 Another Republican the Kool Aid Party hates |
If the debt-ceiling showdown made your blood boil, if the shutdown of air-traffic-control work related to the airline-ticket tax drove you crazy, then you should unplug your TV and power down your computer in late September, as the deadline for extension of the federal gasoline tax draws near.
…A sizable chunk of Republicans, led by Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma and Representative Jeff Flake of Arizona, want to abolish the tax that pays for the federal highway program and replace the whole system with one overseen by individual states.
This insurgency, inspired by the Tea Party, reflects flawed thinking on economics, transportation policy and even American history.
Like many other excise taxes, the federal highway tax comes up for periodic renewal, which is usually noncontroversial. But not this time. If Congress doesn’t act to renew the tax by Sept. 30, gas stations all over the country have to stop collecting it; the highway trust fund will never get the money; and new work on federal highway projects will come screeching to a halt.
A delay of just 10 days in renewing the tax would mean the permanent loss of $1 billion in highway funding (and layoffs for thousands of workers). Longer delays would measurably increase the national unemployment rate.
…Tea Partiers and their allies on this issue haven’t given up the fight over ending the tax; if they can’t abolish it outright just yet, they’ll push to allow states to opt out.
RTFA. More details, info, Congressional ennui.
The Tea Party’s real agenda is to convince the middle class to pay rich’s taxes for them. Nice.
#39, 40 acres and a mule. The FIRST social program.
#70. General Sherman actally issued that policy.
The Eisenhighway System(tm) has been a rousing success. There is some waste, of course, but I can’t think of much that has helped develop and grow the US more than our federal highways.
In fact, I think we should nudge those taxes up a touch and start rebuilding some of the bad pieces at a faster pace.
In # 55 GregAllen said: Most conservatives would be begging to be sent to Sweden after just a few weeks.
The problem with most experiments in the redistribution of wealth is that the wealthy are not affected and the poor take it in the shorts.
Stalin tried a redistribution of wealth that killed 7 million Ukrainian Kulacks directly, [expletive deleted] life up for millions of others and it so screwed up Soviet agriculture that years later, long after Stalin was dead, Nixon got Earl Butz involved in making everything in this country out of corn because the ‘States were shipping all OUR wheat to the Soviet Union.
The beauty if the current redistribution of wealth in the United States is that its being done semi-voluntarily. (Nobody’s holding a gun to your head … yet.)
The rich don’t have to worry because they live on large estates, like Montana, Utah or Washington State, and have private airports where their corporate owned Lear, Cessna, Gulfstream, and internationally made jet planes take off and land from. (No TSA BS for them.)
The 12,000 rich and the 400* really rich in this country can go to Sweden whenever they wish.
The 360,000,000 not rich in this country are stuck with the TSA whenever they can actually save up the cash to fly to Sweden.
Since most Americans would be in dire trouble to raise a measly grand in cash for repair bills if their car suddenly died, the rich and the really rich don’t have to worry about meeting the “Great Unwashed, Ugly Americans” on the Klarabergsviaducten.
*) The IRS tax rolls make for fascinating reading.
For instance did you know that most of the 400 also own several farms in several states (and qualify for FARM SUBSIDIES while their farms are on foreclosed land and tilled by tenant farmers,) while never setting foot on that land, or probably even in that State.
Eat that box of Cheerios™® boy. You wouldn’t want the Koch Brothers to go to bed hungry tonight, now would you…
“reflects flawed thinking on economics”
Unlike our Dear Leader who has the situation well in hand.
# 72 Olo Baggins of Bywater said, – There is some waste, of course,
Some waste? Is that why each mile of highway costs something like five million dollars?
#74: Unlike our Dear Leader who has the situation well in hand.
Glad to hear that North Korean economy is doing great. Traffic can’t be bad either.
tj, if it couldn’t have been built without federal money then that suggests the project is still a waste of money. Maybe it is very popular because it is being priced low, at a loss, with only the federal money allowing it to be built. If it is so popular, then Minnesota/Minneapolis should have built it on their own. When I was thinking of rail projects, I meant the high speed rail that is being suggested for various places, including Vegas to Anaheim.
#73–msbpodcast==do you post KNOWING you demonstrate the wealth transfer that does take place already from the poor to the rich?
Yes, class warfare has long been in place with Puke calls against starting it only when some fair tax plan is proposed to address the unequal system.
WHENEVER YOU HAVE RICH AND POOR YOU ALREADY HAVE CLASS WARFARE====WON AND CONCLUDED.
Marx wrote a book about it. Labor vs Capital classes. It happens repeatedly time after time==something about hooman nature.
Wealth Maldistribution is as extreme right now as it has ever been in the USA passing Banana Republic misery. And yet fools on this blog are even now advocating heavier boots on the necks of the already disadvantaged.
How sweet you goons all are. I laugh you don’t realize YOU are the victims, not the swaggering captains of industry you infantiley fantasize yourselves to be.
EITHER YOU WANT A NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM OR YOU DON’T. A simple issue we can all understand. We have a system that works yet some want to override reality we can all see WITH THEIR DOGMA!!!! Ah Yea===I’m looking directly at YOU. I assume you have not posted again to defend your nonsense because you are fed up with anyone who has disagreed with you?
Prove me wrong by posting back?
Yes–actually “not really” class warfare because those arguing for the Super Rich are not the Super Rich but just dupes and wanna-be fantacists.
More a National Delusion in the form of the Tea Party: Keep the government out of my MediCare.
HAW, HAW!!!!!!! Save me from your stupidly.
Silly Hoomans.
#25 How about: “Highway funds diverted and wasted in supporting an overbloated and inefficient Federal Government are now being spent by smaller, more efficient state Governments resulting in MORE JOBS and better service”.
“Smaller, more efficient state governments”???
Good lord what ignorance. The feds are much more professional and competent than all the state governments.
The state governments are much easier for big corporations to bribe than the feds. Divide and conquer, as they say.
Dude, you are such a tool that you leave a little ring of lube wherever you sit.
#61 Alfie
The Republicans should be able to slam dunk the 2012 election. The front runners are two mouth breathing imbeciles and an old, tanned guy from California who is doing a $12 million add-on to his casa during an election campaign.
What can possibly go wrong?
#63, If the 17th amendment would be repealed, it might go a long way toward alleviating that. Let the senate represent the States and not the population. That’s what the House is for.
#71, True, but Lincoln kept it active. It ended with his death.
Saying it wasn’t a Republican policy is like saying Tommy Frank’s decisions in Iraq weren’t Republican policy.
Chris, I don’t see anything that makes small state senators more entrenched than other states. Connecticut just replaced both Senators, of course it’s a bit bigger. New Hampshire has knocked out one incumbent and scared the other into retirement. Rhode Island saw Lincoln Chafee defeated. Alaska saw its long serving Senator thrown out in 2008, and the other one was defeated in a primary before winning as an independent, just like Lieberman in Connecticut. Montana had one Senator lose in 2006. Utah lost one in 2008. Nevada has seen one Senator resign. The big states don’t show any more turnover than this. New York threw out an incumbent Senator in 1998. California not for at least 20 years, same in Texas and Florida.
Party Politics is what is destroying our government. Philosophically, there is a slight difference when advocating a Party’s “Ideas” but that slight possibility in reality means nothing more than lock step party advocacy.
The notion that “the party OUT OF POWER” is the loyal opposition is so profoundly WRONG and anti-constitutional as to make a reasonable person sick.
The constitution constructs a government NOT OF PARTIES but of checks and balances between Federal and State, people and States, Executive and Congressional and so forth. Parties are not addressed because THEY ARE NOT PART OF THE SYSTEM. And thats our problem what with the Sup Ct legislating their Republican Pants off with Citizen’s Untied and so forth.
“Our number one job is to make Obama a one term President.”==========TREASON…..unconstitutional, and just plain bad government regardless of your political druthers.
Just too much rot from the inside.
VOTE ALL “NO NEW TAXES” POLITICIANS OUT OF OFFICE.
MikeN said:
“tj, if it couldn’t have been built without federal money then that suggests the project is still a waste of money. Maybe it is very popular because it is being priced low, at a loss, with only the federal money allowing it to be built. If it is so popular, then Minnesota/Minneapolis should have built it on their own. When I was thinking of rail projects, I meant the high speed rail that is being suggested for various places, including Vegas to Anaheim.”
The funding bill barely passed as it was due to intense opposition from the Republicans. Having Minnesota fund the entire cost would have guaranteed it would have never happened. Incidentally, what Minnesota did end up paying for it would have been adequate on it’s own a decade or two earlier but while Republicans stalled land values kept going up.
But again, you’re operating under the short sighted assumption that projects like this only benefit the local population and that something is only worth doing if it can be done at a profit.
>something is only worth doing if it can be done at a profit.
Each government decides for itself what it wants to do. They had reached the decision it wasn’t worthwhile, until the Feds offset some part of the cost. Sounds like it wasn’t worth doing.
Mickey—whats between your ears? = = = a hammer?????
The point was well stated: it is shortsighted to view something is worthwhile only if it can make a profit.
Do you learn anything? Take heed? Widen your perceptions?
—OR—- just mindlessly repeat your DOGMA!
Grow a brain Moran! You don’t have to agree, but stop the mindless BS.
Stupid Human.
To Ah Yea, Tard, and the rest of the Tea Partiers:
I’m old enough to remember as a kid (in 1956 or so) what the process of building the original Interstates in Indiana (not the Indiana Toll Road) was like. The routing of the Interstates involved a lot of graft so the roads would be closer to various towns, to the detriment of other nearby towns.
The Tea Partiers would be Aghast, I Tell You…
Or else they’d be right in there handing out the graft so their cornfield could become an interchange to be later transmogrified into a motel or hotel…
Other states have done the same…
#81 “Chris, I don’t see anything that makes small state senators more entrenched than other states.”
Look at this…
ranked by longest serving senator/ state name / population rank
1 Hawaii 40th
2 Vermont 49th
3 Indiana 15th
4 Utah 34th
5 Montana 44th
6 Misssissippi 31st
7 Michigan 8th
8 Iowa 30th
9 New Mexico 36th
10 Massachusetts 14th
11 Iowa 30th
12 Kentucky 26th
13 West Virginia 37th
14 Maryland 19th
15 Alabama 23rd
16 Arizona 16th
17 Nevada 35th
18 North Dakoda 48th
19 Wisconsin 20th
20 Connecticut 29th
Senators from top 10 pop state vs bottom 10 pop state: 1 vs 3
Senators from top 20 pop state vs bottom 20 pop state: 5 vs 9
Senators from top 25 pop state vs bottom 25 pop state: 7 vs 13
Note from wikipedia page on us state by pop: “The 25 least populous states contain less than one-sixth of the total population.”
The wikipedia pages I used were
“Seniority in the United States Senate”
and
“List of U.S. states and territories by population”
The DU spam filter complained about the links so that’s why I’m only giving article titles.
#14, Ah Ya,
I doubt these “Progressives” can understand this simple concept that the Highway Trust Fund, which everyone who buys gas puts into, is being used to pay bribes to Government approved unions who are working on projects which have nothing to do with the National Highway System.
Please post some evidence to back up your claim. I realize the Tea Bagger Party prefers to invent their own facts because the truth is opposite what they wish. But I guess in your twisted, demented, immoral mind, you prefer being in a submissive gay relationship to telling the truth.
Chris, OK, so you are looking at the longest serving 20 Senators to get your point. That is a very fluid situation, so you’d have to have data for several Senates to see if this is a trend. For example, at least 5 of your top 20 are leaving the Senate next year, from small Hawaii, North Dakota, New Mexico, and Medium Connecticut and Wisconsin.
The entire group of posters are a bunch of freaking idiots !!!
The Federal Government raises the money. The DoT gives it to the States who contribute an equal amount of money. The projects have to be approved by the DoT in order to qualify for Federal funding. Except for earmarks like the Republican requested “Bridge to Nowhere” in Alaska. ($40 million was spent on “Access Roads to Nowhere” before the project was cancelled by the bad publicity)
It is the States that are responsible for maintaining Federal roads, “US” series and “I” series, NOT the Federal government.
Ya got potholes? Blame your State government, not the Federal government.
Alphie,
Your posting reminds me of Mary. She rode Joesph’s ass all the way to Bethlehem.
We can always tell when the end of the month is coming. Your looney posts become more frequent and less coherent. But hey !!! Please continue so everyone can see how idiotic the Tea Bagger Party is.
Eisenhower best Republican since Lincoln ( oh and if the TEA Paty new history they would be saying Lincoln didn’t know how to lead either )
This is just about there stupidest Idea yet.
#90 Okay, how about we look at all time versus the same population numbers. Sure I’m stretching a little because some were in office a long time ago when population figures were different. This is a top 25 off of senate.gov which is actually 26 because two are tied.
1. Robert C. Byrd (D-WV) 37th
2. Daniel K. Inouye (D-HI) 40th
3. Strom Thurmond (R-SC) 24th
4. Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA) 14th
5. Carl T. Hayden (D-AZ) 16th
6. John Stennis (D-MS) 31st
7. Ted Stevens (R-AK) 47th
8. Ernest F. Hollings (D-SC) 24th
9. Richard B. Russell (D-GA) 9th
10. Russell Long (D-LA) 25th
11. Francis E. Warren (R-WY) 50th
12. Patrick J. Leahy (D-VT) 49th
13. James Eastland (D-MS) 31st
14. Warren Magnuson (D-WA) 13th
15. Joseph R. Biden, Jr. (D-DE) 45th
16. Pete V. Domenici (R-NM) 36th
17. Claiborne Pell (D-RI) 43rd
18. Kenneth D. McKellar (D-TN) 17th
19. Milton R. Young (R-ND) 48th
20. Ellison D. Smith (D-SC) 24th
21. Allen Joseph Ellender (D-LA) 25th
22. William Boyd Allison (R-IA) 30th
23. John McClellan (D-AR) 32nd
24. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) 34th
24. Richard Lugar (R-IN) 15th
25. Walter F. George (D-GA) 9th
Top 10 pop vs bottom 10 pop: 2 to 6
Top 20 pop vs bottom 20 pop: 7 to 12
Top 25 pop vs bottom 25 pop: 12 to 14 (That’s actually pretty close, but relies on 3 at 24th pop and 1 at 25th pop.)
You say: “so you are looking at the longest serving 20 Senators to get your point. That is a very fluid situation, so you’d have to have data for several Senates to see if this is a trend.”
I looked at the numbers afterwords. I’d like to see someone else do an analysis based on media market costs. I think that would be even more definitive. To be a big player in a more expensive market you’ve got to raise more cash. More cash = more effort. Doesn’t that make sense?
The Right is currently a bunch of defeatist anti-American greedy ignorant morons who don’t even understand, much less appreciate, our country and want to destroy it in a race for the bottom. I have nothing but contempt for them, and a double serving for the disingenuous evil people who are convincing the underinformed that shitty infrastructure and scchools are the way to win in a world where the developing nations are spending lots and lots of money on just that. We’ll eventually have a cell-phone gap in every field of endeavor.
Reagan did sign the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982. TEFRA—the largest tax increase in American history basically instituted the Alternative Minimum Tax as a completely separate taxation system. Thanks Ron.
Excellent. I’m personally responsible for destroying America. Phase One my plan is complete.
Now all I need is the Bolivian brass monkey and I can begin Phase Two.
Chris, in terms of longest serving, I think your point is valid. As far as media costs, this is why I would expect the biggest states to keep their Senators more. It costs money to be a challenger, while the incumbent has advantages of office including free mail to constituents and high name ID. So it is even harder to knock out a Senator in a big state. And campaign finance reform made it even harder for challengers, including a restriction on negative ads. Good luck beating an incumbent while you can’t say bad things about him. That’s why I think small to medium states are more likely to see their Senators thrown out than big ones. But the absolute longest serving being from small states is possible. IN a few years two Senators from California will make that top 20.