Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But he doesn't say that highways will have to exclusively rely on PPPs if they want any additional capacity or upgrades. I think the state allowing PPPs is fine, but not all projects can be done that way, and in particular there are a lot of federal programs that would very likely de facto require a state contribution.
I'm not sure I read his policy that way (that transit would have to exclusively PPP). I also find it interesting that he doesn't include intercity rail in mass transit but up with highways and freight rail [intermodal].
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTH
Generally, when a person running for governor says his plan for public transit is to let localities and PPPs pay for everything, it means he is telling you that as far as what he is responsible for is concerned, you are going to be SOL.
I know in the Philadelphia area they have been asking for years for the power to set up a regional funding scheme (that is not allowed under ciurrent laws). it's not really a bad idea, and could allow urban regions to offer the services they want without fighting with rural legislators. Bear in mind that Rendell has not been able to accomplish dedicated funding either with Democratic control.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTH
As for maintenance--all the talk about running public transit like a business and requiring everyone to adjust to new commuting patterns, as meanwhile upgrading highways are deemed a jobs program, vital for economic competitiveness, and so on, tells you exactly where his priorities will lie. Given his general no new taxes and slash the state budget plan, plus the current massive shortfall in basic maintenance for roads, plus the clearly higher priority he places on state spending on roads--I don't see Corbett fighting for maintenance dollars for public transit when push comes to shove, and the people he will be screwing over didn't vote for him anyway.
you're statements are not without reasoning (based on historical actions of his party) but they make a whole lot of assumptions. I also don't see corbett screwing pittsburgh. he may well get more of it in the next election if he plays his cards right. He seems like he likes living in the pittsburgh area.
Quote:
Asked what he likes to do when he's in Pittsburgh, Corbett mentions visits to the Pleasure Bar and Tessaro's in Bloomfield and Aspinwall Grille. Then he pauses and laughs: "I just realized I only mentioned places to eat."
[SIZE=3][/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]We must leverage existing financial assets and be open to innovative financing opportunities. These ideas may include: [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] Leveraging local and private contributions to support specific infrastructure projects [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] Being open to creative financing possibilities such as public-private partnerships [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] Acknowledging other avenues: fees, Vehicle Miles Traveled, High Occupancy Tolls for new capacity and congestion pricing [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3][/SIZE]
there's a train project in the Philadelphia suburbs that is looking to use tolls to finance both maintenance fo the road and a restoration of commuter rail
Quote:
[SIZE=3][/SIZE] [SIZE=3][/SIZE][SIZE=3][SIZE=3]Engaging in true partnership with local communities to develop realistic 12-year plans that are based on the priorities of local communities and where priorities would have the greatest impact in terms of safety, congestion mitigation and economic development. ..[with]Local Development Districts and Metropolitan Planning Organizations, construction industry and suppliers and the PennDOT workforce. [SIZE=3][/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]Improve federal transportation funding opportunities. As Governor, Tom Corbett will continue to aggressively work to ensure that Pennsylvania not only maintains its share of federal transportation revenues, but also maximizes all federal funding sources to support the long-range transportation program. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3][/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE]..
lastly, getting back to the original topic, the rhetoric of economic liberalization is probably just as important, if not more important. Pittsburgh can't compete nationally if the state can't compete nationally. PA is not NJ, we can't simply live off NYC. As noted in another thread, PA is surrounded by some of the least competitive states in the country (NY, NJ, OH, WV) and as a consequence, will have to sink or swim on its own. having a middling ranking on competitiveness is not enough, we need to move up the list. that includes cuts to the CNI and property taxes (hey Rendell, whatever happened to that?). Getting a handle costs is also a big issue. I'm not saying corbett will be a great friend to transportation but he may not be as bad as Democrats say. we shall see, of course, and he's governor, not dictator.
The draw for many companies who consider relocating to Pittsburgh have to do with close proximity to universities and the many amenities/activities that the city offers which very few are located in the suburbs.
Yep. Basically his transportation plan sounds extremely dated at this point. It was actually never the case that the City lost its status as a prime employment area for the region, and now it is becoming even more so. Not that our suburbs and even rural areas aren't important too from an economic development perspective--for example, I expect a lot of the "Energyburgh" growth to simultaneously create jobs all over the place in Southwest PA. The problem is that Corbett appears to be a typical "loot the pockets of the cities while they are dying" Republican . . . but hey, maybe he will prove me wrong and be something other than what he appeared during the campaign.
Quote:
Without the necessary basic infrastructure development and improvement, I don't see how economic growth and job creation will be able to take place.
We can probably coast for a while, and I wouldn't entirely dismiss the PPP angle . . . there are only some projects that can be done that way, but we probably could keep a pretty full schedule for the next few years. The permanent damage is going to be more subtle, like other urban areas getting a lot more federal infrastructure spending in this period because their states are more supportive and willing to make contributions.
Quote:
This may come back to bite him in the butt if this translates into stagnation or even job losses. Oh well, I guess that means after his term is up our next governor will be a Democrat again.
Honestly I have no idea how this era of state government is even going to get off the ground. Everyone has been promised no new taxes and massive spending cuts, but the spending cuts haven't actually been specified. Even if Corbett et al do as I fear and decimate urban spending, that still won't be enough to address all sorts of other current budget issues that will actually affect their constituents.
So I agree the tide could turn, and very quickly--as a general proposition, the state (and indeed national) electorate has come to expect a lot of something for nothing from government, and they seem inclined to keep changing their governments every few years in a perpetual quest to find the loaves-and-fishes-miracle-workers they have been promised.
The best thing I'm hoping for from the new state government is privatizing the liquor stores. There's some agreement in the legislature at the moment it seems (Turzai, etc.) so it may actually happen this time.
I don't hold much hope for them doing anything else too useful.
I'm not sure I read his policy that way (that transit would have to exclusively PPP).
Here is the entirety of what he says relating to actually expanding capacity or otherwise upgrading transit systems:
Quote:
Improve ridership opportunities. Tom Corbett will direct PennDOT to encourage transit providers to adapt to new commuting dynamics – such as reverse commutes – that support the economic development needs of communities. He also will encourage greater collaboration through public private partnerships or other means to facilitate system expansion and intermodal linkages. In addition, he will ask PennDOT to consider potential transit linkages as a part of highway improvement projects.
I don't see much hope there for state contributions.
Quote:
I also find it interesting that he doesn't include intercity rail in mass transit but up with highways and freight rail [intermodal].
Yep, that is a hopeful sign. If Corbett could actually elevate Pittsburgh as a priority in the state's intercity rail projects, that would be nice. We'll have to see, though, if there is any money for that anyway.
Quote:
I know in the Philadelphia area they have been asking for years for the power to set up a regional funding scheme (that is not allowed under ciurrent laws). it's not really a bad idea, and could allow urban regions to offer the services they want without fighting with rural legislators. Bear in mind that Rendell has not been able to accomplish dedicated funding either with Democratic control.
As you know I actually think it would be great if we could localize more of this, PROVIDED that the state wasn't simultaneously draining local resources to spend on rural roads and bridges. I don't see that latter part actually happening under the new state government, unfortunately. But I suppose if we can get the former but not the latter for now, maybe in the future we can come back and tackle the latter.
Quote:
I also don't see corbett screwing pittsburgh. he may well get more of it in the next election if he plays his cards right. He seems like he likes living in the pittsburgh area.
I honestly don't know how he is going to fulfill all his political commitments in general. Assuming reality sets in and he is forced to make hard choices, I don't see him setting any sort of balance between the people who voted for him this time and the people who didn't. And if he isn't running against another Allegheny County guy next time, he could likely get more votes out of Western PA even if he gets even fewer votes out of the core urban area.
Quote:
he also held his celebration in downtown pittsburgh rather than, say, monroeville (or elsewhere).
Of course. But every day people work in the City, then go home to the suburbs and talk about how much it sucks and deserves everything it gets. The fact that the City is actually crucial to the entire region and that their own actions demonstrate as much doesn't seem to penetrate into their mindset.
Quote:
lastly, getting back to the original topic, the rhetoric of economic liberalization is probably just as important, if not more important.
If it is merely empty rhetoric, I don't think so--in fact to the extent empty rhetoric works politically, it just encourages the relevant politicians to be even more extreme in their abuse and misuse of government, on the assumption that they will still be able to win elections just by saying the right things.
And a lot of the rhetoric is incoherent anyway, of the "get the government's hands off my Medicare!" variety.
Quote:
Pittsburgh can't compete nationally if the state can't compete nationally. PA is not NJ, we can't simply live off NYC. As noted in another thread, PA is surrounded by some of the least competitive states in the country (NY, NJ, OH, WV) and as a consequence, will have to sink or swim on its own. having a middling ranking on competitiveness is not enough, we need to move up the list. that includes cuts to the CNI and property taxes (hey Rendell, whatever happened to that?). Getting a handle costs is also a big issue.
Competitiveness also requires public investments in infrastructure, education, preserving the environment, and so on, and there is very little evidence that a low-tax/low-investment model is actually more competitive (just the opposite).
So what people like Corbett do is SAY we can make all those investments AND cut taxes too, just by eliminating waste, inefficiency, and so on. But while it is easy to SAY that, it turns out it is much harder to actually DO that in practice. So what happens when your rhetoric prevents you from actually solving this problem in the real world?
I actually have no idea what this new government is going to do, in fact, once all this becomes apparent the first time they actually have to form a budget.
Quote:
we shall see, of course, and he's governor, not dictator.
But of course that also blunts any sense in which he can protect Pittsburgh from the new legislature. I'd say a good bet is that when the rhetoric hits reality, what we will get will be a lot more sacrifices in spending for the core urban areas than were promised, because those aren't their actual voters.
Anyway, we won't have too long to wait to see. In fact, one of the first tests will be whether the state finds a way to fulfill its funding promise to PAT, or instead forces PAT to cut back service. I hope I am wrong, but I am fearful I am right.
The best thing I'm hoping for from the new state government is privatizing the liquor stores.
Agreed--that would be nice. And among the reasons to think it could happen is that it is basically the only significant way they have allowed themselves to raise any new money.
Here is the entirety of what he says relating to actually expanding capacity or otherwise upgrading transit systems:
again, we have a situation where we can't even maintain our current service levels. we ahve to walk before we can run.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTH
I don't see much hope there for state contributions.
of course, in contect, PennDOT has never really recognized the role of transit. It was only recently that PennDOT established a rail group. PennDOT (or PennDOH!) has never been the funding mechanism for transit (though it does directly fund the Keystone service). If they can incorporate transit in a highway overhaul, so be it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTH
Yep, that is a hopeful sign. If Corbett could actually elevate Pittsburgh as a priority in the state's intercity rail projects, that would be nice. We'll have to see, though, if there is any money for that anyway.
yep, though it shouldn't take much to improve it provided federal matches are still available.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTH
As you know I actually think it would be great if we could localize more of this, PROVIDED that the state wasn't simultaneously draining local resources to spend on rural roads and bridges. I don't see that latter part actually happening under the new state government, unfortunately.
Pennsylvania's biggest problem is lack of commerce, with too much falling on the backs of residents. addressing economic competitiveness at the state level should help the state's alrge cities take on a greater share of responsibilities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTH
he could likely get more votes out of Western PA even if he gets even fewer votes out of the core urban area.
he could but I don't necessarily see that happening. I've seen no reason to buy into the idea he hates the city.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTH
Of course. But every day people work in the City, then go home to the suburbs and talk about how much it sucks and deserves everything it gets. The fact that the City is actually crucial to the entire region and that their own actions demonstrate as much doesn't seem to penetrate into their mindset.
addressing the pension situation is paramount.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTH
If it is merely empty rhetoric, I don't think so--in fact to the extent empty rhetoric works politically, it just encourages the relevant politicians to be even more extreme in their abuse and misuse of government, on the assumption that they will still be able to win elections just by saying the right things.
there are specific proposals like addressing the CNI (which even Rendell admitted was too high), the capital stock tax, and caps on losses. it's not just "get your hands off my medicare."
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTH
Competitiveness also requires public investments in infrastructure, education, preserving the environment, and so on, and there is very little evidence that a low-tax/low-investment model is actually more competitive (just the opposite).
right, but you tend to underweight the other side. we're not talking about the low tax model, just getting pennsylvania out of the extreme column (highest corp income tax, cap stock, etc). I see little evidence that more taxation always leads to better outcomes. Texas is doing quite well without a corp income tax. there are many factors, I appreciate transportation investments as you know, but you have to work with what you have, an Pennsylvania is hardly a low tax haven or a place that doesn't need to reform the way it handles business. I'd also point out that education isn't always about funding.
I'm not a fan of his opposition to the shale tax (I think that's the most likely one he'll cave on) but I don't know that I agree with the partisan assumptions either.
privatizing the plcb would be sweet, I wonder if they will tie it to paying back the feds for the $3bn rendell borrowed for unemployment compensation. sort of like ravenstahl's parking plan. (speaking of which, the numbers released by the actuary are staggering...hard to believe council is sticking to its guns. ALL $330 million needs to go into the fund).
Agreed--that would be nice. And among the reasons to think it could happen is that it is basically the only significant way they have allowed themselves to raise any new money.
I thought I read that the plan was to lease them? Is this correct? If so, will they be leased to a single party or individually? Or is the plan just to sell off the existing stores and create a licensing system for new stores that wish to open?
I thought I read that the plan was to lease them? Is this correct? If so, will they be leased to a single party or individually? Or is the plan just to sell off the existing stores and create a licensing system for new stores that wish to open?
Quote:
House Republican Whip Mike Turzai (R-Allegheny) today unveiled legislation to privatize the wholesale and retail operations of the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board (PLCB). This plan transitions Pennsylvania from a “control state,” with the Commonwealth controlling both the wholesale and retail operations of the sale of wine and spirits, to a “franchise and license state,” where the Commonwealth licenses persons to operate the wholesale and retail wine and spirits businesses. ...
Turzai’s legislation privatizes wholesale operations by auctioning off 100 wholesale distribution licenses to the highest responsible bidder. On the retail side, the proposal would auction off 750 retail store licenses and would also auction off the inventories of the current state stores. The PLCB would be required to divest itself from the retail sale of wine and spirits over a two-year period. A biennial license renewal fee and a transfer of license fee, similar to other license application and transfer fees currently in place, will be assessed by the PLCB.
It is estimated that the sale of the wholesale and retail licenses will bring in $2 billion. ..On the wholesale side, no person or business may own more than 10 percent of the wholesale distribution licenses statewide. On the retail side, no person or business can own more than 10 percent of state stores statewide. ..Currently, restaurants, taverns and clubs pay the 6 percent sales tax when they purchase wine and spirits from the PLCB. The 6 percent sales tax will be assessed at the point of sale at those establishments. ..The study showed that privatization does not lead to increased DUI fatalities. In fact, the study indicates that license states actually have a lower DUI fatality rate than control states. The study also found “no statistically significant difference” in underage drinking or underage binge drinking between license and control states.
PA House Republican Caucus - Turzai Introduces Legislation to Privatize Sale of Wine and Spirits
not mentioned is that state stores often locate where politically connected building owners are, rather than where the market would otherwise dictate. I'd also like to see extended licenses (4 am ) sold and more licenses than 750 (unless it's 750 + the state stores). It woudl be good for consumers and also for vacant storefronts.
there are specific proposals like addressing the CNI (which even Rendell admitted was too high), the capital stock tax, and caps on losses. it's not just "get your hands off my medicare."
Definitely our current system of corporate taxation is too complex and has some perverse aspects to it. But that isn't really an economic liberalism issue per se--you can support all that just on various wonky grounds.
Quote:
we're not talking about the low tax model, just getting pennsylvania out of the extreme column (highest corp income tax, cap stock, etc). I see little evidence that more taxation always leads to better outcomes.
It isn't high taxes that lead to better outcomes, it is smart investments in public projects and public services. But those cost money, and that is what you need taxes for.
I don't have a problem with reforming the current tax system in many possible ways, to simplify it, remove perverse incentives, and so on. But at the same time we also have to broaden the tax base, introduce new forms of taxation, and increase some rates, so that we have the funding to make the necessary investments. I just don't have much confidence the new government is going to be willing to do all the necessary parts of that, as opposed to just the politically popular parts.
Quote:
Texas is doing quite well without a corp income tax.
Just an aside, but there are many measures on which the state government in Texas is NOT doing a good job, like primary education. Texas also has the benefit of a number of important natural resources, and a strategic positioning. Meanwhile, there are many overall low-tax states which are lagging by every economic indicator, and many overall high-tax states that are near the top of the rankings. Again, it is not that high taxes per se are good, but rather that a decent amount of public investment is good, but that takes taxes.
Quote:
there are many factors, I appreciate transportation investments as you know, but you have to work with what you have, an Pennsylvania is hardly a low tax haven or a place that doesn't need to reform the way it handles business.
Just to be clear, I am not opposed to reform in general, and I absolutely agree we could and should reform the way Pennsylvania taxes businesses as part of an overall fiscal restructuring of the state government. Again, I just have little confidence the hard parts will also get done.
Quote:
but I don't know that I agree with the partisan assumptions either.
I'm actually just taking them at their word about their priorities, and combining that with some sense of the reality of the state's overall fiscal situation.
Quote:
privatizing the plcb would be sweet, I wonder if they will tie it to paying back the feds for the $3bn rendell borrowed for unemployment compensation.
That would be a good use. Unfortunately, that leaves the rest of the budget to deal with . . . I am not kidding when I say I really don't know what they are going to do.
Quote:
(speaking of which, the numbers released by the actuary are staggering...hard to believe council is sticking to its guns. ALL $330 million needs to go into the fund).
Totally agree, but this is a broken political situation, and unfortunately I think a lot of people are now looking at the cliff ahead and thinking about how to blame someone else, as opposed to actually looking for a brake.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There's some agreement in the legislature at the moment it seems (Turzai, etc.) so it may actually happen this time.
