Former official sees little threat from superhighway

Lawrence Journal-World ^ | August 19, 2006 | Ken Miller

[horse_doc]

How is all that "shoving it thru"?

In the real world, "shoving it through" means taking action well before a political concensus has been reached. Political decisions on infrastructure aren't made on tidy engineering timetables. They are made when enough people decide that they are ready. And if that seems too long for you, well, too bad.

I lived in Dallas in the late 70's and early 80's. Central Expressway was a problem, and it had been a problem for 20 years before I got there. The political concensus on what to do took a lot of time. I left Dallas long before it was finished, but it did get finished. And the doomsday predictions made over the preceeding 30 years never really panned out.

You can either face the reality that a lot of your fellow Texans aren't ready for this yet, on the scale that it is proposed, or you can keep acting like everyone who is opposed to the TTC is terminally stupid. Just don't be surprised to see obstacles spring up where they didn't have to be.

[Ben Ficklin]

It is real simple. What is your alternative.

[horse_doc]

As for all these very good conservative people you know, they need to come up with an alternative.

BTW - this is a great example of how not to do it. Here, you are implying that the very good conservative people that I know aren't real, or are idiots. And no, they DON'T have to come up with an alternative, on your timetable. People come up with alternatives when they reach a level of discomfort that drives them to it. Maybe they don't use I-35 much. Maybe they don't mind driving an extra hour getting to Seaworld, from Garland. Maybe they gripe about the traffic driving from Manor to New Braunfels, but not enough to do anything about it, yet.

Someday they will. And when enough of them feel enough discomfort, they will propose alternatives, and new roads will be built. Maybe it won't be soon enough for you. Maybe it will be too soon for me. But you can rest assured that it WON'T happen until a political critical mass is reached - and if you think that you are there yet, you are kidding yourself.

[E.G.C.]

BTTT

[wolfcreek]

"You all, IMO, look silly in your knee jerk opposition and quest for the conpiracy theory of the day".


As opposed to looking silly everytime you post?

[Ben Ficklin]

Maybe I can narrow it down a little for you.

We had a referendum and the voters rejected pay-as-you-go. Those that wanted free roads lost. Those that have to pay for the free roads won. You can hire all the facilatators and stakeholders you want, that is not going to change.

The state can borrow the money and build the road, but they have to repay the loan. The taxpayer will not tolerate a tax increase, gas, income, or otherwise, to repay the loan. Thus, the state built/operated road will be a toll road, except that it will be a higher toll that the proposal on the table.

[rwfromkansas]

10 lanes? Sounds good to me.

Who cares about the farmers. So they would lose what, 10 feet of field?

[rwfromkansas]

Well darn, I guess since bad people can use those roads, we better tear them up!

STOP PROGRESS! THOSE EVIL MEXICANS TRYING TO LEAVE THEIR HELLISH LIVES MAY USE OUR ROADS!

[rwfromkansas]

Actually, if you have a problem with something, you propose an alternative. NOW.

Not 10 years from now.

If you don't, it is your fault if you lose.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Who cares about the farmers. So they would lose what, 10 feet of field?

They could lose a lot more than that. Some farms could be split by this thing, with no immediate access from one side to the other.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

bump.

[ckilmer]

Man I hope you get paid for your efforts.