Comments on: LaHood: ‘About Everything We Do Around Here Is Government Intrusion’ http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/05/21/lahood-about-everything-we-do-around-here-is-government-intrusion/ Covering the New York City Streets Renaissance Sun, 14 Mar 2010 00:14:01 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8 hourly 1 By: TAS http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/05/21/lahood-about-everything-we-do-around-here-is-government-intrusion/comment-page-1/#comment-68566 TAS Fri, 22 May 2009 12:14:26 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=6219#comment-68566 Here's the thing, folks: if you like Secretary LaHood's position on transit operating costs, tell your legislators. For that matter, whatever you want transportation-wise, tell your legislators. Elana's current beat is all about the <b>massive</b> surface transportation reauthorization underway in Congress. We're gonna have to live with the outcome for the next 5 years. If you want something in there, please, TELL YOUR LEGISLATORS. Here's the thing, folks: if you like Secretary LaHood's position on transit operating costs, tell your legislators. For that matter, whatever you want transportation-wise, tell your legislators. Elana's current beat is all about the massive surface transportation reauthorization underway in Congress. We're gonna have to live with the outcome for the next 5 years. If you want something in there, please, TELL YOUR LEGISLATORS.

]]> By: Woody http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/05/21/lahood-about-everything-we-do-around-here-is-government-intrusion/comment-page-1/#comment-68543 Woody Fri, 22 May 2009 00:55:13 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=6219#comment-68543 In the current crisis, it certainly seems like the time to use federal money to cover operating deficits. Old timers like me recall, however, that it didn't go so well back in the 60s and 70s, when federal funds were regularly available for operations. The anti-government and anti-transit types claimed that the federal money all ended up in fatter pensions and other benefits, and bigger raises, for the mostly unionized transit workers, leaving next to nothing for extra trains or more frequent bus service, etc, to serve the public. The worst part was that they were right. And that unfortunate fact undermined support for federal funding even for transit expansion projects for the next two or three decades. So any use of federal funds for operations this time needs to short term and be carefully limited or we could end up worse off than now. In the current crisis, it certainly seems like the time to use federal money to cover operating deficits. Old timers like me recall, however, that it didn't go so well back in the 60s and 70s, when federal funds were regularly available for operations. The anti-government and anti-transit types claimed that the federal money all ended up in fatter pensions and other benefits, and bigger raises, for the mostly unionized transit workers, leaving next to nothing for extra trains or more frequent bus service, etc, to serve the public.

The worst part was that they were right. And that unfortunate fact undermined support for federal funding even for transit expansion projects for the next two or three decades.

So any use of federal funds for operations this time needs to short term and be carefully limited or we could end up worse off than now.

]]> By: Chris in Sacramento http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/05/21/lahood-about-everything-we-do-around-here-is-government-intrusion/comment-page-1/#comment-68540 Chris in Sacramento Thu, 21 May 2009 23:56:46 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=6219#comment-68540 I'm starting to like his style. It will be curious to see if "no new taxes" holds. Perhaps we could live with a bill that provides no extra funding beyond current levels but also: * provides transit with equity in terms of matching funds requirements * makes transit operations eligible for federal funding * includes a strong complete streets provision * links transportation funding to plans for reducing GHG emissions and other air pollution * keeps whole existing pots of money that are pro-livable communities, such as Enhancements and Safe Routes to School I've seen worse bills come out of D.C. I'm starting to like his style.

It will be curious to see if "no new taxes" holds. Perhaps we could live with a bill that provides no extra funding beyond current levels but also:

* provides transit with equity in terms of matching funds requirements
* makes transit operations eligible for federal funding
* includes a strong complete streets provision
* links transportation funding to plans for reducing GHG emissions and other air pollution
* keeps whole existing pots of money that are pro-livable communities, such as Enhancements and Safe Routes to School

I've seen worse bills come out of D.C.

]]>