Comments on: From Denver: Dems Discuss Funding Woes; Biden Says “Amtrak”

By: Josh

Josh — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 22:27:12 +0000

What state is our country in when "Politician Says 'Amtrak'" is the headline? That said, when the "A-word" (tee hee) came out last night, it immediately suprised me.

By: Niccolo Machiavelli

Niccolo Machiavelli — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 21:53:30 +0000

Didn't Rose Ds district used to benefit form tolls on the CT turnpike? Didn't they give up on that about the same time they lowered their fuel taxes? Hasn't Rose been following this strategy for a long time? And if CT won't tax fuel why should the Feds? How will this ever play out in the favor of the Northeast come reauthorization next summer?

By: Squatty HJ

Squatty HJ — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 20:42:56 +0000

You get what you pay for is absolutely right. Amtrak has been under-funded by a mile since its inception. If people really are moving to urban areas at a higher and higher rate, and the population is really increasing at a higher and higher rate... well, it makes more sense when planning cities to plan for mass transit. It equals more people on dedicated lines getting deposited to the downtown area faster. If we don't fix it now, it is going to be one of those things that our descendants will look back on us and wonder what the hell we were thinking. Like our national debt.

By: Boris

Boris — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 20:20:57 +0000

I don't get it. Bush was able to raise hundreds of billions of dollars for the Iraq war without asking anyone, and the question of federal funding for transportation "caused anxiety"? Just have our soldiers build bridges, rail lines, and roads, using Pentagon money, just like they do in Iraq. Pass a transit appropriations bill instead of a war appropriations bill. Isn't it really obvious?

By: Cap'n Transit

Cap'n Transit — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 19:48:18 +0000

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) called any attempt by Congress to raise the gas tax “dead on arrival.”

I know there are a lot of Streetsblog readers who live in DeLauro's district and who might be frustrated with her simplistic approach. They might want to contact her and let her know.

By: Josh

Josh — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 18:33:20 +0000

Wait, they want to spend more on infrastructure but don't have the wherewithal to actually raise funding for it? Stunning.

By: vnm

vnm — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 18:22:57 +0000

The gas tax was conceived of as a proxy for a user fee that would charge those who used the roads and highways based on how much they used them. With technology advances and with the introduction of hybrid cars, the gas tax as originally conceived probably makes less and less sense.

If the goal is to compensate the government for wear-and-tear on roads, it would be better to actaully tax that driving, per mile, based on satelite transponder technology or some such. If the goal is to discourage people from emitting greenhouse gases, better to raise the gas tax.