The Lord giveth & the Lord taketh away, Part II. - The Other Georgia gave to the metro. Will the metro now take it away? - Transportation dollars.
The following is an article by Janet Frankston (excerpts) from the 2-7-05 ajc:
Road fund changes opposed in rural areas
Legislation that would make more money available to metro Atlanta for gridlock relief is not a slam dunk in the minds of rural government leaders.
The "congressional balancing" bill, which would exempt interstate highway improvements from the state law requiring equal transportation spending in each of Georgia's 13 congressional districts, has yet to win statewide support.
The Association County Commissioners of Georgia doesn't support the bill because rural leaders fear it would take away transportation dollars. Until last week, the Georgia Municipal Association wasn't taking a position, but now supports it.
"For those areas in the metro area, I'm sure they're in favor of it," he said. "If you take money off the top, there's less to split by district. We're not changing the size of the pot here. You're just reallocating the pot."
Senate Bill 4 moved out of the Transportation Committee last week. Sponsors include Tommie Williams (R-Lyons), chairman of the Transportation Committee, Majority Leader Bill Stephens (R-Canton) and Majority Whip Mitch Seabaugh (R-Sharpsburg). Among the sponsors of House Bill 16, still sitting in a subcommittee, are three freshman legislators.
The Senate bill would exempt 85 percent of projects for interstate and developmental highways, the Georgia Regional Transportation Authority and MARTA from the formula; the House version seeks to exempt 75 percent.
The bill is of particular interest to the gridlocked Atlanta region. Construction is more expensive in metro Atlanta than in rural areas, and commuters are seeking traffic relief for projects along I-85, I-75, I-285 and I-20. Those projects often take up the largest chunks of a district's transportation allocation.
State Transportation Board member Ward Edwards said he sees the benefit of the bill to his Macon area district. Costly projects along I-75 and I-16 would eat up all the road money allocated to his congressional district for at least two years, he said.
At a board meeting last month of the Atlanta Regional Commission, Chairman Sam Olens told members to lobby for the bill, which he calls the most important legislation in the General Assembly.
It's also a priority of the Metro Atlanta Chamber of Commerce, the Regional Business Coalition and the Metro Atlanta Mayors Association.
That alone makes leaders in more rural areas skeptical of the benefit for them.
[A witness opposing passage of the bill testified before the Senate Transportation Committee that] "[w]e have to have roads from our outlying areas to get to those interstates," she said. "That's the problem. We don't have them."
But DOT Deputy Commissioner Larry Dent said the bill would benefit rural Georgia because agriculture and tourism industries need good interstates to move goods and people.
Williams said he is comfortable with the bill as a rural legislator.
"I don't know anyone who doesn't want to see the bill passed," he said. "I don't think it's a slam dunk until it passes."
[end of ajc article]
_______________
SB 4 was passed out of the Senate Transportation Committee with only only one dissenting vote, freshman Sen. Greg Goggans (R-Douglas).
As noted, Sen. Goggans is from Douglas, and I along with the rest of South Georgia very much appreciate my senator taking this stand in the interest of his senatorial district and voting against the position taken by the chairman of the committee, Sen. Tommie Williams.
_______________
In a 9-10-04 post entitled "We miss you Roy, oh yes we do -- OneGeorgia Authority strays from its roots," I wrote (excerpts):
As this blog indicates, I live in the "Other Georgia."
One of the other candidates during the U.S. Senate race would chide me when I would point this out. He would insist that there was only one Georgia. Such chiding merely confirmed his residence was in Georgia rather than the other Georgia.
Bill Shipp thinks spreading asphalt below the gnat line is nothing but politics. Bill Shipp lives above the gnat line.
For those of us below the gnat line, asphalt means transportation, and transportation means jobs.
_______________
The following are excerpts from a 11-22-04 post entitled
"The Lord giveth & the Lord taketh away. The Other Georgia gave to the metro. Will the metro now take away? -- Legislation on transportation dollars":
It quoted the following from a 11-16-04 post:
"Included in the first list of prefiled bills to be taken up in the Georgia senate . . . is one seeking to change the way that federal money for roads is divvied up between metro Atlanta and the rest of the state."
"Under the current formula, the millions of federal dollars used for road-building money is divided equally among all 13 congressional districts.
"In recent legislative sessions how one voted on transportation bills was often determined by the location of one's home district.
"This is anticipated to continue even now with the legislature controlled by the GOP. Suburban and rural Republicans will have some different priorities just as urban and rural Democrats have in past legislative sessions."
The 11-16-04 post also noted that when House Majority Leader Jerry Keen of St. Simons was House Minority Whip, he said: "Transportation in the metro [Atlanta] area means congestion. Transportation in rural areas means paving roads and economic development.
"Will Rep. Keen forget his constituents now that he is House Majority Leader?
"This transportation bill is going to be one to watch. It could prove much about how much control the Republican leadership is able to exert on the rank and file. The bill could prove to be one of the toughest fights that could split Republicans during the upcoming legislative session.
"Legislators in interstate-heavy suburbia [who] want superhighways taken out of the formula . . . will face the traditional opposition from rural legislators who want as much road money as they can get for economic development."
Folks, I was sort of asleep at the wheel when I concluded the post by saying:
"[Poster child party switcher] Rep. Chuck Sims et al., I hope you will remember what "your" Majority Leader said when he was Minority Leader, and that you will not trade keeping your seat on the House Ways and Means Committee (or whatever it was prior to switching parties) for voting against your District's interest."
How was I asleep at the wheel?
I should have addressed the same question to other legislators who, while not party switchers, may being allowing their ambitions for higher office to transcend their paramount obligation to represent their constituents who sent them to Atlanta.
A case in point is Sen. Tommie Williams (R-Lyons) who was my senator prior to our party being guilty as charged of engaging in "the pigs get fat and the hogs get slaughtered" in its last ill-conceived redistricting plan necessitated by the 2000 census data.
As we are aware, this plan resulted in the federal courts having to correct and apply common sense to a selfish redistricting plan that backfired -- much the same way the state Democratic congressional redistricting plan did following the 1990 census -- and without question played a significant role on Nov. 2 in the Democratic Party becoming the state's minority party in both legislative bodies.
On 11-21-03 the ajc reported the following about Sen. Williams, who, as you no doubt know, has ambitions for being Georgia's lieutenant governor come 2007:
"State Senate Transportation Chairman Tommie Williams (R-Lyons) drew strong applause [at a recent Georgia Economic Development Association seminar] when he said the General Assembly in 2005 would change the state requirement that transportation funds be spent equally among all the state's congressional districts."
"Williams is among a group of state Senate Republican leaders who have already introduced legislation that would exempt interstate and developmental highways, the Georgia Regional Transportation Authority and MARTA from congressional balancing as well as changing the balance formula."
Bill Shipp noted about this time last year:
"Where Georgians live often determines how they feel about central issues affecting their lives and jobs.
"For instance, transportation is often viewed very differently in South Georgia and North Georgia.
"Gridlock and never-ending 'rush hour' traffic plague the highways of much of North Georgia, including metro Atlanta. Informed citizens, yearning for relief from congestion, could not comprehend the recent decision by state transportation officials to shortchange the most crowded region of the state in favor of providing more road financing for sparsely populated rural areas [many in South Georgia resented Lt. Gov. Mark Taylor for publicly criticizing this action by DOT officials at the time; it just goes to show that neither party has a monopoly on ambition for higher office].
"But if you live in parts of South Georgia -- whether you are a Republican or a Democrat -- you probably thought: 'It's about time. Too many billions have already been spent on North Georgia and metro Atlanta. It's time our part of the state received more attention and more money. We need it for growth. North Georgia has more than enough growth already.'''
Several years ago Bill Shipp wrote:
"Quite simply, transportation is what metro Atlanta is all about, why Atlanta exists. Transportation is to Atlanta what gambling is to Las Vegas. Taking away the metro area's ability to move increasing amounts of people and goods would all but assure a long-time economic decline that would have a dire impact on all of Georgia."
I couldn't agree more; Atlanta is the engine that keeps this state going. But just as it is to the metro area, transportation also is the lifeline for the rest of the state, the Other Georgia. All roads outside of Altanta are not just asphalt leading to nowhere.
Four years ago Bill Shipp wrote:"Former Gov. Joe Frank Harris spent much of his time in the 1980s battling the idea of 'two Georgias.' He insisted that only one united Georgia existed. And if he didn't, he would do everything possible to make certain that it did.
"After Harris left office in 1990, the notion of 'two Georgias' -- one affluent and suburban, the other poor and rural -- faded from vogue.
"Politicians detested the term because it signaled their failure to bring economic development to large areas of the state. Many citizens felt uncomfortable with the 'two Georgias' label, because it meant great geographical sections of the state -- and much of the population -- failed to secure their share of the good life.
"Economic boom times came to much of Georgia in the 1990s. Prosperity spread. Our population grew. 'Two Georgias' joined 'yuppie' and 'slums' as terms we don't use much now.
"Gov. Roy Barnes and Lt. Gov. Mark Taylor initiated grand rural development programs to stamp out the 'two Georgias' idea forever."
For the citizens of the Other Georgia, the "idea" -- we think of it as the reality -- of "two Georgia's" never left our minds, much less was somehow stamped out just because politicians deny their existence and do not want to talk about it.
I was correct in my 11-16-04 post saying the above-noted transportation bill is going to be one to watch during the 2005 legislative session.
But in saying in this post that this legislation "could prove much about how much control the Republican leadership is able to exert on the rank and file," and "could prove to be one of the toughest fights that could split Republicans during the upcoming legislative session," as noted, I was asleep at the wheel.
I had assumed those in leadership positions -- Sen. Williams is Chairman of the Transportation Committee -- would remember who brung 'em to the dance.
As this fight is being fought involving this test of the control of the Republican leadership over its rank and file, the Other Georgia -- as our numbers and influence has diminished -- trust that you in the metro do not forget that the legislators from the Other Georgia have served Georgia, the whole state of Georgia, with your interest at the forefront.
As stated by Mr. Shipp in March 2001 following the release of the 2000 census data:
"Admittedly, predicting the collapse of rural domination may be premature. When the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the county unit system in 1962, everybody said the state would be governed henceforth by suburbanites and city dwellers. It didn't happen. The rurals stayed in charge.
"But the population shifts from South Georgia to North Georgia, and from country to suburbs, over the past decade have been so dramatic, it is difficult to see how the downstaters can continue to rule.
"You may argue that it's about time the country boys got their comeuppance. Yet, these crossroads legislators have served the state well. Ironically, Atlanta and environs would not be among the fastest-growing and most prosperous regions of the nation were it not for the likes of [Larry] Walker, [George] Hooks, [Tommy] Coleman and, of course, [Speaker Tom] Murphy.
"They funneled millions into the Atlanta area for transportation. They funded the World Congress Center and the Georgia Dome. They made certain Hartsfield Airport was accessible. They are responsible for MARTA and the expansion of Georgia State and Georgia Tech. They facilitated the hotel-motel tax and made sure the Olympics left a legacy of public works, including a state-of-the-art baseball stadium.
"[T]hese legislators toiled for the enhancement of Georgia's economic engine . . . ."
The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away. Legislators from the Other Georgia gave to the metro when it was in control. Will the metro legislators now take away from us, just when we need it most?
Road fund changes opposed in rural areas
Legislation that would make more money available to metro Atlanta for gridlock relief is not a slam dunk in the minds of rural government leaders.
The "congressional balancing" bill, which would exempt interstate highway improvements from the state law requiring equal transportation spending in each of Georgia's 13 congressional districts, has yet to win statewide support.
The Association County Commissioners of Georgia doesn't support the bill because rural leaders fear it would take away transportation dollars. Until last week, the Georgia Municipal Association wasn't taking a position, but now supports it.
"For those areas in the metro area, I'm sure they're in favor of it," he said. "If you take money off the top, there's less to split by district. We're not changing the size of the pot here. You're just reallocating the pot."
Senate Bill 4 moved out of the Transportation Committee last week. Sponsors include Tommie Williams (R-Lyons), chairman of the Transportation Committee, Majority Leader Bill Stephens (R-Canton) and Majority Whip Mitch Seabaugh (R-Sharpsburg). Among the sponsors of House Bill 16, still sitting in a subcommittee, are three freshman legislators.
The Senate bill would exempt 85 percent of projects for interstate and developmental highways, the Georgia Regional Transportation Authority and MARTA from the formula; the House version seeks to exempt 75 percent.
The bill is of particular interest to the gridlocked Atlanta region. Construction is more expensive in metro Atlanta than in rural areas, and commuters are seeking traffic relief for projects along I-85, I-75, I-285 and I-20. Those projects often take up the largest chunks of a district's transportation allocation.
State Transportation Board member Ward Edwards said he sees the benefit of the bill to his Macon area district. Costly projects along I-75 and I-16 would eat up all the road money allocated to his congressional district for at least two years, he said.
At a board meeting last month of the Atlanta Regional Commission, Chairman Sam Olens told members to lobby for the bill, which he calls the most important legislation in the General Assembly.
It's also a priority of the Metro Atlanta Chamber of Commerce, the Regional Business Coalition and the Metro Atlanta Mayors Association.
That alone makes leaders in more rural areas skeptical of the benefit for them.
[A witness opposing passage of the bill testified before the Senate Transportation Committee that] "[w]e have to have roads from our outlying areas to get to those interstates," she said. "That's the problem. We don't have them."
But DOT Deputy Commissioner Larry Dent said the bill would benefit rural Georgia because agriculture and tourism industries need good interstates to move goods and people.
Williams said he is comfortable with the bill as a rural legislator.
"I don't know anyone who doesn't want to see the bill passed," he said. "I don't think it's a slam dunk until it passes."
[end of ajc article]
_______________
SB 4 was passed out of the Senate Transportation Committee with only only one dissenting vote, freshman Sen. Greg Goggans (R-Douglas).
As noted, Sen. Goggans is from Douglas, and I along with the rest of South Georgia very much appreciate my senator taking this stand in the interest of his senatorial district and voting against the position taken by the chairman of the committee, Sen. Tommie Williams.
_______________
In a 9-10-04 post entitled "We miss you Roy, oh yes we do -- OneGeorgia Authority strays from its roots," I wrote (excerpts):
As this blog indicates, I live in the "Other Georgia."
One of the other candidates during the U.S. Senate race would chide me when I would point this out. He would insist that there was only one Georgia. Such chiding merely confirmed his residence was in Georgia rather than the other Georgia.
Bill Shipp thinks spreading asphalt below the gnat line is nothing but politics. Bill Shipp lives above the gnat line.
For those of us below the gnat line, asphalt means transportation, and transportation means jobs.
_______________
The following are excerpts from a 11-22-04 post entitled
"The Lord giveth & the Lord taketh away. The Other Georgia gave to the metro. Will the metro now take away? -- Legislation on transportation dollars":
It quoted the following from a 11-16-04 post:
"Included in the first list of prefiled bills to be taken up in the Georgia senate . . . is one seeking to change the way that federal money for roads is divvied up between metro Atlanta and the rest of the state."
"Under the current formula, the millions of federal dollars used for road-building money is divided equally among all 13 congressional districts.
"In recent legislative sessions how one voted on transportation bills was often determined by the location of one's home district.
"This is anticipated to continue even now with the legislature controlled by the GOP. Suburban and rural Republicans will have some different priorities just as urban and rural Democrats have in past legislative sessions."
The 11-16-04 post also noted that when House Majority Leader Jerry Keen of St. Simons was House Minority Whip, he said: "Transportation in the metro [Atlanta] area means congestion. Transportation in rural areas means paving roads and economic development.
"Will Rep. Keen forget his constituents now that he is House Majority Leader?
"This transportation bill is going to be one to watch. It could prove much about how much control the Republican leadership is able to exert on the rank and file. The bill could prove to be one of the toughest fights that could split Republicans during the upcoming legislative session.
"Legislators in interstate-heavy suburbia [who] want superhighways taken out of the formula . . . will face the traditional opposition from rural legislators who want as much road money as they can get for economic development."
Folks, I was sort of asleep at the wheel when I concluded the post by saying:
"[Poster child party switcher] Rep. Chuck Sims et al., I hope you will remember what "your" Majority Leader said when he was Minority Leader, and that you will not trade keeping your seat on the House Ways and Means Committee (or whatever it was prior to switching parties) for voting against your District's interest."
How was I asleep at the wheel?
I should have addressed the same question to other legislators who, while not party switchers, may being allowing their ambitions for higher office to transcend their paramount obligation to represent their constituents who sent them to Atlanta.
A case in point is Sen. Tommie Williams (R-Lyons) who was my senator prior to our party being guilty as charged of engaging in "the pigs get fat and the hogs get slaughtered" in its last ill-conceived redistricting plan necessitated by the 2000 census data.
As we are aware, this plan resulted in the federal courts having to correct and apply common sense to a selfish redistricting plan that backfired -- much the same way the state Democratic congressional redistricting plan did following the 1990 census -- and without question played a significant role on Nov. 2 in the Democratic Party becoming the state's minority party in both legislative bodies.
On 11-21-03 the ajc reported the following about Sen. Williams, who, as you no doubt know, has ambitions for being Georgia's lieutenant governor come 2007:
"State Senate Transportation Chairman Tommie Williams (R-Lyons) drew strong applause [at a recent Georgia Economic Development Association seminar] when he said the General Assembly in 2005 would change the state requirement that transportation funds be spent equally among all the state's congressional districts."
"Williams is among a group of state Senate Republican leaders who have already introduced legislation that would exempt interstate and developmental highways, the Georgia Regional Transportation Authority and MARTA from congressional balancing as well as changing the balance formula."
Bill Shipp noted about this time last year:
"Where Georgians live often determines how they feel about central issues affecting their lives and jobs.
"For instance, transportation is often viewed very differently in South Georgia and North Georgia.
"Gridlock and never-ending 'rush hour' traffic plague the highways of much of North Georgia, including metro Atlanta. Informed citizens, yearning for relief from congestion, could not comprehend the recent decision by state transportation officials to shortchange the most crowded region of the state in favor of providing more road financing for sparsely populated rural areas [many in South Georgia resented Lt. Gov. Mark Taylor for publicly criticizing this action by DOT officials at the time; it just goes to show that neither party has a monopoly on ambition for higher office].
"But if you live in parts of South Georgia -- whether you are a Republican or a Democrat -- you probably thought: 'It's about time. Too many billions have already been spent on North Georgia and metro Atlanta. It's time our part of the state received more attention and more money. We need it for growth. North Georgia has more than enough growth already.'''
Several years ago Bill Shipp wrote:
"Quite simply, transportation is what metro Atlanta is all about, why Atlanta exists. Transportation is to Atlanta what gambling is to Las Vegas. Taking away the metro area's ability to move increasing amounts of people and goods would all but assure a long-time economic decline that would have a dire impact on all of Georgia."
I couldn't agree more; Atlanta is the engine that keeps this state going. But just as it is to the metro area, transportation also is the lifeline for the rest of the state, the Other Georgia. All roads outside of Altanta are not just asphalt leading to nowhere.
Four years ago Bill Shipp wrote:"Former Gov. Joe Frank Harris spent much of his time in the 1980s battling the idea of 'two Georgias.' He insisted that only one united Georgia existed. And if he didn't, he would do everything possible to make certain that it did.
"After Harris left office in 1990, the notion of 'two Georgias' -- one affluent and suburban, the other poor and rural -- faded from vogue.
"Politicians detested the term because it signaled their failure to bring economic development to large areas of the state. Many citizens felt uncomfortable with the 'two Georgias' label, because it meant great geographical sections of the state -- and much of the population -- failed to secure their share of the good life.
"Economic boom times came to much of Georgia in the 1990s. Prosperity spread. Our population grew. 'Two Georgias' joined 'yuppie' and 'slums' as terms we don't use much now.
"Gov. Roy Barnes and Lt. Gov. Mark Taylor initiated grand rural development programs to stamp out the 'two Georgias' idea forever."
For the citizens of the Other Georgia, the "idea" -- we think of it as the reality -- of "two Georgia's" never left our minds, much less was somehow stamped out just because politicians deny their existence and do not want to talk about it.
I was correct in my 11-16-04 post saying the above-noted transportation bill is going to be one to watch during the 2005 legislative session.
But in saying in this post that this legislation "could prove much about how much control the Republican leadership is able to exert on the rank and file," and "could prove to be one of the toughest fights that could split Republicans during the upcoming legislative session," as noted, I was asleep at the wheel.
I had assumed those in leadership positions -- Sen. Williams is Chairman of the Transportation Committee -- would remember who brung 'em to the dance.
As this fight is being fought involving this test of the control of the Republican leadership over its rank and file, the Other Georgia -- as our numbers and influence has diminished -- trust that you in the metro do not forget that the legislators from the Other Georgia have served Georgia, the whole state of Georgia, with your interest at the forefront.
As stated by Mr. Shipp in March 2001 following the release of the 2000 census data:
"Admittedly, predicting the collapse of rural domination may be premature. When the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the county unit system in 1962, everybody said the state would be governed henceforth by suburbanites and city dwellers. It didn't happen. The rurals stayed in charge.
"But the population shifts from South Georgia to North Georgia, and from country to suburbs, over the past decade have been so dramatic, it is difficult to see how the downstaters can continue to rule.
"You may argue that it's about time the country boys got their comeuppance. Yet, these crossroads legislators have served the state well. Ironically, Atlanta and environs would not be among the fastest-growing and most prosperous regions of the nation were it not for the likes of [Larry] Walker, [George] Hooks, [Tommy] Coleman and, of course, [Speaker Tom] Murphy.
"They funneled millions into the Atlanta area for transportation. They funded the World Congress Center and the Georgia Dome. They made certain Hartsfield Airport was accessible. They are responsible for MARTA and the expansion of Georgia State and Georgia Tech. They facilitated the hotel-motel tax and made sure the Olympics left a legacy of public works, including a state-of-the-art baseball stadium.
"[T]hese legislators toiled for the enhancement of Georgia's economic engine . . . ."
The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away. Legislators from the Other Georgia gave to the metro when it was in control. Will the metro legislators now take away from us, just when we need it most?
posted by Sid Cottingham | 6:45 AM
3 Comments:
Sid, I have to disagree with you on this issue, and as much as it pains me, agree with the Republicans on this one. As part of my job as a researcher at the DPG I have been to 145 of the 159 counties in this state, and I do not mean just driving through them on an interstate, but from small town to small town on state and local roads. And all of the ones I have not been to, except one, are above the 'gnat line'. This state, in my opinion, has a phenomenal system of state roads. I cannot tell you how many times I have been driving down some four-lane highway in South Georgia with not a soul on the road with me. The “other Georgia” (and I do agree with you that the “other Georgia” does exist) has plenty of roads and, in my opinion, are very well kept.
I also agree with you that “…just as it is to the metro area, transportation also is the lifeline for the rest of the state, the Other Georgia.” I am not advocating removal of all funds from the rest of Georgia, but allocating the funds based upon congressional district is not fair to the Metro area, or the Macon area, or any other urban setting. Building a one mile stretch of road in Clinch county costs a small fraction of what the same road would cost to build in Metro Atlanta, or any other urban setting. The real and actual needs of the each area need to be assessed. The Fault Line Freeway, for example, will be of huge economic boon for middle Georgia and should be funded, built, and used as a tool to lure business and economic development to the communities it passes through. But the needs of the Metro area and its huge traffic problem cannot be ignored, and with the current funding formula those needs are not being met.
Every year Atlanta gets closer and closer to having the worst traffic in the country. That is bad for the economy of all of Georgia. All of the time lost in heavy traffic laden commutes, and the pollution it creates does nothing but hurt the economic heart of the state. Right now the traffic in Atlanta is hitting crisis levels, prompting at least one bill in the legislature asking for the breakdown lanes on the interstate as optional lanes. Huge and drastic changes are needed to alleviate and solve the Metro area traffic and congestion problems now, before it is too late.
Funding for roads should be based on need, not geographical areas. Let me say it like this: Say for instance you have a monthly budget that you split up into various areas like, food, shelter, healthcare, and entertainment. One month you get really sick and need to buy some drug that costs a lot, but will help you out a whole lot. Do you say, well, I have allocated 10% of my budget to healthcare and since I have spent that, oh well, no drug to cure my illness? No, you reallocate the budget, cut out some entertainment, or whatever, and buy the drug. To me, the traffic problem in Metro Atlanta and other Metro areas of the state is an illness that needs to be helped. It does the state no good to let areas that need the money starve and help out those areas that need it the least. If Coffee county needs a road to help its economic development then that road should be built, but I believe the need for that road must be weighed against the need for a road or rail line in Atlanta, or in Macon or in Clinch county.
That’s my two cents.
Josh
As with most things, there are definitely two sides to this issue, and you make a very persuasive case. But there is a little more to this bill than meets the eye, although this in no one diminishes your argument.
The word around the Capitol is that DOT is seeking to eventually get a gas tax increase -- something way overdue and that Barnes would have done had he been reelected as noted in my post on the groceries exemption. If this bill is passed, and then the gap between metro and rural becomes very apparent, it will be easier to sell a gas tax increase to the Other Georgia.
Even though we have needed to improve and go forward with ambitious transportation improvement plans, and this very much includes the metro area, an increase in our state’s motor fuel tax -- one of the lowest motor fuel taxes in the nation and much of any increase which would be borne by non-Georgians -- it has been on the untouchable list for many administrations.
This bill, if successful, will be against the Other Georgia's interest now, and then used to show why it needs to vote for an increase in the gas tax.
I say just increase the gas tax.
Thanks for your considered comments.
That is an Amen on the gas tax Sid. The consumers of this state are getting screwed by the oil industry that charges us almost he same price as neighboring states when we have a much lower gas tax.
Josh
Post a Comment
<< Home