September 5, 2007
State and U.S. Reps Challenge TxDOT Ad Campaigns
Several state reps, including Joe Farias and David Leibowitz, and Congressman Ciro Rodriguez have recently begun to ask questions about the Texas Department of Transportation's ad campaign promoting toll roads and the use of budgetary funds to lobby Congress. Specifically, they are asking the Attorney General whether TxDOT's actions are legal.
Legal or not, ad campaigns and lobbying seem like a poor use of taxpayer money for any state agency, especially one that is constantly complaining that it doesn't have enough money, but especially one that cuts from its budget any project not involving new highway construction. TxDOT's priorities are out of line with the priorities of the people of Texas, which is why they need an ad campaign and lobbyists. We'd rather cut the ad campaign and lobbyists, and instead get TxDOT some new priorities.
Image from AlphachimpStudio on Flickr.
|
Good to see this posted, only small correction, Congressman Ciro Rodriguez is a U.S. Representative, not a Texas State House Representative.
Also interesting, Ric Williamson backed off completely from the red light camera program that was going to catch speeders through intersections.
Thanks. Corrected.
My question is - why do they NEVER finish flyovers at major junctions?? Even the new one at Louis Henna / 35 is half done. Only in Texas - you never see such shoddy, incomplete work anywhere else.
We just do that to piss you off.
Not all the TxDOT ads are bad - those Don't Mess with Texas ads are funded by TxDOT, and they're icons in and of themselves (and promote a broad social benefit). Only real problem is - when's the last time you saw one??
I don't have a problem with a state agency advertising to promote some widely held social objective (like not littering). The problem is when the ads promote some policy of the agency itself, especially a controversial policy (like more toll road construction) that is probably not in the best interests of the people. I want TxDOT to be doing what the people want, not determining objectives based on what construction companies, toll road companies and oil companies want and then trying to convince people that they should want the same thing.
It's truly scary our toll road situation. I heard it the other day from a toll road big wig, (who will remain anonymous) that they will never toll existing roads or interstates. I guess he was lying to me?
They need to spend their money making sure that briges and overpasses don't collapse. Who actually supports roads you have to pay to build then pay to drive on other than the people building them or getting a kickback if they're built?
Yeah. And who supports paying to buy buses that you have to pay to ride on, too? And who supports paying to build parking garages that you have to pay to park in, too?
I think we can all agree that paying for stuff is stupid, that the government charging for things is theft and that taxes are also theft.
I can choose to ride the bus or park in a garage. I can't choose to not take a toll road if I need to get somewhere that only the toll road takes me to.
Your mom is theft.
"I can't choose to not take a toll road if I need to get somewhere that only the toll road takes me to."
WAAAAAAAAH.
Somebody without a car can't choose not to take the bus, and they're more likely to not just be whining out their ass when they complain about it.
I know you're upset because somebody finally made the suburban parasites start paying a non-trivial share of the load. Try to deal with it and understand that pricing is the way we handle scarcity in non-command economies. Or maybe you prefer the Soviet model (long lines and/or rationing)?
The corrupt TxDOT and Toller pals just don't stop.
TxDOT and Senator Kirk Watson are now pushing a double tax toll scheme that shifts freeways in Central Texas to tollways.
The Watson/TxDOT toll plan also diverts $700 million tax dollars - intended for free roads - into toll roads. It is important to note that freeways have NEVER been shifted to tollways in the history of our country.
Conventional toll roads across the country have always been built on new land with investor dollars (after the public expressways had been built) so drivers have a choice between the public highway or the toll road. They are taking what is ours to charge us forever, as the tolls will never be removed even after the road has been paid for 100 times over.
Read more about it here:
http://salcostello.blogspot.com/
Thanks
Sal "The Muckraker" Costello
""I can't choose to not take a toll road if I need to get somewhere that only the toll road takes me to."
WAAAAAAAAH.
Somebody without a car can't choose not to take the bus, and they're more likely to not just be whining out their ass when they complain about it.
I know you're upset because somebody finally made the suburban parasites start paying a non-trivial share of the load. Try to deal with it and understand that pricing is the way we handle scarcity in non-command economies. Or maybe you prefer the Soviet model (long lines and/or rationing)?"
I actually live in the city and I take the bus. I don't even have a car unless I rent one. But it is NOT fair for us to pay taxes to build roads which we then have to use. You can dismiss me all you want, but you're the one WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHing, doo-doo head.
And one can take a bike if they don't want to bus.
"have to pay to use" that should have said. But nice working calling "commie" when someone doesn't agree with you.
"ut it is NOT fair for us to pay taxes to build roads which we then have to pay to use."
And it is NOT fair for us to pay taxes to buy buses which we then have to pay to use.
And it is NOT fair for us to pay taxes to build parks which we then have to pay to use.
Blah blah blah.
Price is how we manage a scarce resource in a capitalist system. What you're asking for IS the Soviet method of market-clearing, son.
You have a point, but it sucks. We shouldn't have to pay to use state and national parks, but they are not getting the funding they need. Obviously roads ARE getting the funding they need because we pay for them not only in income tax, but also gas taxes. And PLEASE don't tell me people aren't buying gas these days.
guest #18:
No, the reason roads appeared to be getting the funding they needed is because the urban residents (drivers and non-drivers alike) were paying the bill (and getting nearly jack squat in return). As suburban populations grow, even that excessive level of subsidy isn't enough to keep up with demand.
Funding JUST major road construction/maintenance with the gas tax would require that it be hiked about a buck. You guys think you're currently being charged too much (or just about right); but the fact is that without the subsidy from urban gas taxes and the tremendous amounts of urban property and sales taxes spent on major arterials (including state highways), you wouldn't be able to pave even one of those six freeway lanes that takes you home at night.
Once again I find myself agreeing with the points (if not the style) of mdahmus. I'm all for making new roads to the urban sprawl tolled and also for increasing the gas tax so we can cut or at least stop hiking property taxes. Let's make the users of the public goods actually pay for them. Driving on highways for free and gas under $3/gallon are not unalienable rights.