Sidebar

Important Information

2024 General Election Voter Guide

2024 Resolutions for Party Conventions


Lege Wrap-up

2023 Session Report Card


Slides from Public Talks


Why public-private partnerships are anti-taxpayer

Texans for Reform & Freedom Texans for Reform & Freedom
  • Home
  • Press
  • Contact Us
  • About TURF
    • About Us
    • Standing Meetings
  • Grassroots Action Center
    • Session Resources
    • Toll-Free Texas: Reforms
    • Party Platform Resolutions
    • Public Hearings
    • Transportation 101
    • Social Resources
  • Donate Today!
  • Eminent Domain
  • News & Blog
    • Latest News
      • Misc. News
      • Eminent domain
      • Trans Texas Corridor
      • Public Private Partnerships
      • Regional Mobility Authority
      • Metropolitan Planning Org.
    • Press Releases
      • San Antonio
      • Texas State Wide
    • SA Toll Party blog archives
  • Resources
    • Report Cards & Voter Guides
    • Non-toll Solutions
    • Glossary of Toll Terms
    • Funny But Sad
    • Public Talks
    • Transportation 101
  • Email Updates
facebook logo Like TURF   twitter logo Follow TURF
  • Home
  • Press
  • Contact Us

Only 60% of federal gas taxes go to roads...

Details
News
Repairing Bridges without Raising Gas Taxes
By Heidi Sommer and H. Sterling Burnett
NCPA
Published: 10-18-07

In the wake of the August 1, 2007, Minneapolis bridge collapse, Rep. Jim Oberstar (D-Minn.), chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, proposed a 5-cents-per-gallon increase in the federal excise tax on gasoline.

Oberstar believes the hike would raise $25 billion over three years for critical bridge repairs across the United States. But his proposal flies in the face of growing public concern over sustained high gas prices. For instance, a 2006 CNN–ABC News poll found that 70 percent of respondents felt that gasoline price hikes had caused them personal hardship, and 59 percent believed gas prices had reduced their standard of living.

While there are legitimate concerns about the safety of the nation’s infrastructure, increasing the federal gas tax is unnecessary and will ultimately hurt America’s poor and low-income citizens. Fortunately, Congress can better ensure the soundness of the nation’s bridges and overpasses without raising taxes, simply by shifting existing funds within the transportation budget.
Current Gas Taxes. The gas tax is an excise tax. Like the taxes on cigarettes and beer, it is paid only by those who purchase the product. The 1956 Federal-Aid Highway Act established the Highway Trust Fund and stipulated that 100 percent of the gas tax be deposited into this fund. The trust fund financed highway building and maintenance across the nation. Currently:


• The federal government imposes a gasoline tax of 18.4 cents per gallon.
• States levy additional gas taxes at rates ranging from a low of 8 cents per gallon in Alaska to a high of 44.4 cents per gallon in California.
• Combined federal and state gas taxes now average about 45 cents per gallon.
However, a substantial portion of the federal gas tax is diverted to nonhighway projects.

Who Pays the Gas Tax? Proponents of the tax increase insist that the hike would be barely noticeable. But the reality is that a 5-cents-per-gallon jump would cost American motorists an estimated $25 billion over the next three years. With this tax increase, most motorists would pay more than $7.50 in taxes alone for an average fill-up.
A recent study by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago reported that households in the top one- fourth of earners devoted 3.3 percent of their total income to gasoline, while households in the bottom quarter spent 3.8 percent. The same study found that families earning $24,000 per year spent almost 5 percent of their income on gas, while families earning $132,000 per year spent less than 2 percent. Thus, a gas tax hike would have the most dramatic effect on the working poor, who spend a higher proportion of their income on gasoline than any other group.

 Diverting Gas Taxes. According to the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), 12 percent of the 597,340 bridges in the United States are structurally deficient — requiring significant maintenance, rehabilitation or replacement.

Despite past debate on the poor condition of the nation’s bridges, the situation was largely ignored before the recent Minneapolis bridge collapse. As they have for decades, Congress diverted Highway Trust Fund dollars away from potentially life-saving construction and repair to pork-barrel and earmarked projects. Earmarks are projects requested by individual members of Congress for their constituencies. The majority of these bypass normal state and federal review and selection processes. Although labeled “high-priority,” these projects only benefit certain constituent groups; the rest of the country would likely prefer funding for more immediate needs.
For instance, the 2005 highway bill contained $2 billion annually for bridge reconstruction. The House Transportation Committee considered increasing that figure to $3 billion a year, but instead Congress stuffed the bill with nearly 6,500 pork-barrel projects costing more than $24 billion. This is about the same amount Rep. Oberstar’s proposed tax increase would raise. “High-priority” transportation projects in the 2005 legislation included:
• $315 million for the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere” intended to replace a 7-minute ferry ride to the Ketchikan Airport in Alaska;
• $5 million to improve air quality in the Sacramento region of California;
• $4 million for bike paths and public parks near New River in Calexico, Calif.; and
• $4 million for streetscape, pedestrian improvements in Clarkson, Ga.
The 2008 transportation appropriations bill seems likely to continue this trend, with more than $2.2 billion in earmarks. Indeed, many billions of dollars have been diverted from highway funding to other programs. As the figure shows, according to Transportation Secretary Mary Peters:

• Only 60 percent of federal gas taxes goes to the construction and maintenance of highways and bridges.

• Thirty percent goes to subsidize construction and maintenance of public transit facilities, such as bus terminals, light rail and subway systems.

• The remaining 10 percent is diverted to other projects — currently 6,000 projects — including bike paths, museums, nature trails, historic building repairs and so forth.

This is especially unfortunate since passenger rail lines, for instance, cost two-and-one-half to five times as much per mile to construct as a highway, though the only rail line in the nation that carries as much passenger traffic as a single lane of freeway is in New York City, and only six urban rail lines in the country carry as much as 3 percent of all travelers in the area they serve.
“Only 60 percent of federal gas taxes are spent on highways.”

Despite these facts, Rep. Oberstar told the Rochester Post-Bulletin, “If you’re not prepared to invest another five cents in bridge reconstruction and road reconstruction, then God help you.” Ironically, Oberstar recently boasted that he had “secured more than $12 million in funding” for his state in a recent federal transportation and housing bill, none of which went for bridge repair. Instead, the funding Obserstar secured included $10 million for a commuter rail line, $250,000 for a bike and hike trail, $200,000 for bus services in Duluth and $150,000 for the Mesabi Academy of Kidspeace in Buhl.

Conclusion. Fifty years ago, the federal government played an important role in creating a national transportation system. The federal gasoline tax financed this effort, ensuring that drivers paid for the system. The Highway Trust Fund should be dedicated to building and maintaining roads and bridges. If trust fund spending were properly prioritized, bridge repairs could be funded by current national and state fuel taxes.

To protect poorer American citizens as they struggle to make ends meet, Congress should end pork-barrel projects and earmarks, and devote the monies in the Highway Trust Fund to critical infrastructure repair and expansion. If bike paths and public transit are worthwhile priorities, an excise tax could be levied on bicycles and jogging shoes, and fees for public transit could be raised.

Heidi Sommer is a policy intern and H. Sterling Burnett is a senior fellow with the National Center for Policy Analysis.

Sen. Dan Patirck takes issue with TxDOT talk radio trainers calling him a "pig"

Details
News
Dan Patrick is a radio station owner and talk radio host turned State Senator. He, like just about every other talk show host across the State, is taking issue with the crude remarks made by TxDOT's hired media consultants who refer to talk radio hosts and callers as "pigs." This arrogance and disrespect for the taxpayers doesn't exactly engender warm fuzzy feelings for an agency asking for $5 billion dollars in taxpayer backed bonds for roads in a Constitutional Amendment election November 6, especially when it's spending $9 million on wasteful ad campaigns...

Read Senator Patrick's letter to Ric Williamson here.

Allard: TxDOT gone too far

Details
News
Link to article here. We could all use some laughter over this toll road fight, and Col. Ken Allard gladly delivers. Let the insurgency begin!

Ken Allard: Give TxDOT red light before it goes too far
San Antonio Express-News
10/17/2007

Forgive me, fellow Texans, but I'm just a newcomer who looks ridiculous in a cowboy hat and doesn't even own an SUV. Quickly recognizing Eastern transplants, tourist shops try to sell me bumper stickers: "Wasn't born in Texas, but I got here just as soon as I could."So can you help me connect these dots while we wait for the daily Boerne-Loop 410-airport-Seguin-San Marcos traffic jam to clear up?

News item No. 1: Pleading a funding shortage, the Texas Department of Transportation announced it will cut $1.8 billion in road construction, including at least $57 million (apparently earmarked in a weak moment) to widen clogged San Antonio highways.

News item No. 2: Today, Travis County District Judge Orlinda Naranjo will decide if TxDOT officials acted illegally in spending taxpayer funds to drum up political support for toll roads (TxDOT's preferred solution to the state's transportation crisis).

News item No. 3: A private contractor received more than $750,000 from TxDOT to send road condition surveys to 150,000 presumably startled motorists whose license plates were "randomly recorded" by TxDOT surveillance cameras hidden in orange barrels on Interstate 35 from Laredo to Dallas.


 

As a one-time regular on his MSNBC simulcast, I would often hear radio shock jock Don Imus exclaim, "You just can't make this stuff up!" Indeed you can't when it comes to TxDOT, which gives an entirely new meaning to the phrase "out of control."

Has no one in the Lone Star State ever heard of "checks and balances"? (Hint to local high schoolers about to endure new rounds of standardized testing: This term does not refer to financial matters!)

Had TxDOT somehow been cast as a character on "The Sopranos," the only question would be: How long before Paulie Walnuts takes 'em out to get whacked?

While the arrogance of government agencies and personalities is the hardiest of all perennials, there is always the inevitable downside.

A powerful congressman such as Wilbur Mills winds up cavorting with stripper Fanne Fox in the Tidal Basin. FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover is eventually revealed to have had a fondness for basic black, apparently accessorized with really nice pumps and pearls.

So just how far can TxDOT push its luck before somebody wakes up and gives the agency its long overdue comeuppance?

Had anything like the trifecta of excesses outlined above occurred in Washington rather than Austin, the offending agency director would have been instantly summoned to appear before investigating committees, with the usual tiers of media mavens and photographers-in-waiting. With cameras scrutinizing every flinch, the tough questions for the TxDOT director would begin.

Who decides which road improvements are funded by your agency — and with whose concurrence? What public input is solicited, and why should the public believe TxDOT when you say you're running out of money?

What gives you the idea that a taxpayer-funded public agency has any business using those tax dollars to lobby for its own interests? And why waste almost a million dollars on a "Big Brother" survey about road conditions that your department should have understood to begin with?

Until such questions are asked and answered, simply think of TxDOT as a state agency being gradually auctioned off to a hot-bidding coalition of builders, developers, heavy equipment contractors and construction magnates.

One thing is certain: We are quickly losing much of San Antonio's special character to chaos — unbridled expansion, high-density housing and utterly unplanned growth. Despite growing questions about its transparency and competence, TxDOT acts as an obliging accomplice while fields, forests and the last remnants of an irreplaceable frontier culture are bulldozed into 24 lanes of privatized, toll-bearing concrete, complete with access roads.

Know what San Antonio will look like if these guys win? Houston!

Know what we are if we let that happen? Stupid!

Reasons enough to demand that our political leaders bring TxDOT's antics to a screeching halt before it starts putting up toll booths at the end of your driveway.

(Got here just as soon as I could to warn you.)

TxDOT marketing coaches call talk show hosts "PIGS!"

Details
News
Link to story here. What ever happened to turning the other cheek? My, my, name calling is the first thing a person devoid of arguments reduces himself to. I doubt these techniques will be useful considering the whole state is now alerted to them. Another $66,000 of taxpayer money WASTED! Thanks TxDOT! OINK! OINK!

TxDOT coached on thwarting toll foes on talk radio
10/17/2007
By Peggy Fikac
Express- News Austin bureau

AUSTIN — When Texas transportation officials talk about bridges these days, they don't necessarily mean steel spans and concrete girders. Instead, they are being taught how to "bridge" from off-message questions to their own talking points in a toll-road campaign."You will often be asked questions that don't get to the points you wish to make or that you don't wish to answer," says a "radio interview techniques" section of Texas Department of Transportation documents released under the Public Information Act. "You can use bridging to turn the question to your points."

One useful phrase, suggests the document — prepared by consultants who are to be paid $24,500 for talk-radio training for the campaign, and tweaked by the department — is this: t"I think what you are really asking is ..."

The document also offers this timeless advice: "Keep calm. Leave wrestling to the pigs. They always end up looking like pigs."


The training document is part of the multimillion-dollar Keep Texas Moving campaign, the subject of a court hearing today.

The hearing comes after activist Terri Hall of the San Antonio Toll Party and Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom filed a court petition to stop the agency from spending public funds on the campaign, projected to cost $7 million to $9 million in highway money.

Hall also wants to block any lobbying attempts by transportation officials to persuade Congress to allow more toll roads.

The Keep Texas Moving campaign has a focus on toll roads and the Trans-Texas Corridor network. Both are touted by GOP Gov. Rick Perry and others as necessary in the face of congestion and gas-tax revenues that fall short of meeting road needs. Criticism has centered on the potential corridor route and on the state partnering with private firms to run toll roads.

In her court filing, Hall contends that transportation officials, in promoting the initiatives, are violating a ban on lobbying and on using their authority for political purposes.

The state says TxDOT is allowed by law to promote toll projects and that its campaign is a response to a call from the public and from elected officials for more information on road initiatives.

State District Judge Orlinda Naranjo of Travis County last month refused to order an immediate stop to the spending. Naranjo today will consider a state request that she dismiss the case.

The state contends the legal complaint is moot because an existing contract for media services was due to end Sept. 30.

Thompson Marketing of San Antonio got a state contract of nearly $2 million last year for the first phase of the project, which included a marketing development plan and such items as TV and radio spots, print ads, internet banner ads and billboards.

The company billed the agency in March regarding a Senate transportation hearing and in April and May for "legislature, media monitoring for strategic planning, messaging." Lawmakers this year worked to curb new private toll projects.

The state plans no more spending on "any future media placement under the current Keep Texas Moving campaign" but still needs to pay Thompson Marketing for some previous work, said an affidavit by Helen Havelka, the campaign's manager.

The agency also has a $20,000 contract for talk-radio training for transportation officials with the Rodman Co., which subcontracted with ViaNovo, whose team includes former Bush strategist Matthew Dowd. It plans another $4,500 training class, and the two consulting companies plan two telephone town-hall meetings at a cost of $17,480.

Rodman and ViaNovo worked on the radio training guide, said TxDOT spokesman Chris Lippincott, who also had input on the document, titled "Talking on Talk Radio."

"The talk radio environment runs the gamut from productive and thoughtful to vitriolic and silly," Lippincott said. "We certainly want to prepare (agency spokespeople) for all possibilities, and that includes everyone from a skeptical talk-show host to an outright hostile caller."

TxDOT to lower speed on I-35 to force more traffic on SH 130 TOLL ROAD

Details
News
Link to article here. And who will get this toll revenue? Cintra, a Spanish company, and its minority partner, Zachry. So a PUBLIC agency is expressly manipulating our interstate speeds to line the pockets of a private, foreign company!

Texas: Speed Limit May be Lowered to Boost Toll Revenue
Toll road contract in Texas allows state to lower speed limits on nearby interstate freeway to avoid paying penalties to a private company.
The Newspaper.com
October 19, 2007

SH130 route mapThe Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) has agreed to consider lowering the maximum speed limit on a stretch of interstate highway that competes with a planned toll road. Cintra-Zachary, a joint Spanish-US venture, paid TxDOT $1.3 billion for the right to collect tolls on 40-miles of State Highway 130 set for construction beginning in 2009. Although TxDOT suggested that free market competition was part of the goal of using a public-private partnerships to construct and operate roads, the contract it signed on March 22 to construct this portion of SH130 was specifically designed to limit the desirability of alternate, free routes.

 


"The compensation amount owing from TxDOT to Developer on account of the competing facility shall be equal to the loss of toll revenues, if any, attributable to the competing facility," the contract states. (11.3.2.1)

The provision ensures no improvements can be made to nearby roads unless the agency issues payment to the Spanish-US private consortium with taxpayer funds. TxDOT can reduce the amount of compensation owed, however, if it agrees to increase toll revenue by imposing a "decrease in the maximum daytime posted speed limit for passenger vehicles on all or a substantial portion of I-35 where it runs generally parallel to the Facility." This means that TxDOT can recover money generated by additional tolls as motorists abandon I-35 because of the lowered limit and increased congestion.

The net effect of the clause is to dissuade, without prohibiting, any improvements on competing roads. TxDOT has argued that it is strapped for cash and therefore has no alternative but to turn to private sector tolling to fund new roads. Future improvements to free lanes would become less likely when the agency must pay not only the cost of labor and materials, but a compensation to nearby toll road operators as well.

In the past, so-called "non-compete" language in tolling contracts resulted in a blanket prohibition on the construction of new roads or engineering improvements intended to ease congestion. Non-compete clauses raised public anger in the case of the SR91 Express Lanes in Orange County, California. More recent agreements have tended to focus on introducing "traffic calming" measures on competing roads intended to drive traffic off of pay roads and onto toll roads, as was seen last year in Sydney, Australia's Cross City Tunnel (view parliamentary report on the tunnel).

TxDOT has also reserved the right to add contract language that would limit improvements to free roads near the planned Trans Texas Corridor toll road.

"The foregoing rights shall be subject to any covenant regarding competing facilities that may be entered into in connection with the development and operation of a Facility," the agency's TTC-35 Comprehensive Development Agreement states. (18.2)

Excerpts from the competition portion of the SH130 contract are available in a 351k PDF file at the source link below.

Source: PDF File Facility Concession Agreement, SH130 Segments 5 and 6 (Texas Department of Transportation, 3/22/2007)

Perry endorses pro-Trans Texas Corridor Giuliani for President

Details
News
The Trans Texas Corridor officially arrived on the national stage and square in the middle of presidential politics today with Texas Governor Rick Perry's endorsement of Rudy Giuliani for President. With Giuliani being the extreme polar opposite of just about everything Perry claims to represent as a "conservative," the only explanation for his cozy relationship with Giuliani is their common tie to Cintra and the Trans Texas Corridor. For a reminder of Giuliani's ties to Cintra, read here. To read about how Perry is expected to be tapped as Giuliani's Vice Presidential running mate, go here.

Given that Perry couldn't even garner more than 39% of the vote in his last election and his betrayal of conservatives ever since (conducted an all out assault on border security, parental rights, private property rights, and keeping transportation taxes as low as possible when he flip flopped on the border, mandated the HPV vaccine for 10-11 year old girls, vetoed a bill to give protection from eminent domain abuse, and vetoed a private toll moratorium bill), does anyone honestly think Perry will help rather than hurt Giuliani and can anyone honestly call him a "conservative"? He's about as conservative as Bush. They're both more like advocates of state-run capitalism!

Perry endorses Giuliani for president
By Peggy Fikac
Express-News, Austin bureau
10/17/2007

AUSTIN – Gov. Rick Perry this morning endorsed former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani for president, saying on Fox News that he would campaign for the man he believes is best-suited to lead America during “probably one of the most important times in our history with a war on terror going on.

“For the last six months, I have cogitated, I’ve looked, I’ve studied these candidates -- some of them I know very well -- and came to the conclusion that the individual who can lead America with clarity, the individual who has the experience, the individual who cleaned up a city that was absolutely on its back is mayor Rudy Giuliani,” Perry said.


“I’m proudly and excitedly going to campaign for him and work for him,” Perry said, appearing on Fox & Friends for what was touted by the news channel as a “humongous Texas-sized announcement.”

Perry, who touts his record as a conservative, made a reference to a difference in views on some issues with Giuliani, who has backed the right to abortion and gay rights.

Perry has supported abortion restrictions -- including a requirement for girls to get parental consent for abortion -- and a constitutional ban on gay marriage in Texas. In a recent speech to California Republicans, Perry touted that record and said the GOP must stay true to its conservative values.

“We spent an inordinate amount of time together over the course of the last six weeks talking about issues, both on the phone and face to face,” Perry said of Giuliani. “I looked him in the eye and I asked him questions on some issues that we don’t agree on.”

But Perry, in a phrase he often uses, said, “I don’t get tied up with the process. What I look for is results.”

Citing his work cleaning up New York City, the GOP governor said Giuliani “is the individual who will give us the results that will make America safer, that will move our economy forward, that will put strict constructionists on the Supreme Court …”

Some have suggested Perry may be a possible contender for vice president, with his appeal to conservatives especially important if a candidate such as Giuliani is the nominee. Others scoff at that idea.

Some say the term of President Bush, the previous Texas governor, will make it difficult for the GOP to put another Texan on the ticket. Asked about that on Fox, Perry said with a chuckle, “I’ve got the best job in the work. Ask the president.”

When pressed, he said, “I have no interest in going to Washington, DC. It’s not a place that I have passion about. I’ve got three-plus years left in my term as the governor of a great state … whose economy is doing quite well and intend to do that and finish out that term.”

Canadians want referendum on North American Union

Details
News
Canadians call for vote on SPP

Activists demand national referendum on 'continental divide'
Posted: October 15, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
 By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

Canadian activists are demanding Prime Minister Stephen Harper fulfill a promise and submit the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America to a national referendum for an up or down vote.

"The Prime Minister of Canada and his cabinet in both Liberal and Conservative regimes support the unification of North America as witnessed by the fact of [former Prime Minister] Paul Martin and [current Prime Minister] Stephen Harper being signatories to the SPP process," said Connie Fogal, leader of the Canadian Action Party.
Fogal rejects the idea that the vote on SPP should be taken solely in the Canadian Parliament.

"A decision about the restructuring of Canada into an integrated North America is not a decision for parliament, but for the citizens of Canada," Fogal says. "What every Parliamentarian should do is call for a no confidence vote on this issue to cease unification of Canada, the USA and Mexico, and then run a campaign on the life of Canada not its death."

Maude Barlow, the National Chairperson of the Council of Canadians, agrees.

"So far, only 30 CEOs from North America's richest corporations, including Lockheed Martin, Bank of Nova Scotia, Chevron, Power Corporation and Merck, have had any meaningful input," a news release on Barlow's website proclaims. "Only they have been invited to annual closed-door meetings of SPP leaders and ministers, such as the one that took place in Montebello, Quebec, in August."

As WND previously reported, the North American Competitiveness Council, or NACC, dominated the SPP closed-door meetings with the SPP trilateral working groups, the trilateral cabinet members in attendance and President Bush, Mexico's President Felipe Calderon, and Harper at the third annual SPP summit in Montebello, Quebec, on Aug. 20-21.

WND has also reported the NACC is a shadowy council of 30 top North American multinational corporations self-appointed by the Chambers of Commerce in each of the three countries to constitute the sole outside advisory to the SPP.

The 30 companies composing the NACC are listed on a memo posted on the U.S. Chamber of Commerce website.

In the United States, the companies on the NACC are:

Campbell Soup Company
Chevron Corporation
Ford Motor Corporation
FedEx Corporation
General Electric Company
General Motors Corporation
Kansas City Southern
Lockheed Martin Corporation
Merck & Co., Inc.
Mittal Steel USA
New York Life Insurance Company
Procter & Gamble
UPS
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Whirlpool Corporation
 
No union leaders, public interest groups, environmental advocates or news media have ever attended the closed-door of the NACC with the SPP.

 
According to a document on the Commerce Department's SPP website, the organization of the NACC was agreed upon by the three leaders on March 31, 2006.

 
"We are pleased to announce the creation of a North American Competitiveness Council," the White House announced the same day.

 
"The Council will comprise members of the private sector from each country," the White House said, "and will provide us recommendations on North American competitiveness, including, among others, areas such as automotive and transportation, steel, manufacturing, and services. The Council will meet annually with security and prosperity Ministers and will engage with senior government officials on an ongoing basis."

 
On Sept. 25, Harper made a speech to the Council on Foreign Relations in New York where he again endorsed SPP.

 
In a transcript archived on the CFR website, Harper referred to the NACC, saying: "At the North American summit that Canada hosted in Montebello last month, I was struck by the power of the message sent to us by the leaders from the American and Canadian private sectors."

 
"They appealed to us to see the connection between security and prosperity," Harper continued. "They told us that without the ‘and' we won't have either."

 
The CFR website also has archived a video of Harper's Sept. 25 remarks.

Express News: SECRET MEETING spurs citizens to get a briefing FIRST!

Details
News
An Express News story touches on the SECRET MEETING for BIG business, but focuses more on the 281 toll rates.

Of course, the article doesn't mention that we only pay 1-3 cents a mile in gas taxes and the national average for toll rates is 9 cents per mile. So 17 cents per mile is a BIG tax hike we'll all pay, since trucks and businesses will pass on the toll costs to customers. AND let's not forget that the improvements to 281 are ALREADY PAID FOR with gas taxes (see proof here and here) so WE DO NOT NEED TOLLS! We've been told it's necessary to convert 281 into a tollway to accelerate improvements. They've had the gas tax money for the first 3 miles since 2003, for the rest of the fix to Borgfeld by 2004, and now as a toll road, it'll cost 4 times the price and only get to Marshall Rd! It also fails to mention SAMCo is taxpayer funded and represents the HIGHWAY LOBBY, so don't let the non-profit tag fool you!

The article states...
The authority will brief the nonprofit mobility coalition at a private meeting Friday at Valero Energy Corp. to strategize support for toll plans.

"We want everyone to have a chance to see this, to ask questions," Boyer said. "We were on the ball and asked for it."

When Hall heard about Boyer's meeting, she called Reed to set up a presentation for toll critics, which will be held at 6 p.m. today at Chester's Burgers at 16609 San Pedro Ave. She said she wants to know how much profit U.S. 281 toll lanes will generate.

"That's the real crux of the matter," she said. "That'll be interesting."
______________________________



17 cents will get you a mile

By Patrick Driscoll
Express-News
10/16/2007
Noisy, anxious speculation over how much motorists will pay to use toll lanes on U.S. 281 has ended with a silent revelation.Barring legal action and a dramatic turnaround in the courts, drivers in two- and three-axle vehicles could pay 17 cents a mile when the first four miles of U.S. 281 toll lanes open in 2012, according to documents posted on the Web without fanfare Monday.

Rates might increase 2.75 percent a year through 2017 and then 3 percent annually after that, about as fast as consumer inflation has been rising.

The Alamo Regional Mobility Authority, which will develop the U.S. 281 tollway, negotiated for months behind closed doors with the Texas Department of Transportation to set the toll rates and had carefully kept the numbers hushed.

But the local Metropolitan Planning Organization must sign off on the deal, and following its habit of releasing information before meetings, posted the proposed toll fees. The organization meets next Monday.

"There you go," spokesman Scott Ericksen said. "It's just our process."

Now that the rates are out there, a furious long-running debate over toll roads will now shift to new ground.

"I'm just glad we're finally getting down to the nitty-gritty," said Jim Reed, a mobility authority board member.

Terri Hall, founder of San Antonio Toll Party and Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom, said the fees, while comparable to Houston and Dallas, are higher than some other states — a claim borne out by a recent state audit.

"Texans have to be asking themselves, 'Why do we have to pay so much?'" she said.

Vic Boyer, director of the public-private San Antonio Mobility Coalition, said business and road industry officials are so far warm to the rates.

"I think they feel fairly comfortable with what they've seen," he said.

Rebuilding U.S. 281 into a tolled expressway with nontoll frontage roads from Loop 1604 to Marshall Road is just a start for the mobility authority.

The agency hopes to use $258 million in public funds and sell bonds backed by decades of toll fees to add $1 billion worth of toll lanes to highways:

The first 4 miles of U.S. 281 — which officials say will cost $200 million, a third more than estimates earlier this year. Construction starts next summer.

U.S. 281 toll lanes to Comal County. No timetable has been set.

Loop 1604 from Culebra Road to U.S. 281. Construction starts in late 2009.

Plans also call for tolled interchange ramps along Loop 1604 to give motorists faster shots to other freeways such as U.S. 281. The proposed toll rates under consideration for 2012 suggest charging 57 cents for each ramp.

Emergency and military vehicles would get free passage on toll lanes. VIA Metropolitan Transit would get a $42,000 a year break, enough to allow buses and vans to ride free, but the agency would have the option of spreading its exemption among other vehicles, such as vanpools.

In 2012 trucks would be charged 46 cents a mile on toll lanes and $1.15 per interchange ramp.

There would be no tollbooths. Instead, motorists would pay via an electronic scanning system.

"Our goal is to be reasonable, to keep it affordable," mobility authority Chairman Bill Thornton said.

The authority will brief the nonprofit mobility coalition at a private meeting Friday at Valero Energy Corp. to strategize support for toll plans.

"We want everyone to have a chance to see this, to ask questions," Boyer said. "We were on the ball and asked for it."

When Hall heard about Boyer's meeting, she called Reed to set up a presentation for toll critics, which will be held at 6 p.m. today at Chester's Burgers at 16609 San Pedro Ave. She said she wants to know how much profit U.S. 281 toll lanes will generate.

"That's the real crux of the matter," she said. "That'll be interesting."

EXCLUSIVE: SECRET briefing on toll rates for BIG BUSINESS before public gets access

Details
News
The San Antonio Mobility Coalition, SAMCo, run by Joe Krier, along with the San Antonio Free Trade Alliance will be hosting a secret meeting October 19 at the Valero campus prior to even the PUBLIC getting access to toll rates and the toll rate escalation for 281 on October 22. The highway lobby that feeds at the public trough was slated to get advance access the PUBLIC hasn't been privy to. This is especially distressing considering SAMCO and the Free Trade Alliance are taxpayer funded. Citizens have to take time off work and head downtown to a place where parking is scarce (MPO mtgs at Via) just to hear this information on their own dime, yet our public agencies bring this vital toll tax information right to the business community's doorstep while they're all on the clock (some of whom are on the taxpayer's dime, too!).

It's an outrage that those who will profit off these toll plans get special treatment at the taxpayers' expense! However, through a turn of events, we asked that the tolling authority brief citizens FIRST on the toll rates at our Tuesday meeting and they AGREED! The taxpayers demanded transparency, sunshine, accountability, and that the public get TOP PRIORITY, and now the PUBLIC gets to scoop the HIGHWAY LOBBY!

Government ought to be operating without even the APPEARANCE of impropriety, this SAMCo meeting smacks of corporate cronyism and backroom deal-making which has become the norm with Perry and his highway dept.


Not only will the hogs at the trough be treated to the potential pricetag road contractors can reap for tolling our public highways, the stated purpose of the meeting is to strategize on how to influence the upcoming MPO vote that must approve the toll rates to move forward.

The purpose of the briefing is to provide:

1) An advance preview of the US 281 and Loop 1604 financial plans prior to these critical MPO meetings;
2) A forum to discuss cooperative action and joint strategy to support the financial plans and SMP amendments at the October 22 and December 3 MPO meetings.
3) Coordination of supportive resolutions, letters, emails, testimony, editorials, etc. prior to the final MPO votes.

Read the entire invitation here.

This meeting is significant because we caught them with their hands in the till using taxpayer money to lobby against the taxpayer and caught BIG BUSINESS getting special privileges NOT afforded the public until an MPO mtg Monday, Oct 22. Why does BIG BUSINESS need to know the toll rates and 281 profit levels before the general public?
SEE LIST OF CORPORATIONS GIVEN A SEAT AT THE TABLE BELOW

Mad yet? Read the list of the corporations involved in SECRET meetings with the U.S., Canadian, and Mexican governments to push for a North American Union in what amounts to forming a trade cartel. Time to dust off the anti-trust unit at the Justice Department!

Full World Net Daily article here.

As WND previously reported, the North American Competitiveness Council, or NACC, dominated the SPP closed-door meetings with the SPP trilateral working groups, the trilateral cabinet members in attendance and President Bush, Mexico's President Felipe Calderon, and Harper at the third annual SPP summit in Montebello, Quebec, on Aug. 20-21.

WND has also reported the NACC is a shadowy council of 30 top North American multinational corporations self-appointed by the Chambers of Commerce in each of the three countries to constitute the sole outside advisory to the SPP.

The 30 companies composing the NACC are listed on a memo posted on the U.S. Chamber of Commerce website.

In the United States, the companies on the NACC are:

* Campbell Soup Company
* Chevron Corporation
* Ford Motor Corporation
* FedEx Corporation
* General Electric Company
* General Motors Corporation
* Kansas City Southern
* Lockheed Martin Corporation
* Merck & Co., Inc.
* Mittal Steel USA
* New York Life Insurance Company
* Procter & Gamble
* UPS
* Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
* Whirlpool Corporation

No union leaders, public interest groups, environmental advocates or news media have ever attended the closed-door of the NACC with the SPP.

According to a document on the Commerce Department's SPP website, the organization of the NACC was agreed upon by the three leaders on March 31, 2006.

"We are pleased to announce the creation of a North American Competitiveness Council," the White House announced the same day.

"The Council will comprise members of the private sector from each country," the White House said, "and will provide us recommendations on North American competitiveness, including, among others, areas such as automotive and transportation, steel, manufacturing, and services. The Council will meet annually with security and prosperity Ministers and will engage with senior government officials on an ongoing basis."

Read these to open your eyes to other secret meetings for special interests:

Secret meeting on TTC 69, corporations invited, public/press is not.

More secret meetings with corporations invited, public/press shut out.
here, here, and here.

Pennsylvania to toll I-80, despite opposition

Details
News
Link to article here. Does this sound familiar or what? Politicos push tolling of existing highways by any means necessary, regardless of PUBLIC OPPOSITION, in order to subsidize everything under the sun with this new infiniti DOUBLE TAX. This is the equivalent of tolling I-35, which is in TxDOT's toll plans, which means economic disaster, and the politicians just don't care. Throw the bums out!

Tolling Of I-80 Nears
By: Dan Hirschhorn, The Bulletin
10/09/2007


As rural residents and lawmakers continue their opposition to plans to the tolling Interstate 80, state officials are inching closer to that first tollbooth.
The Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission (PTC) expects to sign a lease within days allowing it to manage - and toll - the massive highway stretching across Pennsylvania, according to a commission spokesman.

"We are at the point right now where we expect to have an executed lease this week," PTC spokesman Carl DeFebo said.

A current draft lease agreement, which lawyers for both PennDOT and the commission have discussed for weeks, stipulates no revenue from tolling I-80 may be used for mass transit in the state, a sticking point for rural constituents unhappy at the prospect of subsidizing city transit they don't use. The first tollbooth wouldn't hit the ground before 2011.


Instituting the tolls is part of the state transportation funding package that passed in Harrisburg in June. The legislation called for about $965 million in additional yearly funding for roads, bridges and mass transit throughout the state, money that would come from sales taxes, tolling I-80 and, later, toll increases on the Pennsylvania Turnpike. The dedicated funding SEPTA secured through the same legislation is dependent on the extra revenue.

Almost immediately after the bill, Act 44, passed in June, area residents and government leaders, uneasy at subsidizing SEPTA with local taxes lashed out against the plan to toll I-80. They have insisted it would devastate local economies while maintaining that rural residents should not have to pay for city transit.

Two northeastern Pennsylvania GOP congressmen, Reps. Phil English and John Peterson, this summer tucked an amendment into a large federal appropriations bill attempting to block the tolling plan. While that appropriations bill passed the house, the amendment was removed in the Senate.

Simultaneous efforts have been made to completely repeal Act 44, but the chairman of the state House Appropriations Committee last week said a repeal was out of the question.

"It'll never get out of my committee - put it that way," Rep. Dwight Evans, D-Philadelphia, said.

Such opposition also led Gov. Ed Rendell to reopen the idea of leasing the Pennsylvania Turnpike to increase revenue, and 34 companies submitted letters of interest to PennDOT last month.

Meanwhile, PTC CEO Joseph Brimmeir has taken considerable steps in recent weeks to blunt criticisms of the tolling plan, promising that no money from tolls on I-80 will fund SEPTA. Rather, he has said, toll revenue will fund only projects in the region.

Toll revenue would fund, among other things, $2 billion worth of capital improvements on I-80 during the first decade of tolling, Mr. DeFebo said.
Though neither Mr. English nor Mr. Peterson could be reached for comment over the weekend, they and their allies remain on the offensive.

"While we recognize this is going to be a fight. I know that Congressman English and Congressman Peterson are committed to keeping a toll-free I-80," Julia Wanzco, a spokeswoman for English, said in August.

Local politicians have fiercely criticized the opposition for blocking the tolling efforts. State Sen. Vincent Fumo has gone so far as to call Mr. Peterson and Mr. English hypocrites. But for the commission, instituting the plan is a matter of law.

"We have a responsibility to move ahead with the implementation of Act 44," Mr. DeFebo said. "It's a law, and we've got to move ahead implementing."

Vicente Fox: North American currency, Amero, is on the way

Details
News
Ex-Mexican prez: 'Amero' on the way
Vicente Fox confirms long-term deal worked out with President Bush
Posted: October 9, 2007
 
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

 
Ex-Mexican President Vicente Fox last night on CNN Former Mexican President Vicente Fox confirmed the existence of a plan conceived with President Bush to create a new regional currency in the Americas, in an interview last night on CNN's "Larry King Live."
It possibly was the first time a leader of Mexico, Canada or the U.S. openly confirmed a plan for a regional currency. Fox explained the current regional trade agreement that encompasses the Western Hemisphere is intended to evolve into other previously hidden aspects of integration.

According to a transcript published by CNN, King, near the end of the broadcast, asked Fox a question e-mailed from a listener, a Ms. Gonzalez from Elizabeth, N.J.: "Mr. Fox, I would like to know how you feel about the possibility of having a Latin America united with one currency?"


Fox answered in the affirmative, indicating it was a long-term plan. He admitted he and President Bush had agreed to pursue the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas – a free-trade zone extending throughout the Western Hemisphere, suggesting part of the plan was to institute eventually a regional currency.

"Long term, very long term," he said. "What we proposed together, President Bush and myself, it's ALCA, which is a trade union for all the Americas."

ALCA is the acronym for the Area de Libre Comercio de las Américas, the name of the FTAA in Spanish.

King, evidently startled by Fox's revelation of the currency, asked pointedly, "It's going to be like the euro dollar (sic), you mean?"

"Well, that would be long, long term," Fox repeated.

Fox noted the FTAA plan had been thwarted by Hugo Chavez, the radical socialist president of Venezuela.

"Everything was running fluently until Hugo Chavez came," Fox commented. "He decided to combat the idea and destroy the idea."

Fox explained that he and Bush intended to proceed incrementally, establishing FTAA as an economic agreement first and waiting to create an amero-type currency later – a plan he also suggested was in place for NAFTA itself.

"I think the process to go, first step is trading agreement," Fox said. "And then further on, a new vision, like we are trying to do with NAFTA."

Fox's reply to the CNN viewer was captured in a clip posted on YouTube.com. CNN posted video of the interview but did not include the segment with questions from viewers.

Last week, WND reported BankIntroductions.com, a Canadian company that specializes in global banking strategies and currency consulting, is advising clients the amero may be the currency of North America within 10 years.

Coin designer Daniel Carr has issued for sale a series of private-issue fantasy pattern amero coins that have drawn attention on the Internet.

WND also reported the African Union is moving down the path of regional economic integration, with the African Central Bank planning to create the "Gold Mandela" as a single African continental currency by 2010.

The Council on Foreign Relations has supported regional and global currencies designed to replace nationally issued currencies.

In an article in the May/June issue of Foreign Affairs, entitled "The End of National Currency," CFR economist Benn Steil asserts the dollar is a temporary currency.

Steil concluded "countries should abandon monetary nationalism," moving to adopt regional currencies, on the road to a global "one world currency."

WND previously reported Steve Previs, a vice president at Jeffries International Ltd. in London, said the amero "is the proposed new currency for the North American Community which is being developed right now between Canada, the U.S., and Mexico."

A video clip of the CNBC interview in November with Jeffries is now available at YouTube.com.

WND also has reported a continued slide in the value of the dollar on world currency markets could set up conditions in which the adoption of the amero as a North American currency gains momentum.

Austin motorists DOUBLE CHARGED on tollways

Details
News
Link to AP article here. Interesting how this "glitch" didn't cause under-billing, and the article says the double billing could still happen, just less frequently. How comforting...

DOUBLE BILLING is also occurring in Tyler, TX. See the news story here.

Equipment glitch causes double-billing on Austin toll roads
Associated Press
October 9, 2007

AUSTIN - About 50,000 vehicles have been double-billed on Austin-area tollways because of faulty equipment, Texas Department of Transportation officials said.

The agency said Monday that the problem has occurred about one out of every 600 times a car passed one of the tolling points since charging began in January.

The agency has adjusted its equipment and software in the past few weeks to stop the problem, although it could still occur at a less-frequent rate, like once every 2,000 toll transactions.

Officials said the charges will be reversed for any customers who have been double-billed.

"We will reverse all of them," said David Powell, the department's director of turnpike information technology and toll operations.

Powell said the problem occurred at tolling plazas where the overhead flat-panel antennae were out of adjustment, causing faulty communication with electronic toll tags on car windshields.

If the antenna is not aimed correctly, it can read the tag on one car while believing that it is communicating with a car in a different spot. Then, those cars that have already seen debits to their tag accounts might be photographed by the equipment at a different spot and charged again.

Powell said a number of antennae were out of adjustment, but the one causing the most problems was on the westbound center lane at the Lake Creek toll plaza on Texas 45 North.

He said the antennae could have been installed incorrectly or knocked out of adjustment during construction.

Hundreds turn out to oppose elevated tollway, Grand Parkway

Details
News
Link to article here. This Grand Parkway project is widely reported to be a connector to the Trans Texas Corridor, TTC-69 project.

Says a local business representative:

''You all that proposed this plan, you have awakened a sleeping giant.''

Hundreds turn out to hear Grand Parkway plans
Oct. 11, 2007
By DUSTIN WENZEL
Houston Chronicle

More than 250 residents spilled into Manford Williams Elementary on Wednesday night to voice their concerns about plans to develop Segment C of the Grand Parkway into a four-lane tollway.

Hosted by the coalition STOP, or Stop Tolls on Parkway, the meeting drew a standing-room only crowd with representatives from eight communities near the proposed highway, which will run from U.S. Hwy. 59 to U.S. Hwy. 288.

''This road is obviously built to accommodate the future residents in Fort Bend County. We are not being accommodated, said Ann Franson,'' a Brazos Lakes representative from STOP. ''We are just like the people that will come later and yet we have not been invited into the dialogue of this road.''

Current plans for Segment C show it to be a four-lane road with grassy medians and access ramps that begins with an overpass over U.S. Hwy. 59 connecting Segment D. It will continue along Crabb River Road until curving to the west at Rabbs Bayou before hugging the north and east edges of Bridlewood before traveling past the George Ranch and eventually connecting with U.S. Hwy. 288.

STOP is asking for a 60-day comment period and the elimination of tolls on Segment C. The group also seeks the removal of the planned overpass on U.S. Hwy. 59 and access ramps near Bridlewood and Brazos Lakes subdivisions.

Grand Parkway Association executive director David Gornet said he does not have the authority to extend the comment period and that the Texas Department of Transportation's Houston-area district engineer, Gary Trietsch, will make the final decision on the segment's route.

Gorent said after a study team completes the final environmental impact statement, which is due before the end of the year, TxDOT will hold another public meeting. Construction on the segment will not start until at least 2010, he said.

Need for road discussed

Community representatives took turns grilling Gornet about how the segment's route was planned and the need for a tollway through a scarcely-populated area with little traffic.

''Prior to reaching Brazos Lake, there is farmland, people — open land,'' said Lynn Franklin, representing Canyon Gate at the Brazos. ''I guess were trying to operate on the 'Build it and they will come' theory.''

Franklin said she is concerned how much impact taxpayers have on a ''road that goes to nowhere'' and that the tollway will produce more traffic around their communities.

Other residents openly complained about the view of a tollway outside their community and the potential increase in air and noise pollution in a rural area.

''If you look at the (proposed) fly-by (connecting U.S. Hwy. 59 to the Grand Parkway), its like a roller coaster - but its a roller coaster ride you dont want to get on,'' said Cheryl Rambaud, a five-year resident of Canyon Gate at the Brazos. ''From my vantage point instead of looking at the trees and the sky and my neighbors' two-story homes, I will be looking at the Jetsons' version of the roller coaster.''

Gornet later [responded on]explained why he believed elected officials favor Segment C and included it in the Houston-Galveston Area Council's 2025 transportation plan.

''The Grand Parkway possibly provides continued growth of our county. (Elected officials) have seen that it has been a benefit as you go south from (Interstate 10),'' he said.

County judge opposes tollway

Franklin wasn't the only audience member who questioned the need for the tollway. Fort Bend County Judge Bob Hebert said the county is against constructing the segment now, but added the county can't stop TxDOT from building a state highway.

Hebert, though, wouldn't rule out the need for Segment C in the future.

''One of the principles of doing tollroads is that tollroads are devices of last resort,'' he said. ''You have to have cars to pay for it. Fort Bend County has no plans to make Segment C a tollroad. Theres no traffic out in Segment C.

''I agree with you folks, now is not the time to even be considering the subject. I'm not opposed to tollways. (But) Segment C is not needed at this time.''

Impact on businesses

Quart Graves, the owner/operator of Chick-Fil-A Greatwood, represented various businesses in the River Park Shopping Center on the northeast corner of the Grand Parkway.

He called the tollway's potential construction horrific and compared the tollways impact on businesses inside the center to Town and Country Mall, which eventually closed after construction to the Sam Houston Tollway limited access to the shopping center.

Tentative plans call for the construction of direct connectors with U.S. Hwy. 59 directly over the edge of the shopping center. If construction proceeds, Graves said Chick-Fil-A, Mattress Firm, Bank of America and Whataburger would be forced to close.

Other businesses on Crabb Road that lie in the segment's proposed right-of-way include Exxon, Burger King, The Z Icehouse and Greatwood Automotive. However, Gornet said, TxDOT will not take any action on businesses that sit in the right-of-way until it issues a record of decision to purchase the right-of-way.

Regardless of the timetable, Graves said he will fight the proposal.

''The cement has barely dried on my business,'' Graves said. ''You all that proposed this plan, you have awakened a sleeping giant.''

For information on Segment C, visit www.grandpky.com.

Pro-toll Richard Perez new San Antonio Chamber President

Details
News
Perez's stint as toll-road front man
By Pat Driscoll
Express-News
October 10, 2007

Richard Perez, selected as the new president of the Greater San Antonio Chamber of Commerce, is one of the most effective toll-road advocates around.

webPerez.jpg
Richard Perez
Tuesday's story
Chamber statement
As chairman of the Metropolitan Planning Organization for the past two years, Perez was a tenacious fighter for some 70 miles of planned toll roads. Yet, I never saw him try to bully anyone. He was dogged but always a gentleman.

Those are powerful qualities.

Perez skidded into the toll controversy in August 2005, just two months after starting his second term on City Council and taking over as MPO chairman, when he helped beat back demands for an independent study of local toll plans.


Rockin' the toll roads
Split views on toll review
Toll road review idea rejected
Toll critics soon made Perez a top target for his "deplorable behavior AGAINST the PEOPLE."

San Antonio Toll Party
Over the next year, Perez found himself looking for a new MPO director, admonishing a state transportation official in a public meeting, contemplating potential impacts of high gas prices on future toll roads and digging in against cries to revert a U.S. 281 toll plan back to a gas-tax only plan.

Transportation director resigns
Toll debate turns ugly
Gas-price impact on toll roads feared
High gas prices and toll roads
Making a toll stand
Blazing guns
U.S. 281 toll idea gets more detractors
Perez left the MPO last May with as much clamor as ever. An effort led by Mayor Phil Hardberger to keep him on the board, which included a sudden policy change, drew shrieks from critics and the mayor soon dropped the idea.

Perez not going away
Richard Perez passed over
But now Perez is back in the spotlight, and he'll likely be a strong spokesman for toll roads.

State surplus $1.5 billion more than expected…more money for roads

Details
News
State surplus grows by $1.5 billion
Much of the money already committed
By Jason Embry
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Wednesday, October 10, 2007Texas collected more in taxes last year than expected, Comptroller Susan Combs said Tuesday.

The state ended the 2007 budget year Aug. 31 with an $8.5 billion surplus, which was $1.5 billion more than Combs projected in January.

"State sales and use tax collections, which registered a 10.9 percent increase over fiscal 2006, have proved particularly robust, propelled in large part by vigorous activity in the mining, construction, manufacturing and trade sectors," Combs said in a letter Tuesday to Gov. Rick Perry and legislative leaders.

The additional surplus amounts to about 1 percent of the state's $151.9 billion budget for 2008-09.

Some of the extra money will go to so-called contingency appropriations, which are items in the two-year state budget that lawmakers said they would fund if the state collected extra money.

Fo

r instance, $242 million will go toward a state employee pay raise of 2 percent per year for the next two years, although Combs had assured lawmakers that the money for the raise would be there.

Another $300 million is headed to the Texas Department of Transportation for road-building.

Transportation Department spokesman Randall Dillard said that final decisions about how the money would be used have not been made, but he said it would "help offset skyrocketing inflation."

Highway construction costs have increased 62 percent since 2002, Dillard said.

Combs spokesman R.J. DeSilva said agency officials were still crunching numbers Tuesday to see how much of the new money was already committed and how much will be left over.

Whatever is left will be added to the $2.5 billion that lawmakers left unspent this year so they'd have it for the budget they'll write in 2009.

That extra money could help in a couple of ways. For one, Combs has said that growth in state sales-tax collections is expected to slow in 2008 and 2009 as compared with the robust growth of the past few years.

Also, it could help if the state's new business tax, which companies will pay for the first time next year, brings in less than expected.

"How the money should be spent will depend on the next session of the Legislature," House Speaker Tom Craddick said. "However, I am much more comfortable having $1.5 billion more than expected than $1.5 billion less."

Scholars say Bush makes North American Union unilateral executive decisions

Details
News
Scholars Explain President's Plan for A North American Union
By Phyllis Schlafly
Monday, October 8, 2007

Those who seek to understand what's behind the chatter about President George W. Bush's Security and Prosperity Partnership as a possible prelude to a North American Union, similar to the European Union, should read the 35-page White Paper published recently by the Hudson Institute called "Negotiating North America: The Security and Prosperity Partnership."

The Washington, D.C., think tank is blunt and detailed in describing where the Security and Prosperity Partnership is heading.

Here's how Hudson defines the Security and Prosperity Partnership's goal: "The SPP process is the vehicle for the discussion of future arrangements for economic integration to create a single market for goods and services in North America."

The key words are "economic integration," a phrase used again and again, into a North American "single market," another phrase used repeatedly.

"Integration" with Mexico and Canada is exactly what North American union means, but there's a big problem with this goal. "We the people" of the United States were never asked if we want to be "integrated" with Mexico and Canada, two countries of enormously different laws, culture, concept of government's role, economic system and standard of living.


Here's how Hudson explains the Security and Prosperity Partnership's process: "The most important feature of the SPP design is that it is neither intended to produce a treaty nor an executive agreement like the NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) that would require congressional ratification or the passage of implementing legislation in the United States. The SPP was designed to function within existing administrative authority of the executive branch."

Hudson explains further: "The design of the SPP is innovative, eschewing the more traditional diplomatic and trade negotiation models in favor of talks among civil service professionals and subject matter experts with each government. This design places the negotiation fully within the authority of the executive branch in the United States."

Indeed, the Security and Prosperity Partnership is very "innovative." The arrogance of the Security and Prosperity Partnership's "design" to give the executive branch full "authority" to "enforce and execute" whatever is decided by a three-nation agreement of "civil service professionals," as though it were "law," is exceeded only by its unconstitutionality.

The Hudson White Paper admits the problem that the Security and Prosperity Partnership completely lacks "transparency and accountability." Hudson freely admits "the exclusion of Congress from the process"; constituents who contact their Congressmen discover that members know practically nothing about the Security and Prosperity Partnership.

Hudson states that, under the Security and Prosperity Partnership, one of the U.S. challenges is "managing Congress." Is Congress now to be "managed," either by executive-branch "authority" or by "dozens of regulators, rule makers, and officials working with their counterparts" from Mexico and Canada?

The Hudson White Paper reminds us that the 2005 Council on Foreign Relations document called "Building a North American Community" bragged that its recommendations are "explicitly linked" to SPP. The Council on Foreign Relations document called for establishing a "common perimeter" around North America by 2010.

Hudson praises the Council on Foreign Relations document for "raising public expectations" about what the Security and Prosperity Partnership can accomplish. Hudson explains that, while immigration is not an explicit Security and Prosperity Partnership agenda item, "mobility across the border is central to the idea of an integrated North American economic space."

"Harmonization" with other countries is another frequently used word. One of the Security and Prosperity Partnership's signature initiatives is "Liberalizing Rules of Origin."

The Hudson Paper reveals the Security and Prosperity Partnership's cozy collaboration with "some interest groups and not others." Translated, that means collaboration with multinational corporations, but not with small business or citizen groups.

After the heads of state of the United States, Mexico and Canada met in Waco, Texas, in March 2005 and announced the creation of the Security and Prosperity Partnership by press release, the North American Competitiveness Council emerged as "a private sector forum for business input" to Security and Prosperity Partnership working groups. But, according to Hudson, it wasn't merely "private" because it was "given official sanction."

After the three amigos met in Cancun, Mexico, in 2006, President Bush provided taxpayer funding for a think tank called the Center for Strategic and International Studies to meet secretly and produce a report called "The Future of North America." That document's favorite catchword is "North American labor mobility," which is a euphemism for admitting unlimited cheap labor from Mexico.

The Hudson White Paper states that "SPP combines an agenda with a political commitment." That's exactly why those who want to protect American sovereignty don't like the Security and Prosperity Partnership.

Among the people who take the Security and Prosperity Partnership seriously are Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va., who introduced a House resolution opposing a North American Union and a NAFTA Superhighway, similar resolutions introduced into the state legislatures of 14 states, and California Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter's amendment to prohibit the use of federal funds for Security and Prosperity Partnership working groups, which passed in the House by a vote of 362-63 on July 24.

The Hudson white paper suggests that it might be "necessary" for the Security and Prosperity Partnership to change its name and acronym. It is unlikely that a change of name will silence the American people who are outraged by the Security and Prosperity Partnership's goals and process.

TxDOT spies on citizens, hides SECRET cameras to collect data

Details
News
If have to ask ourselves if we just leaped into some Orwellian nightmare when we read this...twice in ONE WEEK we hear of the government (in Maryland and now Texas) monitoring its citizens with cameras on highways. In MD, to catch people with expired registration, in Texas to collect information about people's driving habits, either way, NO ONE ASKED US!

It's one thing to be out and about in public, it's another to be spied upon while going about our daily lives! TxDOT has been hiding cameras in orange barrels along I-35 in Austin and I-10 in San Antonio. They're taking pictures of people's license plates and then mailing them a survey asking questions like:

1) The trip's origin and final destination
2) How often the driver makes the trip
3) How long a driver stayed at my destination before returning

Link to the Austin story here. Link to Houston Chronicle story here. Link to Express-News article with map of camera locations here.

State recorded license plates for transportation study
10/10/2007
By: News 8 Austin Staff

State officials say cameras tucked into orange barrels videotaped the license plates of thousands of drivers on Interstate 35 as part of a transportation study.
Critics of last month's study questioned whether it invaded motorists' privacy.

But a Texas Department of Transportation spokeswoman says the study is vital to transportation planning and was not meant to sneaky.

The state contracted Alliance Transportation Group to conduct the study.

The company mailed about 150,000 surveys to homes explaining that their license plate was randomly recorded. It asks questions such as the trip's destination and purpose, and the number of people living in the home.

Transportation Department spokeswoman Gaby Garcia says about 3,000 people have responded since the survey was mailed out three weeks ago.

She said the information won't be shared or sold and will be securely disposed of.

The department plans similar surveys next year in the Houston, Galveston, Beaumont and Port Arthur areas. Garcia says drivers will be notified ahead of time.

Charge by mile scheme….this time floated in Boston

Details
News
Link to article here.

Tolling the open road
Massachusetts considers charging by the mile for highway drivers
By Noah Bierman, Globe Staff | October 7, 2007

The monthly invoice could look something like an electricity bill or a cellphone statement. But instead of kilowatt hours or roaming minutes, it would itemize how many miles you drive - with surcharges for traveling during peak hours, premiums for using so-called Lexus lanes that bypass rush-hour snarls, and discounts for sitting through traffic jams.

The free and open road, regarded by many Americans as a birthright, could become a relic under a plan being discussed in Massachusetts and in several other states, transforming highway use from a service available to all into a utility paid for on a per-mile basis.

This philosophical shift is the cornerstone of a landmark report, released last month by the Commonwealth's Transportation Finance Commission, which was tasked with finding the estimated $15 billion to $19 billion needed to fix the state's crumbling roads and bridges over the next two decades.

Under the commission's plan, a 5-cents-per-mile fee on major roads would replace, or minimize, gas taxes and fundamentally change a central aspect of everyday life.


"The idea that this is completely free is a fiction. It isn't," said James Aloisi Jr., a lawyer who served on the commission and a transportation official under former governor Michael Dukakis. "Someone's got to pay for it. We think the user should pay for it."

But early signs show that regular drivers may find the notion of a fully-tolled highway system harder to fathom.

"The taxpayers pay taxes to build the roads, we pay tolls to use the roads, and now they want to hit the taxpayers again," said Phyllis Lachman, 67, of Concord.

State Senator Steven A. Baddour, a Methuen Democrat and cochairman of the Legislature's transportation committee, said turning roads and bridges into a utility and adding more tolls "is too big of a stretch."

"People don't see it that way," he said. "You can't just put it in a report and expect people to buy it."

The technology that allows per-mile pricing is being used around the country, in bits and pieces, though no state has begun tolling all major roads. Oregon has come the closest, with a pilot program that equips volunteer drivers with global positioning devices in their cars. They pay by the mile and are exempt from gas taxes.

British drivers famously pay a flat fee equivalent to about $16 to drive into central London. If they fail to pay in advance, a security camera will shoot a picture of their license plates and automatically send them a ticket. Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York is pushing for a similar approach in his city.

More commonly, several states are using transponders, the same ones Massachusetts drivers use for the Fast Lane program, to create premium lanes on major highway systems that set pricing based on supply and demand. Those willing to pay hefty tolls get home the fastest.

Drivers on an 8-mile stretch of Interstate 15 in San Diego pay $1 to $4 to use the carpool lane (carpoolers and buses still ride free). Digital signs display toll prices that change throughout the day based on traffic volume. An express lane on State Road 91 in Southern California costs as much as $9.50 for a 10-mile drive during peak hours.

The price of using the lanes rises during rush hour so that drivers willing to pay more get a faster commute. At first, critics derided the roads as "Lexus lanes" because it was believed only the rich could afford to use them.

But researchers have found popularity cuts across class lines. Parents desperate to avoid a late fee from a day-care center or workers about to get fired for tardiness do the math and decide that a pricey ride can bail them out in a pinch. San Diego is expanding its program.

"That's the most free-market way of doing things in transportation that we have," said Martin Wachs, director of transportation, space, and technology for the Rand Corporation.

To Wachs, these lanes illustrate the broader choice drivers have. They pay for faster-moving, higher-quality roads through user fees or they pay by sitting in traffic on patchy, slow roads.

"You don't pay the same price for a hamburger as a steak," he said.

The Bush administration has embraced the theory as well. Last month, US Transportation Secretary Mary Peters awarded grants worth $848 million to Miami, Minneapolis, New York City, San Francisco, and Seattle to fight gridlock with strategies that include high-priced rush hour lanes.

The Massachusetts Turnpike Authority has been studying cameras that record license plate numbers, so that motorists who drive through toll booths without a Fast Lane transponder get a bill.

The authority is also looking at Fast Lane equipment that lets motorists drive through toll booths at highway speeds rather than slowing to 15 miles per hour.

The technology, in place elsewhere, would give the Turnpike Authority more options to set aside carpool lanes for fast travel.

Or the authority could charge higher tolls on regular lanes during rush hour. That might reduce congestion by persuading commuters with flexible schedules to avoid rush hour.

In most cases, traffic planners choose to build new lanes or convert carpool lanes into Lexus lanes instead of charging everyone. A more dramatic change, charging for basic roads that are now toll-free, may prove a larger hurdle. The federal government forbids charging on interstate highways, meaning the discussion to change would have to take place on a national level. And any system that requires all drivers to log their travel would raise privacy concerns. Proponents say there are ways to overcome the concerns - including systems that let drivers register for anonymous accounts or keep their digital driving logs stored in their cars.

But unless those concerns are allayed, many politicians say they will not support turning roads into utilities.

Voters "simply don't want Big Brother," said Representative David Paul Linsky, Democrat of Natick. "I want to see a specific proposal."

Nonetheless, the market approach has attracted support from the political left and right. Environmentalists say letting drivers see the true cost of using the roads will discourage congestion and persuade more commuters to use public transportation or to carpool. On the other hand, free market libertarians see an opportunity to reduce taxes and involve private companies in building, maintaining, and controlling roads.

"We use economic markets for electricity, for telephones, for food, for water . . . the question is why roads should be excluded," said Gabriel Roth, a research fellow at the Independent Institute and editor of the book "Street Smart."

The American Automobile Association, a powerful consumer lobby, has traditionally opposed adding tolls. Art Kinsman, director of government affairs for Southern New England, said he will poll his 2 million members. But if drivers are expected to treat roads as a utility, they will need to see better services. Now, many accept it may take a few months to fix a pothole. If drivers pay by the mile, they'll demand to know, "are they going to come out and fix it tomorrow?" Kinsman said.

Beyond that, motorists need confidence that the money will be going to improve the transportation network, Kinsman said.

"There needs to be some trust restored with the public," he said. "I think it's a tremendous shift in how people view roads."

Trans Texas Corridor I-69 SECRET meeting in Fort Bend

Details
News
In this article, Transportation Commissioner Ted Houghton repeatedly refers to Texans' FREEways as "assets" as if the PUBLIC'S highways are theirs to sell to the highest bidder on Wall Street! To make matters worse, they're holding a SECRET, CLOSED DOOR meeting to discuss the next controversial leg of the Trans Texas Corridor, TTC 69. Also noteworthy, businesses, ie - the Chamber of Commerce, are invited to the table, but NOT the taxpaying public whose community will be paved over by this corridor! How is this getting "community feedback?" Secrecy and involving multi-national corporations has become standard operating procedure for these trade corridors.

TURF's Board member, Hank Gilbert, is mentioned in the article.

Link to article here.

Oct. 8, 2007, 4:26PM
Trans-Texas Corridor talks include Fort Bend officials
Committee formed by state Transportation Commission

By ZEN T. C. ZHENG
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle

A controversial plan to create an interstate highway from the Texas-Mexico border to Texarkana is gaining momentum in Fort Bend County as local leaders are set to begin meeting in two weeks to brainstorm on how the project should be carried out in this area.

Ted Houghton, Texas Transportation commissioner, who was in Rosenberg Wednesday to promote the project, will be in Sugar Land Oct. 26 to discuss the Trans-Texas Corridor-69 proposal with the 24-member group formed by the commission.

'Transportation crossroad'

Houghton said the project, which would turn Fort Bend and its vicinity into a "transportation crossroad," would enable fast cargo deliveries to various ports with rails or truck lanes and increase mobility for passengers with high-speed toll lanes generally along U.S. 59."We need to bring in the money to create economic opportunities," Houghton said at the annual Fort Bend Regional Infrastructure Conference sponsored by the Rosenberg-Richmond Area Chamber of Commerce.

However, the project has drawn opposition from environmentalists, property-rights proponents and those who see the corridor as part of a proposal to create a North America Free Trade Agreement highway to connect Mexico to Canada through the U.S. heartland.

Meeting closed to public

The group to meet on Oct. 26 at Sugar Land City Hall comprises county judges, mayors of cities along the proposed route, leaders of area chambers of commerce and various ports including those of Houston, Freeport and Victoria, and representatives of metropolitan planning organizations. Members are mostly from the Fort Bend, Wharton and Victoria areas.Houghton told the Chronicle Wednesday that the meeting will be closed to the public and media.


He said the group, one of six formed in the project area from Brownsville to Texarkana, will have the opportunity to help tailor the project to "local needs."

"It's a positive thing. We are letting these regions plan it out," Houghton said. "We hope by mid-next year, the group will come up with some recommendations to tell us what they would like to see built."

The Interstate 69 project is part of the proposed Trans-Texas Corridor network at least seven years in planning by the Texas Department of Transportation and supported by Gov. Rick Perry.

1,200-foot wide corridors?

The network is conceived as a cross-state road system of new and existing highways, railroads and utility rights of way. It would have separate lanes for passenger and truck traffic, freight and high-speed commuter rails, as well as infrastructure for utilities including water, oil and gas pipelines, electricity and telecommunications services. One revenue option to support the network would be toll fees.I-69 would generally follow the U.S. 59 footprint with a section along U.S. 77 from Texarkana to three possible terminals along the Texas-Mexico border: Brownsville, McAllen and Laredo.

Another major component of the network, Trans-Texas Corridor-35, would run along Interstate 35 from Denison to the Rio Grande Valley. Two other possible routes would run along Interstate 45 from Dallas to Houston and Interstate 10 from El Paso to Orange.

According to Gaby Garcia, a spokeswoman for the state transportation agency, each of the two proposed major corridors would stretch about 600 miles and cost $12 billion only for the road portion, excluding rails and utility infrastructure.

Houghton said that critics' assertion that the corridors would be 1,200 feet in width is not true. However, he said the exact width couldn't be determined until a definitive plan is shaped with sufficient local input.

County judge's endorsement

Houghton said he and Fort Bend County Judge Bob Hebert "had a great conversation" about the project during a private meeting.While asking Houghton to present a "fine print" of the plan, Hebert said he supports the project.

"I'm excited about it. We need the road," Hebert said Wednesday.

However, some local community leaders deplore what they perceive to be a lack of awareness among Fort Bend residents about the Trans-Texas Corridor concept.

The county's Democratic Party on Sept. 29 brought Hank Gilbert, a Tyler rancher who lost his race for Texas commissioner of agriculture last year, to Sugar Land to rally support for his crusade against the project. Event organizer Jenny Hurley said about 50 people attended the meeting.

Grand Parkway not a part?

Some opponents of a state plan to extend the Grand Parkway as a toll road from U.S. 59 south and then east to link Texas 288 are concerned that the expansion project could be part of the I-69 project. But, Houghton dismissed that notion.However, former Texas Transportation Commissioner John W. "Johnny" Johnson in 2000 told the Chronicle that I-69 was being proposed to pass north and west of Houston, merging with segments of the Grand Parkway, including the stretch between the Katy Freeway and U.S. 59. Johnson also said the proposed Grand Parkway segment south of U.S. 59 could be used as a continued truck route from I-69 to reach the Port of Houston via Texas 288 and Beltway 8.

"A Beautiful asset"

Calling U.S. 59 "a beautiful asset," Houghton said tracing I-69 along U.S. 59 would mean less additional land needed for the project, thus having less impact on the community along the route."We have already the asset. Now we're trying to enhance the asset," he said.

With the project, U.S. 59 at all its intersections would be turned into overpasses, he said.

Houghton said project planners have been examining a variety of ways to fund the project. However, funding remains a difficult task, he said.

"We have looked at everything possible," he said.

The state's goal is to begin construction on the project in two to three years and have it completed within five to 10 years, Houghton said.

Councilman: “It’s a taxation plan, not a congestion plan”

Details
Metropolitan Planning Organization

See Councilman Jeff Mills of Sunset Valley on YouTube here, telling the Board these toll roads are about raising revenue, not solving congestion.

Last night in Austin, the Capitol Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) Board voted to convert 4 more FREEways into tollways (and build one new toll road) using $910 million in YOUR gas taxes. The public was against it 4 to 1! We no longer have representative government and Councilman Mills' speech on this above YouTube link proves this is about taxation, not congestion relief.

Article in Austin American Statesman here.

Subcategories

Eminent Domain

Trans Texas Corridor

Public Private Partnerships

Regional Mobility Authority

Metropolitan Planning Organization

Climate Policy

Video

Page 93 of 103
  • Start
  • Prev
  • 88
  • 89
  • 90
  • 91
  • 92
  • 93
  • 94
  • 95
  • 96
  • 97
  • Next
  • End

Latest News

  • Costly and Glitchy: A Taxpayer-Funded Electric Vehicle Odyssey
  • Paxton sues more companies for illegally harvesting, selling driver data
  • NYC imposes congestion tolls on cars to pay for transit upgrades
  • NYC congestion tolling unleashes congestion nightmare
  • Still waiting: Families, victims await justice for I-35 pileup in 2021
  • Broken promise: Leaders promised to remove tolls in Harris County once roads paid for
  • Watch Fox-TV Houston panelists sound off on SH 288 double taxation
  • Incoming House members ask Abbott's Commission to declare end date on SH 288 tolls

Latest Press Releases

  • TxDOT awash in cash, $15 billion richer
  • TURF bill to prevent remote kill switches in cars gets filed
  • Grassroots groups sue state of Texas over Prop 2 illegal ballot
  • 'No on Prop 2' campaign steps up opposition to property tax increases
  • Grassroots groups hail Abbott's non-toll plan for I-35 expansion through Austin
  • Stop tolls, criminal penalties during coronavirus
  • BIG Fat 'F': Majority of state lawmakers earn failing grade
  • Krause bill undermines Governor's 'No toll' pledge, renews private toll contracts
Truth Be Tolled :: Voices will be heard
Texans for Toll-Free Highways
TURF - Defending Our Property Rights and Freedom to Travel

© 2006-2023 All Rights Reserved.  Texans United for Reform & Freedom

FAIR USE NOTICE. This site may contain copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. TexasTURF.org is making this article available for academic research purposes in our non-commercial, non-profit, effort to advance the understanding of government accountability, civil liberties, citizen rights, social and environmental justice issues. We believe that this constitutes a "fair use" of the copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use," you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.TexasTURF.org  does not express or imply that TexasTURF.org holds any claim of copyright on such material as may appear on this page.
Bootstrap is a front-end framework of Twitter, Inc. Code licensed under MIT License. Font Awesome font licensed under SIL OFL 1.1.