[Oeva-list] Update on HB2328

cje at hevanet.com cje at hevanet.com
Wed May 4 17:31:09 PDT 2011


Sure. We spend more on roads than we take in. We've all known that 
forever, it's not new. I'm just calling BS on blaming the shovel wielders 
and road-grader drivers. The legislature is the place to cast the blame. 

Curt

> 
> --- On Wed, 5/4/11, cje at hevanet.com <cje at hevanet.com> wrote:
> 
> As far as the "cutting benefits" etc stuff goes, it doesn't work like 
> that. They're already taking furlough days and benefit cuts. Dark 
> mutterings about "taxing the little guy so they don't have to suffer
too">   
> and hating on the gummint slug DOT guys don't really further any 
> constructive ends. The problem here is the legislators, not the guys
with>  
> the shovels.
> 
> 
> 
> I refer you to the abstract of the talk by Gail Achterman, Chair, Oregon
> Transportation Commission .
> It has the following paragraph.
>  But the transportation revenue model is broken. Revenues flowing into
th> e federal Highway Trust Fund have fallen significantly due to higher 
gas
pr> ices, recession pressures and the shift to alternative fuels. 
Meanwhile,
st> ate fuel tax revenue can only be used for highway transportation 
projects.
> First, I highly doubt the shift to alternative fuels affects them in any
me> asureableway.
> So it sounds pretty obvious that they are  claiming the system is
"broken> " becausethe recession is taking a hit on them too.   
> This hardly sounds "broken" to me.    It actually sounds a desireable
f> eedback.i.e. people are poorer, less people are driving, so less money 
is
c> oming back into the roads.   If everyone elses wages are falling, is
it>  broken to suggest that government's wages should fall also?
> Do you think she would be claiming the system is "broken" if it was the
oth> er way around?   i.e.  " Well more people are driving because of the
> economic boom, and lower gas prices and we are getting a ton more money,
> so the system must be broken...."
> Personally I think her abstract shows pretty clearly exactly what I
alluded>  to.  "They don't expect their fortunes to rise and fall with the
general>  public.   Theyonly expect them to rise".    So I think it is
actuall> y "Tax the little guy more"because the system is "broken".   They 
just
do> n't say it in those words.
> More something like.....
> Because the transportation revenue system is universally regarded to be
u> nsustainable, we most seek more ways to look at smaller revenue
sources>  which have not been fully exploited in order to fully fund
ourobligation> s
> 
> 
> I'm just not falling for that hot air.....
I'm just not falling for that hot air.....





More information about the Oeva-list mailing list