Here are some thoughts for your consideration this weekend.
1. Orange County Register: It’s time for Congress to get out of the transportation business.
2. Huffington Post: Five reasons not to raise the gas tax.
Which means you’ll be able to make satisfied to their go to the pharmacy shop purchase cheap cialis lady love with the sexual arousal, and the brain provides signals to the nerves of male private organ. Therefore it is sildenafil india wholesale recommended to consult a doctor to determine how well his recommendations are working). Forzest is well canadian pharmacy cialis tested and known to cause autoimmune disorders, gastrointestinal dysfunction, and organ damage. Escitalopram pdxcommercial.com order cheap levitra is sold in the USA by Lundbeck as Lexapro.
3. Minneapolis Star Tribune: Twin Cities housing report not credible.
Have a safe and happy weekend.
Happy 4th of July!
RANDAL O’TOOLE wrote (in the O.C. Register, as per link above):
All of these facts point to one conclusion: It is time for Congress to get out of the transportation business and return highway and transit funding to state and local governments. At the very least, Congress should simply give federal transportation dollars to the states with no strings attached and let them decide how to spend them.
I disagree in part with the above.
It has never been clear why the national government should be funding transit. Transit boosters assert that transit funding benefits highway users by removing trips from the highway network, but I have seen little real evidence of same – and transit does not form a national network (or even close to it) in the U.S.
If Congress gave federal transportation dollars to the states, there may be some that would spend 100% of that money building new rail lines. With the exception of certain projects (like this one) in New York City and nearby counties of Connecticut, New Jersey and New York, those rail lines are not exactly a good use of those dollars, and should not get federal government funding.
In 1956, Congress approved the construction of the Interstate Highway System and funded it by dedicating federal gas taxes to those roads. This led to construction of one of the greatest and the most successful public works projects in history.
Agreed! But having built that national network, we have incurred a national obligation to maintain and upgrade it.
The Interstate Highway System was successful because it gave the states a simple mission: build interstate roads. Moreover, that mission was funded out of user fees on a pay-as-you-go basis, meaning that if no one drove on the roads there would be no gas taxes to pay for building them. Today, the interstates make up just 2.5 percent of the lane-miles of roads in this country, yet they provide 20 percent of all passenger travel and 15 percent of all freight movement.
Like it or not, that Interstate Highway System, along with the National Highway System (of which the Interstates are a subset), form a truly national network of highways, and I assert that it is in the national interest to maintain it well (and in some cases) upgrade and expand that network.
Should the states be encouraged or allowed to maintain and improve the network in innovative ways? Yes, as long as they keep the highways up to a certain set of minimum national standards.
Those innovative ways might include some of these:
Tolling to manage congestion (especially recurring congestion, with the requirement that collected tolls benefit the motorists paying those tolls);
Contracting with the private sector to maintain the system, either partly or entirely;
Allowing private concessionaires to operate rest areas and convert them to full-service service areas, as are found on many U.S. toll roads built prior to or in the 1960’s; and
Allowing trucking companies heavier and longer vehicles (as long as the roads are engineered to safely support same).
Fourth of July is a planner’s most hated holiday, anything about freedom rubs a planner the wrong way.