Know the rules The Paceline Forum Builder's Spotlight


Go Back   The Paceline Forum > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-26-2011, 03:49 PM
bikinchris bikinchris is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 4,336
Bicycle funds under attack (Again)

Another effort to end bicycle related funding
If you have an interest in advocacy, you might want to know that our legislators are again trying to cut out transportation enhancement funding. This time, they want to cut ALL of it out. Please take a few moments to send them a note telling them how you feel about it.



This is the wording of the note I just got:

Transportation Enhancements under Attack Again
Take Action by clicking this link!
http://capwiz.com/lab/utr/1/HQAAQRQH...MMI/7506335666

Contact your Senators Again Today to Save Bicycle and Pedestrian Funding



It’s happening again. Just one month ago, Sen. Coburn (R-OK) failed in his efforts to strip funding for Transportation Enhancements from the six-month transportation extension.

Senator Rand Paul’s 80-year Bridge Repair Plan

Now, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) is taking the lead in trying to destroy Transportation Enhancements. On November 1, the Senate will finalize the transportation appropriations bill, which sets funding levels for FY2012. Sen. Paul has offered an amendment to redirect all funding for Transportation Enhancements to bridge repair.

We agree on the need to keep our bridges safe, but the lives of pedestrians and cyclists are important too. Thirteen people died when the Minneapolis bridge collapsed in 2007: since then, close to 20,000 pedestrians and 2,800 cyclists have died on our nation’s highways, largely as a result of poor highway design and a lack of safe non-motorized infrastructure – exactly what the enhancement program was created to fix.

If Sen. Paul’s amendment is successful, it would eliminate approximately $700 million in federal funding for FY2012 that is used to construct sidewalks, bike lanes, bike paths, trails and other infrastructure that makes it safe for bicyclists and pedestrians to get around. Even if every penny of these funds is diverted to bridge repairs, Senator Paul’s plan will still take 80 years to fix the backlog of bridge repairs we have today.

Remember that the TE program represents less than two percent of the Federal transportation program and these projects help alleviate traffic congestion, improve safety, get people active, and create more jobs per dollar than highway-only projects.

Remember also that last year, states sent back to Washington $530 million of unspent bridge funds in rescissions – the states are leaving bridge repair funds on the table, unspent, year after year; they should at least spend these funds first.

If the Paul amendment succeeds, it will make it much more challenging to sustain funding for Transportation Enhancements, Safe Routes to School, and Recreational Trails in the long-term transportation bill that the Environment and Public Works Committee starts debating just 8 days later on November 9.

We must turn back any amendment to strip Transportation Enhancements.

Last month, more than 75,000 messages were sent to Senators to ask them to stand strong for Transportation Enhancements. That was an amazing turnout, but we must do better this time. Every time someone in Congress attacks bicycling and walking, we must push back even stronger than we did the time before. And, we will keep doing it until bicycle and pedestrian funding is protected.

This is the third time in a month that a small group of Senators have targeted Transportation Enhancements, using a different angle each time. It is a waste of the Senate's time and taxpayers dollars to focus on this small and valuable program when we are in dire need of real and viable solutions to fix our failing transportation system.

Please contact your Senators today to ask them to vote against the Paul amendment (SA-821) to eliminate Transportation Enhancements.
__________________
Forgive me for posting dumb stuff.
Chris
Little Rock, AR
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-26-2011, 04:45 PM
Ahneida Ride's Avatar
Ahneida Ride Ahneida Ride is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: near the factory
Posts: 174,236
People are already dying from a 16 Trillion debt, an attack on the
American middle class.
__________________
www.HandleBra.com
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-26-2011, 05:29 PM
oldpotatoe's Avatar
oldpotatoe oldpotatoe is offline
Proud Grandpa
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Republic of Boulder, USA
Posts: 47,055
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ahneida Ride
People are already dying from a 16 Trillion debt, an attack on the
American middle class.
Glad somebody said it.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-26-2011, 06:55 PM
93legendti 93legendti is offline
Adam/SerottaFan
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 11,871
Actually, the middle class is doing quite well:

http://www.nd.edu/~jsulliv4/well_bei...ss_poor4.3.pdf

when you account for taxes and measure inflation correctly, there has actually been considerable improvement in the material well-being of the middle class over the past three decades. Median income and consumption have both risen by more than 50 percent in real terms.

In addition, for families with income in the middle 20 percent, there have been noticeable improvements in the homes they live in and the cars they drive. Living units are bigger and are much more likely to have air conditioning and other features. The quality of the cars that these families own has also improved considerably. The data are clear: middle-class Americans are better off today than they were three decades ago.

This improvement is due, in part, to policy changes including lower tax rates and a more-generous child tax credit that leave middle-class families with more disposable income. But the most important factor is economic growth.

When the economy grows, the middle class is better off. To be sure, some groups (most notably very rich households) have benefited from economic growth more so than the middle class, but this does not cancel out the substantial progress that the middle class has made.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-26-2011, 08:28 PM
nm87710 nm87710 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 823

Last edited by nm87710; 04-12-2016 at 03:24 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-26-2011, 08:33 PM
Ahneida Ride's Avatar
Ahneida Ride Ahneida Ride is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: near the factory
Posts: 174,236
Actually the OP has a point I believe..

But we have to restore sanity and it will not be pleasant.

Or we can just continue on the current track of the last 50 years
and see what happens.

Pick your poison.
__________________
www.HandleBra.com
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-26-2011, 08:48 PM
jblande jblande is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 964
Quote:
Originally Posted by 93legendti
Actually, the middle class is doing quite well[/I]

Didn't you read the congressional report from yesterday on the middle class?

Doing OK, but not nearly as well as the top 1%.

And let us not talk about the 1 in 6 Americans living in poverty.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-27-2011, 05:38 AM
SamIAm SamIAm is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 1,711
Quote:
Originally Posted by jblande

Doing OK, but not nearly as well as the top 1%.
What is the wrong that needs to be righted here? Must all groups rise at the same rate? Is it possible that the same skills that led to individuals being in the top 1% also allowed them to do comparatively better in a sketchy economy without victimizing the middle class?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-27-2011, 05:43 AM
soulspinner soulspinner is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: rochester, ny
Posts: 9,500
Lets just stick to bike funding..................
__________________
chasing waddy
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-27-2011, 06:55 AM
LesMiner LesMiner is offline
TooSlowToCare
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 551
Unfortunately Rep Oberstar of Minnesota lost the last election. He was the biggest bicycle advocate in Congress. He was also a bicycle enthusiast. He rode frequently and had organized rides in Minnesota. Without his voice in Congress I doubt provisions for bicycles or pedestrians will survive.

Chip Cravaack now represents the 8th District in Minnesota. He relocated to Rhode Island a short time after the election.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 10-27-2011, 07:55 AM
sg8357 sg8357 is offline
Forward the Foundation
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Highland Heights, Kehn-Tuck-ee
Posts: 2,758
Quote:
Originally Posted by soulspinner
Lets just stick to bike funding..................
Rand Paul is a secret minion of John Forrester.
Death To Bike Lanes (and bike funding)
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-27-2011, 08:10 AM
staggerwing staggerwing is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 1,137
Like every other special interest group, we as cyclists can't even remotely agree on how to spend the alternative funds. There is a vocal group wanting a separate ecosystem, entirely distinct from that provided for motorized transport, and a less vocal group that would prefer just making the current motorways a bit more cycling friendly.

It is increasingly clear, that we have spent well beyond our means, and the note is coming due. Even as a dedicated rider, I'm having a tough time jumping up and down for my slice of the pie, if the funds are primarily earmarked for separate ecosystem projects. Of course, in the vacuum of my non-commitment, there will still be plenty grandstanding for their slice of the pie.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-27-2011, 08:15 AM
oldpotatoe's Avatar
oldpotatoe oldpotatoe is offline
Proud Grandpa
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Republic of Boulder, USA
Posts: 47,055
Quote:
Originally Posted by staggerwing
Like every other special interest group, we as cyclists can't even remotely agree on how to spend the alternative funds. There is a vocal group wanting a separate ecosystem, entirely distinct from that provided for motorized transport, and a less vocal group that would prefer just making the current motorways a bit more cycling friendly.

It is increasingly clear, that we have spent well beyond our means, and the note is coming due. Even as a dedicated rider, I'm having a tough time jumping up and down for my slice of the pie, if the funds are primarily earmarked for separate ecosystem projects. Of course, in the vacuum of my non-commitment, there will still be plenty grandstanding for their slice of the pie.
Agree. Make roadways safer thru education of car drivers that there are bikes everywhere, gonna be for a long time, no need to be pissed about it.

Multiuse paths(separate ecosystems) are expensive and cater to very small groups and enhance leisure times, not transportation times.

Just decent shoulders on roadways would go a long way to safer cycling.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-27-2011, 08:28 AM
AngryScientist's Avatar
AngryScientist AngryScientist is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: northeast NJ
Posts: 33,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldpotatoe
Agree. Make roadways safer thru education of car drivers that there are bikes everywhere, gonna be for a long time, no need to be pissed about it.

Multiuse paths(separate ecosystems) are expensive and cater to very small groups and enhance leisure times, not transportation times.

Just decent shoulders on roadways would go a long way to safer cycling.
i also agree. wider, well maintained shoulders are a cyclists best friend.

maybe also some more road signs that advise motorists that we have a right to the road as well. how about not just "share the road" signs, but "share the road - it's the law". just like the "buckle-up" campaign. those would be dollars well spent i think.

i would say that >75% of drivers i talk to don't really know that it's perfectly legal for a road bike to be on the road, as opposed to the sidewalk, where they think we belong. seriously.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-27-2011, 09:02 AM
Kontact Kontact is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Sunny Seattle
Posts: 2,824
I think we have bigger fish to fry.


The middle class might be better off than 30 years ago, but are the number of people who now qualify as "middle class" actually growing? It isn't hard for the quality of life to improve in an elimination game.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.