Light rail lost in Pinellas County (St. Petersburg), Florida by 62 to 38 percent. Light rail in Austin is going down by 58 to 42 percent. A transit tax in Polk County, Florida, is also losing.
Not all transportation taxes are losing. Voters in Alameda County (Oakland), California, approved a sales tax that will provide some money for roads but will mostly go to transit and bike/pedestrian paths. Clayton County, Georgia approved a sales tax to bring Atlanta transit into the county. But Maryland voters agreed to protect gas taxes and other highway funds from being diverted to other uses, while Wichita voters rejected a sales tax increase that would have funded a variety of things including transit.
The big news for transportation activists, however, was the strong rejection of light-rail ballot measures in Austin and Pinellas County. Opponents in Austin were better funded than those in Pinellas County, and even some rail supporters joined the opposition in Austin saying that the proposed route wasn’t the best place for a light-rail line. Opponents in Pinellas, meanwhile, had to overcome strong support from most local media and borderline-illegal campaigning in favor of rail by the transit agency and other government agencies. So it was a surprise to see that Pinellas voters rejected rail by an even larger margin than those in Austin.
Benefits of Taking kamagra for ED Treatment according to their health complications. 20mg pill must sildenafil purchase be swallowed completely with water for ease swallowing. Basically a person faces erectile dysfunction only when they face cute-n-tiny.com buy levitra issues in their erection. http://cute-n-tiny.com/cute-animals/pug-in-a-darth-vader-outfit/ cialis sales canada Premature Ovarian Failure When a woman suffers from Premature Ovarian Failure, infertility is the outcome. You will see the list of options and rests with one providing viagra österreich here the widest vary.
These results, combined with the Republican victories in Congress, indicate that voters are upset with tax-and-spend liberalism. Whether this is a permanent change or just a swing of the politician pendulum remains to be seen.
Republicans in Congress could end up alienating voters by taking conservative stands on social issues that Congress really shouldn’t be involved in. Or they could overreach, attempting to pass legislation so extreme that Democrats will successfully maintain a gridlock despite having a minority in Congress. We can hope instead that they’ll focus on achieving some significant fiscal reforms that most people agree are necessary to keep the nation’s economy healthy. I’ll try to do more analysis of this tomorrow.
To be honest, most government planners are lower than pond scum. The sort of gyrations and truth-twisting they engaged in to attempt passage of the two mentioned rail boondoggles (I looked at both of the Pro- websites) is beyond pale. According to the planners, the choo choo’s were supposed to solve every problem except for peace in the middle east, and maybe that, too.
As a devout transit advocate I opposed Austin’s light rail line. Austin is a city with terrible mobility issues and if we are to fund mobility projects the goal of said projects should be to increase mobility of the residents that currently live here. This light rail project was first and foremost about developing areas in need of “activation” (new code for blight). The light rail would help spur TODesque style developments and then cut through downtown in the only area where there is no businesses or services (the state parking garage district otherwise known by planners as the black hole of Austin). At best this line would improve mobility options for wealthy, car owning, new residents that would presumably move into these new mixed use areas. The plan was not to provide mobility options for current residents.
As for the drivel above in the previous comment, I understand why someone like that would hide behind a moniker. Only anomalously could one have the balls to callously insult people with reckless abandon. I would suggest that he keep hiding. At least from me. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuBWbpTJRqk
“These results, combined with the Republican victories in Congress, indicate that voters are upset with tax-and-spend liberalism.”
Well, Republicans are likely to do anything differently. And we haven’t exactly had tax-and-spend liberalism or tax-and-spend anything. More like borrow-and-spend. Both parties are guilty. Was the AP not paying attention during the Bush administration when the national debt ballooned?
“Whether this is a permanent change or just a swing of the politician pendulum remains to be seen.”
Yeah right. I think we all know the answer to that one.
“…Democrats will successfully maintain a gridlock despite having a minority in Congress.”
Of course they will, and even if they kowtow to republicans the president will veto. And, seeing as the republican presidential primary process kowtows to the wackadoodle “base” it’s unlikely we’ll see a republican president anytime soon. It’s hard to pick up the moderate swing voters on the median when you’ve already hurled you car off the right shoulder.
*unlikely
To Frank’s point: The only thing worse than a tax-and-spend democrat is a no-tax-and-spend republican.
Thanks, bennett. I often find myself in agreement with you and appreciate your contributions here.
Another thought along these lines, by a different author:
“For the first time since 2006, Republicans have control of the Senate (or at least they will at the beginning of the year). What will Republican control of the Senate, and therefore total control of the Congress, mean? As someone who has studied the actions of the Republican Party for over 20 years—including the legislation they have passed or helped to pass, the bills they have introduced that did not pass, the speeches Republicans have made, the Party Platforms they have adopted, and the budgets they have proposed—I can say without hesitation that it will mean absolutely nothing. They will continue to spend, spend, spend, bomb, bomb, bomb, tax, tax, tax, and regulate, regulate, regulate. Watch them for the next two years and try to prove me wrong. I will be watching them like a hawk,” says Laurence Vance.
So bennett, are you so upset because you consider yourself part & parcel with the government planners cooking up lies to foist transit boondoggles upon citizens? It’s kind of schizophrenic that you claim to oppose these projects, yet take offense at my characterization of these projects’ mendacious & crony-connected supporters. Don’t shoot the messenger…..you ought to hate those government planners who give a bad name to planners everywhere. They are the reason your profession is despised.
What part of my post is drivel? When government “officials” (sic) exist to enrich their crony buddies and force projects thru that do not benefit the citizens paying for them, I consider that lowlife behavior, ie, pond-scum. When planners hide in their downtown bunkers and cook up plans to increase congestion and force people to take slow, expensive transit, that is pond-scum behavior.
We simply can’t sit around the table and pretend everyone’s’ ideas are equally worthy of discussion and respect, when it clearly isn’t so. If more people called out corrupt planners for peddling the same tired, crooked transit boondoggles, maybe government planners would stop peddling them.
So according to mycommentssuck a planner is, a governmental official, a PR firm, a politician, a real estate developer friend of a politician, an executive director of a transit agency, a county commissioner, a city council person or a citizen who supports a rail initiative (people quoted on the rail proponents websites).
A professional planner is either not a planner (by his logic), or at best, a planner who should be upset that all of these other people (who are clearly not planners) are giving planning a bad name.
He calls us schizophrenic, corrupt, crooked, liars, lowlifes and pond scum (all hurled behind a alias. How upstanding and brave!) and then is in awe that we take offense to his attacks.
Then he concludes with a ditty about not all ideas are equal, which is rich, considering he has never offered an “idea” on this blog (FYI, hyperbolic insults are not an “idea.”). This amazes me the most, because I am able to engage in debates about ideas with many opponents on this blog in a manner that is by and large polite and respectful even if the discussion is passionate and heated.
I’m hoping that we can meet in person one day so he can say these things to my face. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=internet+balls
Be serious bennett. That’s a really tired meme you run with: that poor government planners are just decent, honest folk, chafing under the unfair demands placed upon them by crooked politicians. This is a startling rewrite of reality, as it is politicians who are at all answerable to citizens, while those good, decent planners hide behind civil service laws in the serene belief that they can never answer for their numerous fuckups. Many a politician has reversed course and dropped support for boondoggles under the withering assaults from angry citizens, while planners and their media mouthpieces continue piling on the falsehoods obstinately.
Everyone else on this blog, regardless of their supposed position on anything, knows that what you say in regards to planners and accountability is so full of shit that it’s mind boggling. It’s too bad you take umbrage at what I say and start puffing up like this is some internet shit flinging contest where everyone is 6’6″ and can bench press 500 pounds. The mere constant implied threats of violence from you is obvious proof that you don’t believe in defending your position, except by intimidating the opposition.
AP, do you think it’s fair to say that spending on current residents (Seattle, Texas, Fairfax etc…) won better support than transit subsidies for private developers (Pinellas county etc…)?
Hopefully the republican majority will allow locals to have such say on all transportation projects by gutting federal funding for road and rail projects nationwide. Let funding of such projects be a local matter, paid for by user fees and taxes as decided by those who are most directly affected.
If you thought Politifact’s eval of the MKE’s trolley comment by Gov Walker during the last recall election debate was a classic example of group think, they out did themselves with this atrocious piece on the LRT proposal for Pinellas
http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2014/oct/23/no-tax-tracks/greenlight-pinellas-opponents-argue-denver-light-r/
“The mere constant implied threats of violence from you is obvious proof that you don’t believe in defending your position, except by intimidating the opposition.”
I have many opponents on this blog but you are the only person I’ve implied a threat of violence towards. Don’t try to lump yourself into a group with my other opponents. You are different, and I treat you as such. I’ll be in the Pacific Northwest this coming spring. We should get together and discuss our differences face to face. This schizophrenic, corrupt, crooked, lowlife, pond scum, liar would love to meet the brave man behind the metrosucks curtain.
Were any local candidates in San Antonio helped or hurt by the recently canned street car project?
I’m glad bennett had this little outburst of his. Despite my never having directly attacked him or called him any names (the adjectives I occasionally use are not used to deliberately inflame him, yet he acts as if that is the case) here he is, foaming at the mouth and threatening to assault me for criticizing other people in his profession, people he does not ever claim to support, but has never had the balls to disown.
So who is the real coward?
And might I add, that, even if you and I decided to get together and “work” out our differences, something I am sorely tempted to do, law enforcement doesn’t take lightly of this sort of thing and would be prosecuting you regardless of the outcome. I ought to meet you up just just for the entertainment value of that, if nothing more.
Bennett, your sentiments mirror my thoughts of some time about “Metrosucks” and a few other trolls around here. Want to do a joint venture? :-0
I see Metrosucks is as chickenshit as ever. Bennett, this is why I proposed a Seattle boxing gym to Metrosucks, which would preclude any chickenshit call to the cops.
msetty, you’d need to detach your lips from stacey & witbeck’s penis to go anywhere, much less Seattle. And I’ve seen your picture, so I know you’re very much a pathetic little chickenshit yourself.
So…
How ’bout those voters?
And their rejection of taxes?
Frank,
they’re too busy advocating violence on anyone opposed to their plans. Ever notice how all statists are enthralled by violence (whether the regular kind or the badge & government costume type), and believe it to be the first solution to any problem, whether the collection of a supposedly owed tax or to settle a dispute?
Several things missing from the discussion.
First, minimum wage. Five states voted to increase the minimum wage, including SD and AR. These are two states that had Democratic incumbent senators who lost to Republicans. Yet they voted for minimum wage increases. They didn’t vote for less government. They just want more government from the Republicans because the more government they got from the Democrats wasn’t doing it for them. So they want to give these moderate Republicans a chance to bring home the pork.
The players in Congress may be slightly different, but the game has not changed. Now that the Republicans have power, they want to keep it. How do you keep it? By selling out.
Voters in the five states can be forgiven their economic ignorance. When the new, higher minimum wage results in rising teen unemployment and crime rates then they can reverse their error.
SciFi writer Sarah Hoyt has a perfectly reasonable reason to vote Republican:
Vote Republican because the press hates them and will magnify everything wrong they do, if for no other reason.
Seattle approved a tax hike for transit Frank. You know Seattle better than I do, do you think the funding package services existing riders more than developer interests? That’s a rather different proposition than taxing the entire city (or nation) so some speculative private developer can benefit. Maybe the best way to end such wasteful projects that use public dollars to benefit private developers through transportation improvements, whether rail or road, is for the republicans to stop funding them by ending federal transportation taxes and funding and so force localities to see the full expense of proposed projects. What do you think?
Seattle is strange. Most of the people who voted for the increased taxes for buses don’t take the bus. Guess it doesn’t matter since poor and working class people will end up being disproportionately hit by paying the regressive sales tax.
BTW, Seattle again rejected a monorail project by a landslide majority. Points to monorail advocates for proving the definition of insanity.
On another Seattle election note, after electing Socialist Sawant, it rejected Socialist Spear for state rep by a landslide.
To answer your question, I think people should pay directly for the goods and services they use.
Frank, are they beholden to specific bus service increases with those new taxes? Or could they end up sinking them into a bunch of new downtown express buses that will largely serve middle class and upper middle class?
The Mayor promised that the city will “use this money responsibly” and insist on “strict accountability measures” to assure that Metro expands bus service in areas of greater need.
I’m not holding my breath.
There’s lots of duplicity in the actual measure, talking about loss of revenue due to the financial crisis, while according to some media outlets, the county and city are awash in funds since Seattle’s booming again.
The actual text of the proposition states that “first priority for the funding is to preserve existing routes and prevent King County Metro’s proposed February 2015 service cuts and restructures.”
IMO those propose cuts have nothing to do with the recession and everything to do with malinvestment in streetcars and LRT.
As someone who walks to work and uses a second car for grocery shopping, I’m not looking forward to paying an extra $60 in vehicle licensing fees (for a total of $170) in a few months (and for the next six years) so people can ride shiny new street cars and LRT and eat up car lanes with articulated buses. (Although I would pay it if it went toward street repair.) I may in fact dump the second car, which is nearing the end of its life.
And that’s probably an intended consequence of this proposition’s writers and supporters.
I either need to leave Seattle or get a high-paying job at Amazon.
Thanks
This is a very misleading title. While voters rejected taxes in a couple of instances, they overwhelmingly voted to increase taxes for transit nationwide. According to http://www.cfte.org/elections , in 2014 voters approved 71% of 58 ballot measures to increase taxes for transit. Voters that voted for transit include traditional liberal areas such as Alameda County, CA; San Francisco; Monterey, CA; the aforementioned Seattle, as well as conservative regions like Clayton County, GA and many smaller cities in Michigan. Clayton County, GA was of particular significance, as they became the first jurisdiction since MARTA’s inception to join MARTA, hopefully spurring Cobb County and Gwinnett County to join as well to significantly improve regional transit in the Atlanta region.