Something along the lines of “you wouldn’t change your mind on whether to defend america every year; you’d only quibble over the direction. So why are we always changing our mind on how to make this city work?” Obviously I don’t work in advertising, but you get the idea.

If we can get people to think about transportation spending in the same way they think about 15 year defense contracts (i.e. long term strategic value, and a shared agreement to decouple the political cycle from the value of a given project) then there is a way forward. Without doing this the transportation lobby will be stuck in sniping mode – always reacting to *this* project or *that* initiative.

The nature of the debate has to change. Right?

In response to a discussion we had last year on this topic, I came up with a proposal for someone with a little money to spend on this. The total member items for most legislators actually comes out to a relatively small amount – under $200,000. Just pick a member, commit to donating as much or more for the next five years (say), and watch their power dwindle!

I’m really care about transit policy, so I spend time researching politician’s views and voting record regarding mass transit. Yet, I don’t think that most people, even those who care about transit, spend as much time as I do researching political candidate’s transit credentials. Therefore, we need an easy rating system, which could help solidify support for pro-transit politicians. Maybe state politicians will start to care when they realize they are flunking with an important constituency.

Can I borrow a car from someone? (I’d take a Zipcar, but I can’t afford the 18.75% tax!)

o Infrastruture investment vs. being stuck with past debts.

o The environmental future vs. current convenience.

BUT ALSO

o Funding for teachers in the classroom vs. earlier retirement for those that left.

o Taxes on retirement income relative to wage and self-employment income, particularly for those that have less.

o Subsidies for shrinking old-line companies vs. taxes on new companies.

o A second wave of Social Security payroll tax and retirement age increases for future beneficiaries, with no shared sacrifice by older cohorts, possibly used to fund current spending (once again) rather than actually saved for those future beneficiaries.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/05/AR2009050503850_pf.html

o And, most importantly, health care finance for at least basic and proven services for everyone at the federal level, including those still paying Medicare taxes, not just more enhancements to the existing Medicare program for those who get it and no longer pay.

I wish those concerned with all those other issues showed the fighting spirit I see from many on this blog, because the inequties and future deterioration are as great.

People who commute by walking or cycling or work from home have had their income taxes raised not insignificantly – about $150-500/year for most people in the middle to upper middle classes.

People who take the mass transit system who already have to contribute a higher percentage of the total costs than any other mass transit system in the nation will have to pay even more.

People that own cars that they only use on the weekends for special trips at 3-4k miles per year will be taxed at the same cost as people who put 30k miles on their car every year. Same for gas guzzlers vs. highly efficient cars.

People that don’t own cars, but occassionally rent them may pay even more in yearly taxes than automobile owners do for yearly registration fees & taxes.

To boot, the people that politicians talked about protecting the most – daily commuters from the outerboroughs – now face a stark choice: Higher tolls on the MTA bridges or Longer waits on the “Free” East River Bridges.

It’s not a comprehensive transportation plan, it’s a stop-gap funding band-aid to maintain service.