators’ utility functions are allowed to be a mixture of the two most commonly assumed utility functions: the quadratic function and the Gaussian function assumed by NOMINATE. The “Alpha” is a parameter estimated by Alpha-NOMINATE that varies from 0 (Quadratic Utility) to 1 (Gaussian Utility). Hence, in one dimension with Alpha = 0, Alpha-NOMINATE is identical to the popular IRT model. Thus Alpha-NOMINATE can actually test whether or not legislators’ utility functions are Quadratic or Gaussian.

Below we apply Alpha-NOMINATE to the 114th Senate. There have been 262 total votes in the Senate as of the August recess of which 220 are scalable (at least 2.5% in the minority; that is, votes that are 97-3 to 50-50). We used the R version of Alpha-NOMINATE to perform the analysis. We used 2000 samples from a slice sampler in one dimension with a burn-in of 1000. The first graph shows the Trace and Density plots for alpha.


Click image to enlarge


The mean was 0.9916 strongly indicating that the Senators’ utility functions were Gaussian.

The next plot shows the estimated ideal points for the 100 Senators along with their 95% Credible Intervals. On the left, Senator Sanders (I-VT) is located at -2.74 just off the left edge of the plot. His credible interval runs from about -3.31 to -1.89. Off the right end and not visible are Senator Cruz (R-TX) at 3.84 with a credible interval that runs all the way from 0.958 to 5.398 and Senator Paul (R-KY) at 5.175 with a credible interval that ranges from 4.766 to 5.750.
Click image to enlarge


The median of the Republican Party is 0.7562 with a standard deviation of 0.0331 and the median of the Democratic Party is -0.9318 with a standard deviation of 0.0583. The probabilities for the median Senator are 0.575 for Murkowski (R-AK), 0.158 for Graham (R-SC), and 0.128 for Heller (R-NV). Assuming that the Republicans vote as a bloc, the probabilities for the the Filibuster Pivot are 0.251 for King (I-ME), 0.218 for Tester (D-MT), 0.197 for Bennet (D-CO), and 0.154 for Warner (D-VA). Again, assuming that the Republicans vote as a bloc, the probabilities for the Veto Override Pivot are 0.174 for Nelson (D-FL), 0.130 for Coons (D-DE), 0.125 for Feinstein (D-CA), and 0.115 for Shaheen (D-NH). President Obama will likely have the votes to prevent a veto override of his nuclear deal with Iran.