Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

H'Burg Patriot-News: U.S. House votes against tolls on I-80 (Reps. Phil English and John Peterson)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Places » Pennsylvania Donate to DU
 
Penndems Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-25-07 09:07 PM
Original message
H'Burg Patriot-News: U.S. House votes against tolls on I-80 (Reps. Phil English and John Peterson)

U.S. House votes against tolls on I-80
Posted by Brett Lieberman/The Patriot-News July 24, 2007 20:14PM

In a move that would derail the much-touted state deal to pump about $950 million into Pennsylvania's highways, bridges and mass transit, the U.S. House of Representatives approved a measure that would block tolling of Interstate 80.

The measure introduced by U.S. Reps. John Peterson, R-State College, and Phil English, R-Erie, would prevent federal money from being used to establish or collect tolls on the highway that runs across the state's northern tier.
The toll deal was part of the plan brokered between Gov. Ed Rendell and state legislators as part of the agreement a week ago to pass a state budget.

"The governor and state Legislature's proposal, taking I-80 from PennDOT and giving it to the bloated Turnpike Commission to peppering tolls across rural Pennsylvania, was a terrible decision and would cause irreversible economic damage," said Peterson, whose district includes more miles of I-80 than that of any other member of Congress.

Peterson's and English's measure, approved by voice vote, was included in the annual transportation funding bill. A final vote on the overall bill is expected late tonight. A Peterson aide expressed confidence that the amendment would be included in the final bill, which still must be approved by the U.S. Senate and signed by the president before becoming law.


Link:
http://blog.pennlive.com/patriotnews/2007/07/263002-us_house_votes_to_block_i80_to.html

********************************************************************************

I did a Google search to ascertain exactly how many earmarks Representatives English and Peterson proposed, and were agreed to by Congress, to shore up PA's transportation infrastructure. The result was exactly zero. (Congressman Peterson, however, did submit an earmark for the $100,000 for the Punxsutawney Weather Discovery Center Museum into the VA/HUD appropriations bill in December 2004.) Do they have an alternative plan to fix the state's highways, byways and transit systems that they're keeping close to their respective vests?

If these guys aren't "bringing home the bacon" not only for their constituents but also statewide, what the hell are they still doing in office?

A massive mistake
Refresh | 0 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
PhishWithLemon99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-26-07 10:07 PM
Response to Original message
1. which means...
that it's time to revive the leasing the Turnpike idea.

It makes no sense...the Senate GOP was so adamantly anti-tax that it wouldn't pass a $5.40/yr energy fee or a $2.40/ton increase in landfill tipping fees to bail out the hazardous sites cleanup fund. Yet they objected to leasing the Turnpike and instead opted to increase local option taxes and toll I-80 for roughly half the annual money that leasing the Turnpike would've provided. Go figure...

This amendment will likely be stricken from the final bills in conference in November. In the mean time, we need to come up with a Plan B and a way to figure out how to fund our transit systems until a plan is finalized. So the Governor's accepting formal bids for leasing the Turnpike to see just how much it could potentially generate. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cosmocat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 11:44 AM
Response to Original message
2. I SO hate ...
to stick up for him ... I helped his opposition last time (Hillard) and will help whoever is opposing him in the future ... But, I have to stick up for Peterson on this one ... He has the largest congressional district east of the Mississippi, almost literally from Ohio to past the halfway point of the state and up to NY ...

And 80 cuts right through it ...

80 needs a lot of work and all, but a fee would take a lot of money out of a lot of rest stops, distribution centers and the such along that route ... Not much going on in most of his district other than that, a Walmart hub for instance ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PhishWithLemon99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 05:05 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. i dont think...
the impact of tolling 80 is as devastating as they are making it out to be.

The district isn't very developed. It never has been.

Plus all parallel routes are tolled. The PA Turnpike to the south has tolls, and so does I-90/NY Thruway to the north. I-70 is too congested and I-86 doesn't connect to anything. If trucks want to access the Northeast or want distribution centers serving the Northeast, they're gonna build them whether or not I-80 is tolled.

Plus, 80% of I-80 traffic through Pennsylvania comes from out of state and contributes nothing to maintaining the road. I don't blame Peterson and English for trying to stick up for their districts, but they should've held a roll call vote on this amendment and allowed its defeat instead of calling up a voice vote in front of an empty House chamber. Or better yet, they could pony up some funds from DC to take care of our highways.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Penndems Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 08:48 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. "Or better yet, they could pony up some funds from DC to take care of our highways."
Edited on Mon Jul-30-07 08:51 PM by Penndems
YES - You took the words right out of my mouth, Phish.

I live in the Eleventh Congressional District of Virginia. Tom Davis is my Representative. Last month, the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors voted to extend Metrorail subway service all the way out to Dulles Airport. Somehow, some way, Tom managed to secure Federal funding to pay for part of that extension. (Which may not happen after all, according to this Washington Post article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/27/AR2007072702264.html?referrer=emailarticle)

Now, would someone please explain to me how a nincompoop like Tom Davis could manage to finagle five billion dollars of Federal taxpayer money (funds being poured down a proverbial rathole, IMHO), but yet Congressmen Phil English and John Peterson have secured absolutely ZERO transportation dollars to upgrade highways and mass transit in their respective districts?

I see that keystonepolitics.com has posted a piece from the that states Representatives English and Peterson are using Federal legislation to put the kibosh on the tolls. Phil English has been in office for seven terms, John Peterson for five. They've never taken an interest in their constituents' transportation needs until now. All this bluster sounds like election-year grandstanding to me. (Link to the Centre County Daily piece:
http://www.centredaily.com/news/local/story/164580.html)

Two Members of the PA Congressional Delegation come to mind when it comes to road and transit improvements: Jack Murtha and Tim Holden (Congressman Holden sits on the board of Harrisburg's CAT (Capital Area Transit) Board.)) I'm sure there are probably others out that, but English and Peterson ain't two of 'em.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bleedingheart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-31-07 08:06 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. I will tell you why Virginia got the money...
Fairfax county is a "growing" community.

Folks are moving there, building there and business are generally growing there...fed by the local business and of course the folks who live in DC. There are loads of folks both rich and poor who would benefit from better mass transit there...companies who can draw upon more labor resources...etc


I-80 in PA is a transit route for truckers and locals...and PA is not a state that is growing economically speaking. The region I-80 runs through is an agricultural area...there aren't going to be a lot of donations to candidates from the folks living in the I-80 stretch...There aren't a lot of companies clamboring to start a business there...and sadly...that is why the tax paying folks in PA get shit.

Pittsburgh could do with a state of the art metro system....they don't have it either...Hell Pittsburgh has been waiting 50+ years for their subway...and it won't happen...hell we couldn't even get the Feds to give us Maglev...when I think of the money wasted on that project...and all for nothing... we get the big fat nothing...and part of it for good reason...Pittsburgh has been mismanaged ...we let sports teams owners run amok, we do shit to fix the schools and help the folks who live there, we also have politicians who give commercial developers of retail space (not housing) all kinds of breaks...thinking that "if we build a store...people will move here"....it is just so insane...and it isn't just Pittsburgh...local governments are run like little fiefdoms with little forward thinking...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PhishWithLemon99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-31-07 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. agreed...
Edited on Tue Jul-31-07 05:15 PM by PhishWithLemon99
though PA is growing its economy overall...it's just not growing too much west of the Susquehanna. Much of the growth of the Lehigh Valley and the Southeast offsets economic losses in Western PA...thus showing an overall state economic growth that's slightly better than stagnant.

The Pittsburgh area isnt quite big enough for a state of the art metro system along the lines of DC...especially considering that the Pittsburgh region is losing population. The region's got a ton of old bridges and roads that need fixed first. The entire region out there is f*cked up when it comes to governance. There are 70 independent boroughs with less than 10,000 residents in Allegheny County alone! Nothing on a regional level can get done when people are so against working with their neighbors. Check out the news coverage about West Mifflin's bitching about the Duquesne school merger as a prime example.

Sports teams are running amok everywhere...it's not just a Pittsburgh thing. For everyone who complains about money funding stadiums and arenas, someone would complain if a team left for a city that did pay for one. It's a no-win issue.

There's no question the Pittsburgh area needs a hand with tackling a lot of issues. IMO, however, the local leaders need to start stepping up to the plate a little more and show some willingness to work together to get things done. The news of people's reactions out of West Mifflin/Duquesne put a bad taste in a lot of people's mouths from other parts of the state and didn't exactly reflect well upon the region.

EDIT: Allegheny County would do itself a big favor if it stopped electing John Maher to the State House. He's a professional blowharde who does nothing but slow the legislative process to a crawl with his irrelevant points of parliamentary inquiry and constant bickering on the floor with the Speaker. He droned on for some length when this transportation bill was coming up for a vote about how a) he didn't want Allegheny County to collect any new taxes to pay for its transit and b) that there was no new funding in the bill for the Mon-Fayette Expressway. Projects cost money! You can't have it both ways...
If you have any friends or family in Upper St. Clair, tell them to get rid of this jerk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Penndems Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-31-07 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Interesting post, bleedingheart. If I may, I'd like to offer a response
Fairfax county is a "growing" community.

Folks are moving there, building there and business are generally growing there...fed by the local business and of course the folks who live in DC. There are loads of folks both rich and poor who would benefit from better mass transit there...companies who can draw upon more labor resources...etc


Well, it didn’t start out that way. In fact, prior to all those businesses moving there and the ensuing development, it looked exactly like Venango, Elk or Potter Counties.

The land that Tysons Corner I and II are built on was owned by a man named Marcus Bleis (pronounced “bliss”). Mr. Bleis moved to Northern Virginia in the early 1940s from Missouri. My maternal grandmother, my mother and my aunt, who all knew the Bleis family, told me that Mr. and Mrs. Bleis, as well as their two sons, were so poor they would pick up soda bottles along the main thoroughfares and cash them in. Mr. Bleis put aside some money he made from doing odd jobs, and eventually purchased farmland for pennies on the dollar. In the late 1950s, just before the Virginia leg of the D.C. Beltway was built, Mr. Bleis sold the land to the Lerner Corporation. It literally made him a millionaire many times over. A true rags-to-riches story!

There are two other factors that were instrumental in Fairfax County’s growth. The first were the 1968 riots that occurred after the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King. They cost the city millions and millions of trade, industry and tourism dollars, and literally destroyed D.C.’s economy. In the aftermath of the riots, then-Mayor Walter Washington pleaded with proprietors to come back into the city and start over. The consensus amongst them was “Why should we come back and risk getting burned out again?” So, rather than set up shop in D.C., those business owners stayed in the Maryland and Virginia suburbs. (The public official who encouraged them to return is former Mayor Marion Berry.)

Secondly, the most prominent figure in FC's development was the late Jack Herrity – a man beloved by developers, and hated by just about everybody else. He was elected Chairman of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors in November 1975, after a stint as Supervisor of Springfield District in the southern part of the county. Herrity rolled out the welcome mat and courted every “Beltway Bandit” that showed up at his front door, be they residential or business developer, or defense contractor. The joke going around was that Jack Herrity was in bed with so many developers he could’ve given birth to their children. About two years before his death, Herrity had an epiphany. The dream he had nurtured and the prosperity he brought to the county had turned into his personal Frankenstein, and he became a staunch advocate of slow-growth policies. The current supervisor, Gerry Connolly (a Dem), isn’t much better. Metro out to Dulles is his brainchild, seemingly to appease his developer buddies and employer (SAIC).

Those who forget the past truly are condemned to repeat it.

As much as I detested Jack Herrity, he deserves credit for one particular aspect of his tenure: Herrity knew how to work with the state legislature. He was one "good ole boy" dealing with an assembly comprised of like-minded individuals. Gerry Connolly (a Bostonian who's lived here twenty years), doesn't have that ability. He can't connect with Richmond, and doesn't understand that fighting them is futile.

Yes, Fairfax County is affluent and flourishing, but a hell of a price was paid for it. The quality of life that people like me (a native with multi-generational roots here) enjoyed no longer exists. This jurisdiction was never zoned to hold over a million people, and it looks like a slum. The air stinks – roll down your car window, and you inhale gas fumes. There is trash along side the highways. The housing is cheaply built, and looks like something built when Russia was still the USSR (and I can tell you for a fact that much of it was built over cemeteries and trash dumps). Puppets of developers control the Board of Supervisors. Who wants to live that way?

”I-80 in PA is a transit route for truckers and locals...and PA is not a state that is growing economically speaking. The region I-80 runs through is an agricultural area...there aren't going to be a lot of donations to candidates from the folks living in the I-80 stretch...There aren't a lot of companies clamboring to start a business there...and sadly...that is why the tax paying folks in PA get shit.

Pittsburgh could do with a state of the art metro system....they don't have it either...Hell Pittsburgh has been waiting 50+ years for their subway...and it won't happen...hell we couldn't even get the Feds to give us Maglev...when I think of the money wasted on that project...and all for nothing... we get the big fat nothing...and part of it for good reason...Pittsburgh has been mismanaged ...we let sports teams owners run amok, we do shit to fix the schools and help the folks who live there, we also have politicians who give commercial developers of retail space (not housing) all kinds of breaks...thinking that "if we build a store...people will move here"....it is just so insane...and it isn't just Pittsburgh...local governments are run like little fiefdoms with little forward thinking...”


If there is to be growth in the Northern Tier, then it will depend upon whether or not (1) growers want to sell off all or part of their farms to development, and (2) each county’s Department of Economic Development, in conjunction with the State DED, actively pursues and convinces businesses to relocate there. If not, then that area will remain largely agrarian. The fact that I-80 is a major east-west thoroughfare for the trucking industry would certainly be a very attractive selling point. (If the PA Turnpike isn’t being promoted to businesses, that would be an incredibly foolish and unfortunate oversight by the state DED.)

What a boon both a new subway system and the Maglev would be for “da Burgh” – and let’s not forget the completion of the Mon Expressway! Why hasn’t Federal funding been made available? Is it the fault of the Western PA’s Congressional delegation? If so, it seems as if a major housecleaning may be in order. The region of the state that gave America the Whiskey Rebellion needs to do a major ass-kicking again, starting from your state and Congressional representatives to City Hall. (Bob Regola in particular is useless, particularly at this stage of his life.) A change in the status quo will come from public servants with fresh ideas, and from the local Dems recruiting candidates of this caliber.

If the respective county governments in the Pittsburgh metro area developed a comprehensive set of proffer laws regarding business development coupled with an aggressive provincial marketing, it would go a long way towards enticing builders to focus their efforts on creating office parks and commercial buildings – and not just islands of retail space. Giving tax breaks for improvement of blighted urban areas and create housing would also be a smart incentive. The new arena and casino were both excellent ideas, IMHO. Anything that’s legal and is a revenue-generator is beneficial (and a significant portion of the proceeds is recycled back into the local economy).

In regards to the plethora of local governments: Agree with you 100% BF It’s extremely complicated to create a sense of area unanimity when there are thousands of municipalities that are islands unto themselves. There must be a sensible alternative that everyone can agree upon. (FYI, here are the latest Pennsylvanis job growth details: http://www.papolicyblog.com/pablog/2007/07/pennsylvania_an.html)

BTW, for anyone reading my post wanting to relocate and do business in PA: www.teampa.com

Anyway, that’s just my .02, and I apologize for my on-line verbosity. You made some outstanding points, bleedingheart!






Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bleedingheart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-30-07 04:53 PM
Response to Original message
3. The roads need fixing...it takes money...it has to come from somewhere
so...


we either put tolls on the roads...

or we lease our turnpike to a private entity...and we all know how successful privatization is...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Penndems Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-31-07 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #3
9. English and Peterson introduced a bill to eliminate the toll, and replace it with a Federal exise
tax.

In other words, the money would not be going to their consituents in the Third and Fifth Districts, but into Federal Government coffers.

Here's a story link:
http://www.mcall.com/news/nationworld/state/all-a9_5transit.5973124jul31,0,734836.story
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
d_fender Donating Member (12 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-26-07 09:23 PM
Response to Reply #3
21. Just idle curiosity ....................
Where is the money from turnpike toll collections going?

Weren't those tolls supposed to go .....

for maintaining the road and any other turnpike expenses?


How about the franchise fees for the rest areas?

Isn't the state supposed to collect gasoline taxes and road use taxes?


How about the sticker costs imposed on the truckers who use the PA highways?

I would like to know where this money is!

Government always finds a way to corral the sheep.

After all, isn't it us that ultimately pay for all of this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
philly_bob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-08-07 09:46 AM
Response to Original message
10. Tolls on Interstate are an emergency measure to fix Bush mess
Before Reagan, I would have been adamantly opposed to putting tolls on interstates.

But now, with infrastructure crumbling after twenty years of Republican fiscal irresponsibility, I think Rendell is smart to back the idea.

One proviso, though. It should be labeled as an emergency measure, to (1) repair infrastructure and (2) build mass transit.

It should also have a sunset provision, something like no tolls after ten years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PhishWithLemon99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-08-07 09:01 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. it'll last a lot longer than 10 yrs...
this plan is a complicated public finance mechanism with a lot of long-term debt obligation. It'll take millions and several years just to get the infrastructure for toll collection in place...it'll be there to stay.

Roughly 80% of I-80 traffic is from out-of-state anyway...time for them to pay up. Barriers placed every 30some miles would have a minimal impact on local traffic.

They really need more money than the I-80 tolls call for to really address this problem. The $1.7 Billion the Gov wanted originally wasn't even close to the "Cadillac" of recommendations from the Transportation Reform Commission....the $950 million we're going to get is like the "Kia" version...it'll get the job done, but just barely.

Nobody wants to raise gas taxes, the prices of construction materials has skyrocketed, inflation has eroded highway funds, and most of our roads/bridges were built roughly the same time and are starting to age at the same time. It's a recipe for disaster, unless significantly more money is found.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
philly_bob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-08-07 10:26 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Why I only grudgingly accept the need for state taxes on interstates...
Thanks for your thoughtful and well-informed response. You may be right that we'll need more than ten years of tolls to restore infrastructure. So maybe twenty years? I know spots on New York and New Jersey roads that contain shuttered toll booths.

Allowing states to tax the interstates is SUCH a backward step in economic history. Like Europeans going back to national currencies. I'm willing to support it because things are desperate -- I agree with you on that. But I'm grumbling.

Incidentally, I'm willing to raise taxes on gasoline, enough to make gasoline the same price it is in Japan or Europe, approximately $5. That would probably be the first thing I'd try -- but then, I don't have to run for office on my opinions.

My comments are partially motivated by memories of those Eisenhower-era WW2 vets who planned and built the interstates, clear-eyed Greatest Generation pragmatists. Engineers, not money guys.

If you had raised the idea THEN of state tolls on interstates, you would have been thrown roughly out of the room.

But if that's the only way we can get the Schuylkill Line and other public transportation projects, then I'm for it.


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Robson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 08:45 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Question and comment
Why aren't I-95 Phila. and I-279 Pittsburgh tolled so that it would be both beneficial and subsidize mass transit in those areas? Instead the good Gov Rendell of Pa wants to toll those living in the rural areas that have no opportunities for mass transit. Actually interstates 80, 81, 95 and 279 should be tolled to capture revenue from all the through truck traffic to NY that tears up the PA roads..

Northern VA has something that PA doesn't....a built in hundreds of billions in market force known as the mil-industrial complex that forcibly sucks the blood out of taxpayers from every state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PhishWithLemon99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-12-07 11:17 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. those living in rural areas...
aren't bearing the major cost of this toll. Barriers are to be set up every 30-ish miles, affecting thru traffic the most. How many locals take I-80 more than 30 miles on their daily routine? How many locals use the interstates you described that run through metropolitan areas? Tons. Rural areas get the tolls based on the sheer numbers of Pennsylvanians affected alone. Plus, nearly 80% of I-80 traffic is from out of state anyway. None of the other roads you described have that high a percentage of out-of-state traffic. 81 carries a ton of local traffic, as it passes through many highly-populated areas. 95 loses most of its out-of-state thru traffic to the NJTurnpike in Wilmington because of the missing link in 95 near Trenton...therefore, its mostly a local traffic road throughout the Southeast. 279 is definitely mostly local traffic...thru traffic wouldn't go through downtown Pittsburgh when it could continue on 79 out in the suburbs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Robson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-12-07 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Rural areas should not pay for metro mass transit
The funds to pay for mass transit in big cities should come out of fees that serve as disincentives for local traffic and commuters to use their automobiles, such as a major tax on parking, or tolls on the roads leading into the cities or costly HOV lane permits. That's the only way you can effectively implement and fund a growing mass transit system.

I don't disagree that the interstate roads should be tolled to minimize truck use and encourage more use of rails. It is the increased truck traffic that is tearing up the highways. But when it comes to funding mass transit it needs to come from the metropolitan area that benefits, not from those in rural areas that neither have the ability nor the need to use mass transit. Gov. Rendell shifted the cost from the metro areas to the rural areas for political purposes only, and it does little to address the need to increase demand and use of mass transit

In Northern VA they have HOV lanes but those HOV lanes should require a $25+ monthly permit that would help fund mass transit and the Metro improvements.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PhishWithLemon99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-12-07 07:18 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. well...
if rural areas don't want to pay for mass transit, fine. As a resident of Philadelphia, I'll stop paying for their rural roads and bridges.

People who say mass transit doesn't affect rural areas are very shortsighted in their beliefs. When half a million Pennsylvanians can't get to work, the entire state's economy suffers. Far more so than if Farmer Joe's backcountry bridge used by 100 cars a day but costs $10 million to fix has to be closed. The cities are chipping in to fix roads and bridges throughout Pennsylvania. The rural areas chip in to fund mass transit. This is what makes them public systems, just like how everyone pays for public education whether or not they have kids in school.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Robson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-12-07 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. You keep avoiding
and shifting the discussion from a key point.......most funding for mass transit should involve disincentives for commuters to drive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PhishWithLemon99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-13-07 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. that's all well and good...
when highly-developed mass transit exists in an area that is economically booming (like DC or NYC). That's not the case in Pennsylvania. Incentives to use mass transit at the expense of drivers won't work in many places without stifling economic development.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Robson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-13-07 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. Fairness and common sense - sorry - not Rendell's strong point
Edited on Mon Aug-13-07 06:04 PM by Robson
Sorry can't agree.

Funding for mass transit must be accompanied with disincentives to drive (especially commuters) which will by nature boost mass transit usership. In other words Rendell should be pushing potential mass transit users into mass transit. He's done nothing in that regard. He's made it easier for them to drive.

The Europeans were astute enough to tax gasoline heavily for decades and use the revenue to build and operate mass transit. To artificially keep commuting rates down in Philly and Pittsburgh so as to appease constituents indicates that Rendell is simply a typical politician playing to his choir in Philly, when he should (as Governor) be playing to ALL the people of PA using fairness and common sense.

Rendell is a typical politician looking out for his self interests instead of the interests of his state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PhishWithLemon99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-13-07 08:48 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. in a perfect world...
you can do whatever you want and govern solely based on ideology. When you have a Republican Senate and a 1 vote margin in the House, you have to make deals and compromises. That's the difference between the guy who governs effectively and the guy ranting on a soap box in the park. Your idea's great in theory, but when it comes down to it, nobody would be in favor of it except transit advocates. Everyone running and working in the cities would be against it, everyone in the suburbs would be against it, and nearly every employer would be against it. The only people in favor might be people who live in the middle of nowhere, who as a group don't (and shouldn't) have equal influence as the above groups.

Commuting by mass transit is great, provided that the facilities exist. I'm saying this as a SEPTA pass-holder and frequent user. Mass transit just isn't developed in Philly or Pittsburgh to the degree that it is elsewhere, so there just isn't the service or infrastructure available. If you want to do what you propose, it would require a massive investment in capital improvements at the same time...which just isn't going to happen due to the expense. If SEPTA had more train lines with 15-minute service, that would be terrific. But it doesn't, and the costs of doing so are prohibitive. Most of this extra mass transit funding is enough to avoid service cuts and to begin minor capital improvements (like finally moving SEPTA to a farecard system). It's not enough to build Metrorail or PATH for Philadelphia.

When you consider Philadelphia's taxes, making it more difficult to enter the city isn't in the best interest of the city. Why would an employer bother to locate downtown when most of their employees live in the suburbs anyway, have to pay high wage and business taxes, AND have either exorbitant tolls or inconvenient mass transit. When the infrastructure's available, I agree that incentives should be made to use transit. It makes no sense for Pennsylvania given its current state, though. Philadelphia and Pittsburgh don't want to make it more difficult for people to get into their cities and spend money. They don't have the economic luxury of a place like DC or Manhattan.

Pennsylvania's gas tax is the 2nd highest of any state in the nation as it is. There's absolutely no political will to raise it further. Fairness and common sense are dangerous terms in governing. I think everyone chipping in for roads and mass transit statewide is pretty fair. Very few things in government are "common sense"...issues are far too complicated to boil down into black and white absolutes. When someone tells you they want to bring "common sense" back to government, chances are they have absolutely no understanding of the complexity of the issues.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
d_fender Donating Member (12 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-26-07 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #10
22. Interstate crumbling.
I agree with you about the crumbling interstate (I80). I travel it quite often. However it is improving.

One question ....... What has interstate tolls got to do with mass transit?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PhishWithLemon99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-26-07 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. its a complicated...
system of financing, using tolls from the PA Turnpike and I-80 (which are both set to hike in the next few years anyway) to pay off debt service on bonds used to provide roughly $950 million/year over 10 years for highways and transit. The tolls are used to pay for borrowing funds to fix both roads and transit. Essentially, the state's going to borrow money to fix our roads and transit but dedicate much of the tolls for paying the bonds back. Not that this is a bad thing...its OK for a government to borrow money, as long as it has the means to pay it back. By any measure used by the market, PA doesn't borrow anywhere close to what it could afford to borrow...we have a light debt load, contrary to what some Repubs would want you to think. Nevertheless, it's a "short term" (10 year) fix to a problem that we'll see again...but at least it keeps the trains running in the mean time, and gives us a chance to get caught up on fixing some of our infrastructure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
d_fender Donating Member (12 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-26-07 11:06 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. still doesn't answer my question
Why is creating a toll road essential to paying for mass transit? It sounds like a smokescreen.


Originally, the tolls for the turnpike were supposed to pay fot all expenses supporting the turnpike.

Originally, gasoline and diesel taxes were imposed to provide funds for highway infrastructure.

Originally, mass transit fares were supposed to pay for maintenance and operation of mass transit.

Where is the accountability? Where the hell did the money go?

I'm about as D as you can get, but I also want to know where what we collect goes! Don't you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PhishWithLemon99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-27-07 12:22 AM
Response to Reply #24
27. here's some more answers...
The toll road is necessary in order to provide for an additional revenue stream, plus relieve maintenance of I-80 ($100M a year) from the PennDOT budget, since the tolls will automatically finance the maintenance of I-80 plus provide cash to PennDOT and transit.

Originally, the tolls for the turnpike were to pay off the construction bonds used to finance the road. The Turnpike Commission was never disbanded, since there's always been a continuous debt stream to pay for construction projects. The Turnpike takes in far more than it needs to spend on day-to-day maintenance and has a notoriously padded payroll as a result. The tolls are scheduled to hike in the next few years, and those increases...plus the money from tolling 80 at the same rate, will provide for much of the financing of the new highway funding bill.

Gasoline and diesel taxes haven't kept up with inflation...especially since the costs of the materials for road construction (concrete, steel, asphalt) have grown far more than the rate of inflation due to higher energy costs. There's no legislative will to raise the gas tax when our state's is already pretty high and gas is almost $3/gallon.

Mass transit fares have never been able to cover the costs of operating mass transit. That's why our systems are no longer private companies. With the advent of cars and interstate highways, private transit companies went bankrupt and were assumed by public authorities to operate the necessary systems with public subsidy. The federal government provided operating subsidies until the last decade or so, and the state's dedicated funding source for its operating subsidy (the utility franchise tax) was eliminated. These cuts in subsidy, plus the need for capital infrasturcture replacements and especially the increase in health care employee benefits, have created a big crunch for transit systems statewide. Remember that every fare increase is beared heavily on the people least likely to afford it and the most dependent on its service. The economic consequences of half a million people in Philly alone not being able to get to work would shake the entire commonwealth.

In short, some of the funding sources have dried up while costs have increased, as with anything else. Not to mention that we're finally facing the costs of adequately maintaining our aging infrastructre that takes a hell of a beating from out-of-state truck traffic that contributes nothing to its maintenance. About 80% of I-80s traffic alone is from out of state. Something's gotta give, and some new money has to come from somewhere. The gas tax isn't going up in Harrisburg anytime soon, so other options have to be pursued if anything's going to get done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
d_fender Donating Member (12 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-26-07 11:13 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. Its not complicated ...........................
Edited on Sun Aug-26-07 11:41 PM by d_fender
Its an unaccountable revenue. When taxes are collected, there is an audit trail. Not so with tolls or other subtle taxation. Take cigarette taxes, for example, can you tell me where that money goes. I doubt it. But it is still a tax.

There are also taxes on taxes. Example: when you buy a tire, you purchase a tire including the federal excise tax, and then the state tax is imposed on the total of the tire price plus the excise tax. TOTALLY ILLEGAL, but it is a routine occurance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PhishWithLemon99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-27-07 12:11 AM
Response to Reply #25
26. not true...
with certain taxes, there's legal limits as to where that money goes and where it can be spent. I believe most of the cigarette tax revenue, which amounts to single digit percentages of the budget, pays for expanded health coverage to Pennsylvanians. The liquid fuels tax goes directly into the Motor License Fund, which legally can only be spent on the state police and PennDOT (which includes transit). The garbage tipping fees go into HASCA to clean up our hazardous sites. Originally mass transit's funding source was the utility franchise tax, which was eliminated during electricity deregulation in the 90s. That's why there's a funding crunch now. As for double taxation, it's extremely common. In the case of home rule cities like Philadelphia, they can tax anything the state also taxes as long as they get the legislative OK from Harrisburg. That'll never go away...money's gotta come from somewhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
d_fender Donating Member (12 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-27-07 07:14 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. The more they collect, the more they want.
We the people have created a ravenous monster as our government. When the fiscal year approaches its with a surplus, they panic and find ways to use up that surplus before the end comes. Government always grows to use every tax dollar collected, and once it reaches that size, it needs to increase taxes again to support the anticipated government expenses for the new year. Have you heard about the "walk around" money that was included in this year's budget? 360 Million! Meanwhile we don't have enough money for road repairs?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MrMickeysMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-27-07 09:39 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. I've been following this, and have to ask-
... How have other MSA's managed to push forward mass transit? Is it their leadership, and is this state so inept and unable to make decisions?

I agree that Pittsburgh needs mass transit in the worse way for reasons discussed already. After living here over 9 years, I see that we have a lot of duplicative services (school districts for example). I would have used the Maglev, but the commonwealth, along with competing states since Bush are drying up state funding, or matched funding. There simply is less and less money and a per capita wage drop. I see privitization growing for roads. The turnpike commission? Oh, man.... I go 9 miles and one exit for 75 cents one way. I know, I know... we have the oldest turnpike in the union.

But, when does it change? DOES it change? Has Bush dried up so much of the shared pie that we all starve to death making commutes that cost us people's health (Mon Fayette expressway project that will polute the poor people's neighborhoods) while we all choke up traffic?

Sorry for the bitch session, but ... maybe I'm not, since I'd possibly learn more by bitching here!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PhishWithLemon99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-28-07 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. most other places...
fund their mass transit with a dedicated funding source from the state and/or the area that is served (usually in the form of sales or property taxes). This new transit package calls for additional local option taxes to fund transit. I don't think there's a system anywhere in the country that pays for its operations through fares alone. Even New York City's MTA, an enormous and busy transit system, constantly fights budget deficits and threatens service cuts...which further reduce ridership...which perpetuates the cycle.

Pennsylvania's incresed its funding in the last 4 years for road and bridge repair by something like $500 million/yr...before this new transit package was passed. It's just not enough to keep up, when so much of our infrastructure is so old, the system is enormous, much of the traffic that's worst for our roads doesn't pay anything to maintain them, and we haven't funded any of these things adequately for years.

I don't think our state is completely inept at making decisions, it's just a very complicated state in general. There's a lot of competing interests who want a piece of the same pie. Anything that gets done involves a lot of compromise on all sides.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MrMickeysMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-29-07 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #30
32. Thanks... Why does it have to be this complicated anyway?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PhishWithLemon99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-29-07 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #32
33. Pa is fascinating...
because of its diversity. There's no majority interest. Roughly 1/3 of the state lives in urban areas with very common interests, 1/3 lives in rural middle-of-nowhere with common interests, and 1/3 lives in suburbia with widely varying constituencies. As long as the map's drawn the way it is, the Senate isn't going to go Democratic any time soon. And sometimes it's damn hard to round up the majority just in the House to get anything done. When you have a liberal pro-city Governor who has challenged the status quo so much in order to get more public spending for worthy programs, it makes it pretty hard to do much. It's fascinating to study, but unfortunately it often means Pennsylvania's slow to do much of anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PhishWithLemon99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-28-07 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #28
31. you sure you're a Democrat?
Fiscal surpluses are good. It means that the economy is growing and that you didn't irresponsibly overestimate revenue projections. The cost of government is constantly increasing, just like the cost of anything else. Those surpluses have only been a few percent of the total operating budget, and the reason why Pennsylvania has made it 4 years without cutting services to its citizens and without a tax increase. When the Dept. of Revenue says there's a surplus, the state doesn't hurry up and spend the money so it disappears before the next budget. Instead, 25% is mandated to go into the Rainy Day Fund (which Schweiker depleted to balance his last budget in 2002), and the rest is usually held in the various funds with the revenue projections for the next year's budget adjusted accordingly. Typically, the surpluses cover the increases in costs from year-to-year so the state doesn't have to raise taxes. They can't legally just gobble up the surplus on dumb shit as it rolls in, since the enacted budget spells out how much each agency is allowed to spend. While it's true that PA's budgets have incresed higher than the rate of inflation, so have the budgets of over 40 states. Our state's budget ranked somewhere around #30 of states with highest growth in spending.

Pennsylvania's taxes have not increased since 2003, when the Personal Income Tax was increased from 2.8% to 3.07% (making it the 2nd lowest of any state that collects one). A 5% gross receipts tax was also placed on phone bills. Meanwhile, the operating costs of government have decreased by tens of millions of dollars not adjusted for inflation. 85% of the state general fund ($27.3 billion) funds K-12 education, higher education, Medical Assistance, Welfare, and Corrections. Those things are highly influenced by increases in costs beyond their control, especially of healthcare, and very sensitive to the continued cutbacks in funding from Washington. It's shocking that Pennsylvania's maintained the services it has without a tax increase for this long.

The WAM money was decreased from previous years this year. It accounts for a tiny portion of the budget ($360M / $27.3B = 1.3%). While there are certainly political benefits to the senators and representatives who hand out these checks, that money goes to providing the community services that most Pennsylvanians take for granted (like grants for parks, libraries, nonprofits, etc). I'd hardly call it squandered tax money, just money distributed according to political motives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 02:07 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Places » Pennsylvania Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC