[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by mp775

NYSDOT maintains it, but CTDOT reimburses them for it.

For 100% of the cost? Source?

[JGBigGreen]

Not a single truck has taken a local road to avoid a toll? Doubtful.

Originally Posted by mp775

Trucks have not been usnig local roads to skirt the tolls in Rhode Island.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by MikefromCT

Well, I hope they enjoy it while they can. Rhode Island is about to lose a court case after trying to toll trucks only. That’s why I bring this up.

You can criticize Len Fasano for his views, but you really think Lamont’s ideas are any better? His solution is the same as every other politician before him: refuse to cut spending and pass costs onto taxpayers. People are tired of expected to be the safety net for this state — especially when they get nothing in return. That’s primarily why people are leaving this state.

I’m not sure why you think Rhode Island is going to lose. The trucking industry lawsuit was initially dismissed. All that has happened is a judges panel agreed the dismissal could be appealed. They are still fighting over whether the lawsuit should be heard in federal or state court. That does not mean the lawsuit can be won.

https://www.theday.com/article/20200103/NWS12/200109788

I criticize Fasano because he always has criticism but never a solution. This is why the Connecticut Republican Party keeps failing here. As a Republican, I am appalled and tired by this.

And no, as has been shown MANY times on this forum, the primary reason people are leaving the state is retirees moving to warmer weather climates. Even then, this is a small number. The vast majority actually stay here in retirement. Jay

[mp775]

Originally Posted by JGBigGreen

Not a single truck has taken a local road to avoid a toll? Doubtful.

I don't know about "a single truck," but you don't see a parade of trucks along Route 3 between exits 1 and 5, which would be a really easy bypass around two toll gantries.

[MikefromCT]

Originally Posted by JayCT

I’m not sure why you think Rhode Island is going to lose. The trucking industry lawsuit was initially dismissed. All that has happened is a judges panel agreed the dismissal could be appealed. They are still fighting over whether the lawsuit should be heard in federal or state court. That does not mean the lawsuit can be won.

https://www.theday.com/article/20200103/NWS12/200109788

I criticize Fasano because he always has criticism but never a solution. This is why the Connecticut Republican Party keeps failing here. As a Republican, I am appalled and tired by this.

And no, as has been shown MANY times on this forum, the primary reason people are leaving the state is retirees moving to warmer weather climates. Even then, this is a small number. The vast majority actually stay here in retirement. Jay

Obviously it's anyone's guess where this lawsuit will end up, but I would not be surprised if RI loses this on the grounds that it's deemed unconstitutional. That's not what I'm saying, but I could see a judge ruling it as such.

As far as why the GOP keeps losing, I would argue that it is because this state has swung so far to the left that the very word Republican is toxic, and anyone with an "R" after their name is automatically synonymous with Trump. They shouldn't be. Plenty of common sense Republicans exist who refuse to align themselves with this administration. They believe in climate change, marriage equality, reproductive rights because they know this has nothing to do with fiscal matters.

Warmer weather is definitely a reason why people are leaving, but it is hardly alone. I can't tell you how many op-ed pieces I have read about people leaving because they are tired of unjustifiably high taxes and political incompetence. The new places where these people settle are not perfect, but by comparison they do regard them as better. Government is simply run more efficiently and competently in the areas where they have transplanted, and this will not always be measured in an anecdotal poll that someone cherry-picks where CT ranks high. I have friends of all ages who have either left, are in the process of leaving, or looking to get out.

[mp775]

Originally Posted by kidyankee764

For 100% of the cost? Source?

" New York handles routine maintenance such as snow removal with Connecticut reimbursing New York for costs involved."

"The 1.4 mile section is owned by the Connecticut Department of Transportation and is maintained and repaired by the New York State Department of Transportation (reimbursed by Connecticut)."

"Lamont had planned to erect a tolling gantry that would charge each vehicle 50 cents to drive through the short Connecticut section. This caused an uproar in the state of New York, whose Department of Transportation handles routine maintenance and plowing on that brief stretch of federal highway and is reimbursed by Connecticut."

Although this 2013 bridge maintenance project was apparently carried out by CTDOT, not NYSDOT.

[JP Nutmegger]

Originally Posted by mp775

" New York handles routine maintenance such as snow removal with Connecticut reimbursing New York for costs involved."

"The 1.4 mile section is owned by the Connecticut Department of Transportation and is maintained and repaired by the New York State Department of Transportation (reimbursed by Connecticut)."

"Lamont had planned to erect a tolling gantry that would charge each vehicle 50 cents to drive through the short Connecticut section. This caused an uproar in the state of New York, whose Department of Transportation handles routine maintenance and plowing on that brief stretch of federal highway and is reimbursed by Connecticut."

Although this 2013 bridge maintenance project was apparently carried out by CTDOT, not NYSDOT.

I still don't get how this does not qualify as a border toll, and is therefore illegal.

The United States Supreme Court has made clear that a state charge violates the Commerce Clause “if it is facially discriminatory, has a discriminatory intent, or has the effect of unduly burdening interstate commerce.” Amerada Hess Corporation v. Director, Div. of Taxation, 490 U.S. 66, 75 (1989). It can be argued that many state tolling schemes fail every element of that analysis.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by MikefromCT

Obviously it's anyone's guess where this lawsuit will end up, but I would not be surprised if RI loses this on the grounds that it's deemed unconstitutional. That's not what I'm saying, but I could see a judge ruling it as such.

As far as why the GOP keeps losing, I would argue that it is because this state has swung so far to the left that the very word Republican is toxic, and anyone with an "R" after their name is automatically synonymous with Trump. They shouldn't be. Plenty of common sense Republicans exist who refuse to align themselves with this administration. They believe in climate change, marriage equality, reproductive rights because they know this has nothing to do with fiscal matters.

Warmer weather is definitely a reason why people are leaving, but it is hardly alone. I can't tell you how many op-ed pieces I have read about people leaving because they are tired of unjustifiably high taxes and political incompetence. The new places where these people settle are not perfect, but by comparison they do regard them as better. Government is simply run more efficiently and competently in the areas where they have transplanted, and this will not always be measured in an anecdotal poll that someone cherry-picks where CT ranks high. I have friends of all ages who have either left, are in the process of leaving, or looking to get out.

It has long been accepted that trucks can pay higher tolls because they do greater damage to roadways and bridges. This was tested decades ago but trucks are charged higher rates of tolls than passenger vehicles everywhere. This is just an extension of that and why it is unlikely the courts will rule in the trucking industry’s favor.

I disagree that this state has swung to the far left. The Republican Party, even the Connecticut Republicans, have swung to the right. After successfully winning the Governor’s office with Rowland and Rell (both moderates by today’s standards), they ran Foley twice and the Stefanowski. Both very conservative. How did they do? Despite the low popularity of Malloy, Foley lost twice and despite the clear desire for change, Stefanowski lost too.

For every op-Ed piece you have read (and there really haven’t been that many) there are thousands of people who feel otherwise. I too know people that have left. Some are happy, more are not. And most have found they did not save nearly as much as they thought. Housing costs near major employment centers are not that much less, if at all. They also found that those less costly places are less costly for a reason. They do not have the same level of services. Emergency services are NOT more efficient. They are just less which means longer wait times for response. I even know some that happily returned and said never again.

Further discussion of this here is off topic to this thread so I won’t go on. Jay

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by JP Nutmegger

I still don't get how this does not qualify as a border toll, and is therefore illegal.

The United States Supreme Court has made clear that a state charge violates the Commerce Clause “if it is facially discriminatory, has a discriminatory intent, or has the effect of unduly burdening interstate commerce.” Amerada Hess Corporation v. Director, Div. of Taxation, 490 U.S. 66, 75 (1989). It can be argued that many state tolling schemes fail every element of that analysis.

The Federal Highway Administration has indicated that Tolls can be placed on a bridge that needs repair. There is one bridge on that stretch of I-684 that needs repair so the state feels it can be tolled. Tolls do NOT impede or unduly burden interstate commerce. It is merely Federal Highway Administration’s Policy to not allow border tolls. I’m not sure what they will think of this, but it is likely CTDOT has already discussed this with them. Jay

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by JayCT

It has long been accepted that trucks can pay higher tolls because they do greater damage to roadways and bridges. This was tested decades ago but trucks are charged higher rates of tolls than passenger vehicles everywhere. This is just an extension of that and why it is unlikely the courts will rule in the trucking industry’s favor.

I disagree that this state has swung to the far left. The Republican Party, even the Connecticut Republicans, have swung to the right. After successfully winning the Governor’s office with Rowland and Rell (both moderates by today’s standards), they ran Foley twice and the Stefanowski. Both very conservative. How did they do? Despite the low popularity of Malloy, Foley lost twice and despite the clear desire for change, Stefanowski lost too.

For every op-Ed piece you have read (and there really haven’t been that many) there are thousands of people who feel otherwise. I too know people that have left. Some are happy, more are not. And most have found they did not save nearly as much as they thought. Housing costs near major employment centers are not that much less, if at all. They also found that those less costly places are less costly for a reason. They do not have the same level of services. Emergency services are NOT more efficient. They are just less which means longer wait times for response. I even know some that happily returned and said never again.

Further discussion of this here is off topic to this thread so I won’t go on. Jay

We definitely disagree on who has swung where. I’ve been an independent all my life, and actually supported many democratic candidates, but seeing their manipulation tactics as of late, never again will I vote Democrat.

Curious to know - how has the Republican Party swung right?