Transit Ills Spark Debate
News yesterday that the state roads and transit systems need another $2 billion is sparking new debates all over the Commonwealth. Deteriorating highways, bridges and transit systems need a huge infusion of cash according to the study. The Schuylkill Valley Metro Project, finally relinking Philadelphia and Reading with transit service is dead, according to Ed Rendell. That would cost an additional $2 billion.
What happened and why? The Federal highway transportation bill is always the biggest, baddest pork barrel spending orgy Washington ever sees. Congressmen line up for their turn at the trough and the result is projects like the $240 million bridge to nowhere in Alaska. Getting this money for your District is almost automatic re-election insurance. Therefore no intelligence goes into where it goes. No one cares about who or what really needs funding. The only criteria is how much money can I bring back to my area.
I say all federal transportation bills be compiled the same way we do base closures for DoD. A commission comes up with the plan and legislators must vote up or down on the enire plan. No amendments.
Mass transit has been a bastard step child to long term planning for decades. We really don't fund it well. The result is too much dependence on cars, too much pollution and more global warming. Europe is serious about transit. Look at their rail system, the same in Japan. In too much of America you can't get there from here unless you drive. This is bad policy and now it's killing our soldiers so we can continue fueling our cars.
It's time to get serious about transportation. Do we really want to continue building more highways or will building more light rail reduce congestion, preserve open space, and lower emissions from cars? How many more highways can we keep building? I cannot take public transportation to Philadelphia. My only option is driving then paying exorbitant parking charges once I arrive.
The debate is good. We need to discuss these issues and decide on a consensus course of action. We need to decide what our transportation priorities are and what they should be. Then we need a Congressional delegation to stand up for that plan and the Governor to use his clout to convince others.
Yes, it's a lot of money. What's the alternative? Let's hear your ideas.
What happened and why? The Federal highway transportation bill is always the biggest, baddest pork barrel spending orgy Washington ever sees. Congressmen line up for their turn at the trough and the result is projects like the $240 million bridge to nowhere in Alaska. Getting this money for your District is almost automatic re-election insurance. Therefore no intelligence goes into where it goes. No one cares about who or what really needs funding. The only criteria is how much money can I bring back to my area.
I say all federal transportation bills be compiled the same way we do base closures for DoD. A commission comes up with the plan and legislators must vote up or down on the enire plan. No amendments.
Mass transit has been a bastard step child to long term planning for decades. We really don't fund it well. The result is too much dependence on cars, too much pollution and more global warming. Europe is serious about transit. Look at their rail system, the same in Japan. In too much of America you can't get there from here unless you drive. This is bad policy and now it's killing our soldiers so we can continue fueling our cars.
It's time to get serious about transportation. Do we really want to continue building more highways or will building more light rail reduce congestion, preserve open space, and lower emissions from cars? How many more highways can we keep building? I cannot take public transportation to Philadelphia. My only option is driving then paying exorbitant parking charges once I arrive.
The debate is good. We need to discuss these issues and decide on a consensus course of action. We need to decide what our transportation priorities are and what they should be. Then we need a Congressional delegation to stand up for that plan and the Governor to use his clout to convince others.
Yes, it's a lot of money. What's the alternative? Let's hear your ideas.
posted by PA progressive @ Thursday, August 24, 2006
<< Home