Corbett and Public Transit? (Elim, Highland Park: car rental, rental, inspectors)

[UKyank]

Originally Posted by Blackbeauty212

You sound like someone who doesn't know PA politics very well or either naive to how this works there is very much a Cause and Effect in play here.

Or I just happen to know the thinking of people that do not use the system which includes most everyone I know and work with.

I understand it's a huge issue for people that use it & rely on it, but it's also an equally non issue for most other people & politicians pander to the majority of their potential voters paramount above all else.

I'm not taking sides - my personal view is that mass transit is necessary for a healthy city but that PAT still has much more to do to make itself viable - and also admittedly the existence or nonexistence of it would really have no effect on me at all as I neither use the system nor drive to work & nor is my employment in reliance to the health of the local economy - I'm just trying to point out that unless the funding has majority support politically I wouldn't count on the governor seeing any backlash when it comes to reelection.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

Is there a drink tax to pay for our few bike lanes?

You use streets too, right?

Collectively bike trails and streets are paid for in a variety of ways. A significant chunk is from fuel taxes (although not as much as some people seem to think), another bit from various vehicle and license fees, in the case of bike trails specifically there are sometimes private donations, and most of the rest comes from the general accounts of various government entities.

But what isn't happening is that bicyclists are being charged directly for using those trails and streets, which is the equivalent of charging fares to use public transportation.

Now of course I have no problem with that--we should be encouraging people to bike more, and in general it is bad policy to ask transportation users to pay all the costs of their usage on the spot. But then again, I'm not the kind of person who runs around saying things like, "Why should I pay for others all the time?", because I recognize that we are all paying for each other all the time when it comes to transportation.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by ferrarisnowday

My point was that if Allegheny County received it's fair share of transportation funding, there very well may be more bike lanes and better public transportation a like.

That's almost surely true--both the County and the City are now very interested in bike infrastructure.

Again, a lot of people end up shooting themselves in the foot with this logic of never paying for transportation used by others, because they fail to account for all the ways others are paying for the transportation they use. That's not the right question (whether people are paying for each other--they always are)--the right questions are whether Allegheny County is getting its fair share, and in the ways that we need it, and whether we have enough control in general over how our money is spent on transportation.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by UKyank

Or I just happen to know the thinking of people that do not use the system which includes most everyone I know and work with.

I don't know who you know, but rather than accept that as a fait accompli, I suggest you talk with them in an effort to explain why everyone in Allegheny County has a stake in public transit in the County, whether or not they personally use it

& politicians pander to the majority of their potential voters paramount above all else.

Again, we don't, and can't, approach transportation policy piece by piece in the manner you are suggesting--if so, there wouldn't be majority support for anything.

Instead, we get majority support for an overall system of transportation policy, then apply it to the various pieces.

[UKyank]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

But that's always been the deal. The state collects a bunch of money for transportation funding. It gives it out to different areas depending on what sort of transportation each areas use.....

I'm not saying its logical, fair, rational etc. I'm merely trying to show that if the governor does not change his tune about funding PAT it shouldn't be super shocking. I get that PAT is as unimportant to someone in Clearfield Co as is a rural road wherever, but funding a road project is a much easier sell to most of the state then is mass transit. Yes it all comes out of 1 fund, but that fund still has to be chosen how it is spent which is why PAT is currently losing.

Again im not arguing for rational thought, just looking st the realities of political expediency. Until a backlash eclipses reelection chances I would not expect a policy change.

Hopefully I'm wrong

[Blackbeauty212]

Originally Posted by UKyank

Or I just happen to know the thinking of people that do not use the system which includes most everyone I know and work with.

I understand it's a huge issue for people that use it & rely on it, but it's also an equally non issue for most other people & politicians pander to the majority of their potential voters paramount above all else.

Again one last time, the people who do not use the system and are in Opposition to Public Transit Funding (basically the people that just don't get the logic and understand that there's a cause and effect to things), their Voice of opposition will NOT be loud enough to counter the overwhelming majority of people in support of Public Transit or at least affected greatly by its demise...

Corbett use to think it was a Non Issue too, so much so he publicly stated it was a not a priority for him even though it was for both side of the Legislature. Now just 6 months later Corbett is feeling the heat and showing it because he's now admitting it will be priority (why all of a sudden is it a priority for him when just 6 months ago he couldn't give a rats ass about Transportation in PA)...Looks like Corbett was a bit spooked by something possibly happening which threatens his re-elections chances maybe...

Governor is not dumb he knows this issue will make or break his bid for another 4 years.


Again

"Public opinion research shows that a majority of Pennsylvanian regard transportation funding as the most important issue facing the commonwealth,"

Read more: Governor makes little mention of transit

So much for the it's a "Non-Issue" type Voters being in mass.

[squarian]

Originally Posted by Blackbeauty212

Governor is not dumb he knows this issue will make or break his bid for another 4 years.

While I agree in general about the urgency and importance of fixing transit in PA, on this particular point I'd have to deliver the verdict of Scottish law: "not proven".

[Blackbeauty212]

Originally Posted by squarian

While I agree in general about the urgency and importance of fixing transit in PA, on this particular point I'd have to deliver the verdict of Scottish law: "not proven".

Well all we can do is wait and see.....come back here and compare notes once the dust settles.....I don't know how anyone could think Corbett will be able to escape this when it will affect so many people...it will affect way more people that those it will not.

Oh and like Brian keeps saying over and over and over again this is even bigger than just PAT and SEPTA.....Let a bridge carrying a school bus packed with kids of the "Opposition" Fall into the river (ala i-35 W Bridge in Minneapolis), wonder what that will do for Corbett's re-election chances.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by UKyank

I'm merely trying to show that if the governor does not change his tune about funding PAT it shouldn't be super shocking.

Yes, but I think we should understand exactly what has changed--after all, the state has long funded transit, including in times when the rural areas were more prominent. Ironically, the fact that the large metros have come to dominate the present and future growth and prosperity of the state has created a reactionary movement among the people who feel left out by those developments. That reactionary movement has become radically anti-urban, including anti-transit, and they are trying to use the opportunity created by a perfect-storm political cycle in 2010 to change the state's transportation policies to dramatically improve their net position at the cost of the large metros (of course they don't think of it that way, but that's the truth of what they are trying to achieve).

This is not a natural outcome in light of underlying interests. The only reason it has any chance of success is that too many people in the large metros are easily distracted by things like union-bashing and partisan sentiments, such that they are vulnerable to being manipulated into arguing and voting against their own interests. Fortunately that dynamic is dying out, but a lot of damage could be done before the large metros reassert their natural place in state politics.

[Blackbeauty212]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

This is not a natural outcome in light of underlying interests. The only reason it has any chance of success is that too many people in the large metros are easily distracted by things like union-bashing and partisan sentiments, such that they are vulnerable to being manipulated into arguing and voting against their own interests. Fortunately that dynamic is dying out, but a lot of damage could be done before the large metros reassert their natural place in state politics.

Agreed, where UKyank think its a common "Disinterest" in Public Transit is more like a "Taken for Granted" case. PAT's been having these issue for so long and always threatening cuts that it becomes boy who cried wolf syndrome to people...But thing is once they start seeing PAT isn't blow smoke and what they've always taken for granted is now gone, people then rally with anger and demand someone answer for it.