Sunday News...
Last week, I wrote that the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review is a newspaper suitable for lining birdcages, if you're heartless enough to subject a defenseless parakeet to the abuse. Apparently KQV radio had a poll regarding road taxes, and the following was one response that was printed in the newspaper. The poll results are not available on the KQV website yet, so there's no way of knowing if this responder was typical. (And in case anyone is wondering about the odd call sign - KQV is one of the oldest licensed radio stations in the US, dating back to the early 20s, if I recall right.) I don't know if the radio station and the Tribune-Review are joined at the hip, though KQV is listed as a partner on newspaper's website, but I'm not surprised that the paper didn't print any pro-PennDOT letters. It takes the same "fair and balanced" approach as Faux News.
Those of us in bicycling advocacy hear this same argument again and again. "Fuel taxes should go to support roads and bridges." The corollary argument is that since bicycles don't use fuel, cyclists are freeloaders, and as such, deserve lesser rights on the road than motorized vehicles. It's an entirely bogus argument, of course, since most road funding comes from sales taxes, real estate taxes, and income taxes. As far as I know, cyclists aren't exempt from them.
It’s tiresome to hear that lament – (INSERT STATE HERE) has the worst roads and bridges in the nation. Does any state boast that it has the best?
As John points out in the second piece from Philadelphia Bicycle News, multi-use trails comprise only 0.3% of the PENNDOT budget. "Almost all of the multi-use path money comes from the federal government which has transportation enhancements funds set aside, coupled with a 20% required local match from the county or municipality. You cannot build roads with the money. If PENNDOT were to forego spending that money it would simply go another state." Keep this in mind. Most MUPs are built with federal funds that cannot be spent on roads.
And our intrepid tax-cutting populist would go a step further, eliminating any support for public transportation, thereby seeing that the poor couldn't get around at all. Of course, they could buy cars...if they weren't poor. And they wouldn't be poor if they could get better jobs, but without public transportation to get them there.......well, you get the idea. This is nothing more than another example of class warfare – taking from the poor and giving to the rich – but it’s not unexpected from the people who gave us the Orwellian phrase “compassionate conservatives”.
Investigate PennDOT
Friday, February 17, 2006
I was so annoyed when I read the Feb. 13 KQV Poll question: "Would you support toll roads and bridges as an alternative to higher gasoline taxes?"
In the first place, they didn't give us enough choices. I do not support either toll roads and bridges or higher gasoline taxes.
…Pennsylvania has one of the highest state gasoline taxes in the nation, if not the highest. Yet we also have some of the worst roads in the nation, and our bridges are becoming a serious danger.
Where is PennDOT spending our money? From blips in the paper we read that 25 percent goes for public transportation -- probably to bail out Pittsburgh's and Philadelphia's failed systems.
…Another questionable expenditure are the bicycle trails. Bicycle trails may be nice, but at the present time they are a luxury for a few people when the roads and bridges should be taken care of first.
If the governor cares about the poor and the elderly, reduce the gasoline tax and spend the PennDOT money only on the roads and bridges.
LaVerne Sober
Hempfield
Philadelphia Bicycle News
Saturday, February 18, 2006
Populist Rallying Cry - Death to Gas Taxes! ... but fix those damn roads.
…Can you point to the line item in PENNDOT's budget that says "bike trails"? About 0.3% of the total PENNDOT budget goes to multi use paths. It would be like taking away your kids ice cream money to pay the mortgage.
Almost all of the multi-use path money comes from the federal government which has transportation enhancements funds set aside, coupled with a 20% required local match from the county or municipality. You cannot build roads with the money. If PENNDOT were to forego spending that money it would simply go another state.
"If the governor cares about the poor and the elderly, reduce the gasoline tax and spend the PennDOT money only on the roads and bridges"
Yes if the governor cared about the people who cannot drive he would cut the public transportation and spend it on roads and bridges. Again the writer is preaching inequality.
Those of us in bicycling advocacy hear this same argument again and again. "Fuel taxes should go to support roads and bridges." The corollary argument is that since bicycles don't use fuel, cyclists are freeloaders, and as such, deserve lesser rights on the road than motorized vehicles. It's an entirely bogus argument, of course, since most road funding comes from sales taxes, real estate taxes, and income taxes. As far as I know, cyclists aren't exempt from them.
It’s tiresome to hear that lament – (INSERT STATE HERE) has the worst roads and bridges in the nation. Does any state boast that it has the best?
As John points out in the second piece from Philadelphia Bicycle News, multi-use trails comprise only 0.3% of the PENNDOT budget. "Almost all of the multi-use path money comes from the federal government which has transportation enhancements funds set aside, coupled with a 20% required local match from the county or municipality. You cannot build roads with the money. If PENNDOT were to forego spending that money it would simply go another state." Keep this in mind. Most MUPs are built with federal funds that cannot be spent on roads.
And our intrepid tax-cutting populist would go a step further, eliminating any support for public transportation, thereby seeing that the poor couldn't get around at all. Of course, they could buy cars...if they weren't poor. And they wouldn't be poor if they could get better jobs, but without public transportation to get them there.......well, you get the idea. This is nothing more than another example of class warfare – taking from the poor and giving to the rich – but it’s not unexpected from the people who gave us the Orwellian phrase “compassionate conservatives”.
Investigate PennDOT
Friday, February 17, 2006
I was so annoyed when I read the Feb. 13 KQV Poll question: "Would you support toll roads and bridges as an alternative to higher gasoline taxes?"
In the first place, they didn't give us enough choices. I do not support either toll roads and bridges or higher gasoline taxes.
…Pennsylvania has one of the highest state gasoline taxes in the nation, if not the highest. Yet we also have some of the worst roads in the nation, and our bridges are becoming a serious danger.
Where is PennDOT spending our money? From blips in the paper we read that 25 percent goes for public transportation -- probably to bail out Pittsburgh's and Philadelphia's failed systems.
…Another questionable expenditure are the bicycle trails. Bicycle trails may be nice, but at the present time they are a luxury for a few people when the roads and bridges should be taken care of first.
If the governor cares about the poor and the elderly, reduce the gasoline tax and spend the PennDOT money only on the roads and bridges.
LaVerne Sober
Hempfield
Philadelphia Bicycle News
Saturday, February 18, 2006
Populist Rallying Cry - Death to Gas Taxes! ... but fix those damn roads.
…Can you point to the line item in PENNDOT's budget that says "bike trails"? About 0.3% of the total PENNDOT budget goes to multi use paths. It would be like taking away your kids ice cream money to pay the mortgage.
Almost all of the multi-use path money comes from the federal government which has transportation enhancements funds set aside, coupled with a 20% required local match from the county or municipality. You cannot build roads with the money. If PENNDOT were to forego spending that money it would simply go another state.
"If the governor cares about the poor and the elderly, reduce the gasoline tax and spend the PennDOT money only on the roads and bridges"
Yes if the governor cared about the people who cannot drive he would cut the public transportation and spend it on roads and bridges. Again the writer is preaching inequality.
posted by Ed W at 1:11 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home