Massie: Stop money for streetcars, all transit

 

How can Washington help foot the bill for a new Brent Spence Bridge and Western Hills Viaduct?

 

Stop spending money on streetcars, light rail and bike trails, according to U.S. Rep. Thomas Massie of Northern Kentucky.

 

The Lewis County Republican unveiled a bill Thursday calling for all transit projects to be stripped from the Highway Trust Fund, which will become insolvent on May 31 if Congress doesn't act. That could free up an additional $10 billion a year to help fix crumbling highways and bridges, Massie said.

 

"Currently, gas tax revenue is diverted from the federal Highway Trust Fund for bike paths, sidewalks, mass transit and other local projects," Massie said. "But ... there is no longer enough money in the Highway Trust Fund to maintain our nation's critical highways and bridges while also funding local projects that have no federal nexus."

 

Local transit advocates don't like Massie's so-called "DRIVE Act."

 

"For anyone concerned about safety and congestion on our highways, there is no better dollar spent than a dollar spent on transit," said Over-the-Rhine resident Derek Bauman, regional director of All Aboard Ohio, a statewide transit advocacy group. "Effective transit systems remove millions of commuters from roadways every day."

 

Bauman added: "If anything, we should be looking for ways to increase transit investment to help relieve traffic congestion and provide for the free and safe flow of traffic."

 

The Highway Trust Fund provides most of the money to build highway and transit infrastructure. Money for the fund comes from revenue generated from the federal gas tax, which is 18.4 cents per gallon (15 cents goes to highways; 3 cents to transit projects).

 

The federal gas tax hasn't been increased since 1993, and lagging revenue has contributed to an ongoing shortfall for the Highway Trust Fund. Since 2008, Congress has transferred more than $50 billion from the general fund to the Highway Trust Fund in a series of stopgap measures. Budget analysts project the Highway Trust Fund shortfall will be around $100 billion by the mid-2020s.

 

The lack of federal money has forced state and local governments to look for alternative ways to pay for crumbling infrastructure. Tolls have become a popular (or unpopular) way to pay for projects, and Cincinnati's business community has been pushing for user fees to help fund the $2.6 billion Brent Spence Bridge project.

 

Meanwhile, the Obama administration has pushed for the revival of streetcars as part of a plan to help revive urban centers. Many of those projects have been the focus of contentious debates, mostly over the costs and merits of streetcars. Such has been the case in Cincinnati with the $148 million Downtown streetcar project.

 

The Highway Trust Fund provides between $8 billion and $9 billion annually for transit projects, and Massie is among several fiscal conservatives in recent years to call for completely eliminating transit projects from the fund.

 

"By eliminating diversion of gas tax revenues ... the Highway Trust Fund can fulfill its namesake duty – to fund highways, without an increase in the gas tax rate," Massie said.

Light rail is like the green industry and industry that has trouble standing on its own with Dems siphoning money to it.

I have no problem with bike paths but how much revenue do they generate? NONE.

Light rail is like the green industry and industry that has trouble standing on its own with Dems siphoning money to it.

 

How would cars and trucks be doing without government road and highway money? That industry is absolutely subsidized and has been for decades.

 

Cities and states have shelled out billions on airports. Think we'd be flying as much if air carriers were paying for their own airports?

 

It's all in what we choose to spend the money on. I'm a big believer in a large and vibrant public transit system.

 

That said, the highways fund should be for highways. I'm not against this idea.

How would cars and trucks be doing without government road and highway money? That industry is absolutely subsidized and has been for decades.

 

Cities and states have shelled out billions on airports. Think we'd be flying as much if air carriers were paying for their own airports?

 

It's all in what we choose to spend the money on. I'm a big believer in a large and vibrant public transit system.

 

That said, the highways fund should be for highways. I'm not against this idea.

 

The main complaint is taking the money from a fund that is in trouble and using the monies for a purpose never intended.

 

If government bodies want to issue bonds or assess fees or taxes to pay for such ventures - they can. But in this instance they are raiding a fund that I believe everyone has acknowledged is underfunded for its actual mission - as the rust on the bridges over the Ohio somewhat shows.

 

Like the green industries there is a definite quid-pro-quo that is mainly with the 'green' Dems. Maybe the should just give them money to squander like the green industries vs. raiding the road funds.

 

 

Rail and subways make sense in many areas - I love the Metro in DC or the EL in Chicago. But I have seen where light rail cars run mostly empty in parts of California in the SF and LA areas. In some cases its solution looking for a problem and in the end the main or only benefactor is the contractor (and their political allies).

I'm of the opinion that local transit projects — light rail, streetcars, etc. — should be funded locally. Local people and tourists are who will be using them, so they should be paid for via their fares.

 

In short, call this an occasion where I agree with Massie. Won't happen often.

 

Something such as a major bridge carrying two critical interstate routes north-south is highest-priority fed and state business. We need a massive shuffling from the top down in terms of how federal, state and local governments prioritize funding for key infrastructure projects.

I'm of the opinion that local transit projects — light rail, streetcars, etc. — should be funded locally. Local people and tourists are who will be using them, so they should be paid for via their fares.

 

In short, call this an occasion where I agree with Massie. Won't happen often.

 

Something such as a major bridge carrying two critical interstate routes north-south is highest-priority fed and state business. We need a massive shuffling from the top down in terms of how federal, state and local governments prioritize funding for key infrastructure projects.

 

There is absolutely no reason the Federal government should be funding local transit systems. I agree.

 

It just isn't the job of the Fed. They should be funded and debated locally.

 

A bridge such as the Brent Spence that is critical to the flow of traffic for a large portion of this country should be of the upmost importance.

 

There is no reason the Fed should be able to tell us they don't have the money for a bridge but are handing out funds for street cars and light rails .

How would cars and trucks be doing without government road and highway money? That industry is absolutely subsidized and has been for decades.

 

Cities and states have shelled out billions on airports. Think we'd be flying as much if air carriers were paying for their own airports?

 

It's all in what we choose to spend the money on. I'm a big believer in a large and vibrant public transit system.

 

That said, the highways fund should be for highways. I'm not against this idea.

 

Yes money has been spent on highways and roads, infrastructure and the ability to have a national web of logistics is one of the backbones of this country.

 

Airports are/were a necessity for a growing economy in any large city. Cities without airports are locked out of most growth unfortunately in out country, nobody wants to build or expand to a city they can't get into or out of easily. No different than having water and sewer services...it is a necessity for growth. A booming airport also means jobs and more money back into the economy. Cities building an airport is no different than the tax breaks and other inducements that Kentucky gave Toyota many years ago (probably one of the best investments the state has ever made)

 

Public transit is a great idea, but when compared to highways the money spent compared to the citizens served and impact on the economy it lags way behind on ROI.

For the life of me I can't figure out why this bridge can't get fixed...I also can't figure out why it should cost that much either. A lot of greasing going on IMO.

By the time you implement a major highway construction project, it is already obsolete and congested. Does anybody ever consider the cost of sitting in traffic for hours on end because some truck, that is allowed to freely flow through downtown Cincinnati, has jack knifed? I'd much rather commute by commuter rail where I can work while I travel!

By the time you implement a major highway construction project, it is already obsolete and congested. Does anybody ever consider the cost of sitting in traffic for hours on end because some truck, that is allowed to freely flow through downtown Cincinnati, has jack knifed? I'd much rather commute by commuter rail where I can work while I travel!

 

Problem is that commuter rail in Cincy would only serve a very few outside the city. Fixing that bridge isn't about the locals, it's about keeping a major artery in our country open and free flowing north and south. I 75 is one of the most important highways in the nation. In fact it is listed by some as the second most important North/South Interstate Highway in the country.

For the life of me I can't figure out why this bridge can't get fixed...I also can't figure out why it should cost that much either. A lot of greasing going on IMO.

 

Eminent domain of the property needed to place the bridge (for the land areas) is going to be very expensive. Gotta remember where they are trying to build a bridge, its not like its just open farm land.

By the time you implement a major highway construction project, it is already obsolete and congested. Does anybody ever consider the cost of sitting in traffic for hours on end because some truck, that is allowed to freely flow through downtown Cincinnati, has jack knifed? I'd much rather commute by commuter rail where I can work while I travel!

 

Commuter rail isn't going to get your commerce across the United States let alone into the stores and restaurants in downtown Cincinnati.

I wonder how many trucks jack knife as a result of careless drivers around them? #sharetheroad

Commuter rail isn't going to get your commerce across the United States let alone into the stores and restaurants in downtown Cincinnati.

I wonder how many trucks jack knife as a result of careless drivers around them? #sharetheroad

 

And the problem with the existing commercial rail is what exactly?

Commercial rail? Are we in the wild, wild west? Railroads are only good for moving coal across country anymore. You have to have the trucks on the highways and bridges moving the economy along.

 

If you want commuter rail, streetcars and the such, find the money to build them. I have no problem with them.