Posted on 10/16/2006 6:45:49 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Do you remember voting on the Trans-Texas Corridor?
Me neither. But I think I might have. Sort of.
Toll road proponents have said over the past couple of years that Texans had voted to authorize what has turned out to be a very aggressive push for toll roads. Gov. Rick Perry said as much in the Oct. 6 gubernatorial election debate.
One of the moderators relayed a question from a McKinney woman asking why Texans haven't gotten to vote on the "Trans-Texas Corridor and related toll highways."
The corridor is Perry's 4,000-mile plan of tollways, railroads and utility lines.
The governor's response was deft.
"First and foremost, the people of Texas had the opportunity to vote on a substantial amount of that in a constitutional amendment," he began, going on to say that the Legislature had debated and passed toll laws in several sessions. The voters, he said, "sent a clear message of how we're going to build infrastructure."
What actually happened is that in a September 2003 election, 810,855 Texans said yes to ballot language that only the most wonkish among them could have known authorized wholesale borrowing for toll roads. The 45 words on the ballot, in fact, do not include the words "toll" or "turnpike."
Here's what Proposition 14 proposed:
"The constitutional amendment providing for authorization of the issuing of notes or the borrowing of money on a short-term basis by a state transportation agency for transportation-related projects, and the issuance of bonds and other public securities secured by the state highway fund."
I was told at the time that the purpose of this was to allow the agency to borrow here and there against future gas-tax revenue to address cash-flow problems. And that, in fact, is what the first part of the language refers to.
But then there's a comma, and some more words. Some technical but powerful words that amounted, apparently, to the electorate saying, "Whoo-eee, slap some toll roads on us, baby!"
Now, Texans did approve another constitutional amendment, this one in 2001, that created the Texas Mobility Fund, and it actually said the money could go to "state highways, turnpikes, toll roads, toll bridges, and other mobility projects." A total of 543,759 Texans said yes to that one.
In 2003, lawmakers dedicated some fees allowing that fund to borrow $4 billion or more.
And as the governor said, that same year the Legislature approved a huge bill allowing the creation of the Trans-Texas Corridor. That bill, passed in a session marked by Democrats fleeing to Ardmore, Okla., and a $10 billion budget gap, got little press coverage.
Did Texans vote on the Trans-Texas Corridor? Not in any real sense.
Did we vote on a "substantial amount" of the toll road revolution? Yes, technically, in a special September 2003 election with predictably poor turnout and all the focus on other amendments, we gave the Texas Department of Transportation carte blanche to borrow for roads and charge tolls.
Who knew? Almost no one.
It sure takes a special kind of Rube to miss the context or meaning of these words. If the Governor had moved too quickly, there would have been cries against a hasty decision. BTW, the Governor that Perry replaced on December 21, 2000 was a champion of this legislation. That Governor was George W. Bush.
Documentation proving that corporate earnings are at record levels? Documentation showing that unemployment is at 4.6%?
How about you? You have documentation showing that companies outsource and keep prices the same? From what I've seen, clothing has gone down in price. Did I misread that fact?
They screw over their employees? If only their employees could unchain themselves and get a different job.....a pipe dream, I know.
Don't shoot the messenger, sheesh! I'm just relating to what's in the news. They just won a class action I posted about due to not getting scheduled breaks. People I see at the local store appear happy as clams to me.
I don't think you understand the concept of outsourcing. See, it involves talking to someone actually not in this country...
I think your sense of humor was outsourced.
See, it involves talking to someone actually not in this country...
How does talking to someone in another country get Levi jeans on the shelf? (See above comment)
I just noticed we're terribly off topic. I really don't know or care about Levis getting on the shelf. All I want is to call Dell and not get someone telling me they understand when they obviously don't.
No offense, posting off now.
You started.
I really don't know or care about Levis getting on the shelf.
You brought up Levis, not me.
All I want is to call Dell and not get someone telling me they understand when they obviously don't.
Yeah, those Dell workers in India are destroying our economy. /sarc
No offense, posting off now.
None taken. If you ever want to talk about outsourcing and you have some actual data, please feel free to ping me.
The 2004 U.S. presidential election campaign focused on outsourcing to some degree. This debate did not center on problems of declining quality of customer services but on the threat to U.S. jobs and work. Democratic U.S. presidential candidate John Kerry blasted firms that outsource jobs abroad or that incorporate overseas in tax havens to avoid paying their fair share of U.S. taxes during his 2004 campaign, calling such firms "Benedict Arnold corporations," in reference to the infamous traitor Benedict Arnold. Criticism of outsourcing, from the perspective of U.S. citizens, by-and-large, revolves around the costs associated with transferring control of the labor process to an external entity in another country. A Zogby International poll reports that 71% of American voters believe that “outsourcing jobs overseas” hurts the economy and another 62% believe that the U.S. government should impose some legislative action against companies that transfer domestic jobs overseas, possibly in the form of increased taxes on companies that outsource. The poll of over 1,000 Americans was conducted in August 2004.[6]
Outsourcing appears to threaten the livelihood of domestic workers and, in the United States, the American Dream. This is especially true for high-tech workers who were promised the “jobs of tomorrow”- a phrase Bill Clinton iterated in 1994 to justify his conservative position on the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Outsourcing appears to work contrary to the claim that “free trade” will create the “jobs of tomorrow” in America when high-tech or high paying white collar jobs are transferred to or created in foreign countries. Thus, outsourcing is representative of a specific historical moment where the United States government fails to mediate business-labor relations in a way conducive to prevailing values that places the American middle class worker as a central priority. At a more general level it represents a new threat to labor, contributing to rampant worker insecurity, and reflective of the general process of globalization culminating in Western societies as a whole.
In the UK, it is argued a malicious implementation of the Higher Education Role Analysis (HERA) may force Higher Education administrative and support staff to prematurely retire or seek for new employment in other organizations, thus freeing of staff many departments which could then be effectively outsourced. Outsourcing departments like Accounts, Payroll and Procurement is now common practice, as seen in August 2005 at the University of Portsmouth.
Policy solutions to outsourcing are also criticized. One solution often offered is retraining of domestic workers to new jobs. However, some of these workers are already highly educated and already possess a bachelor's and master's degree. Retraining to their current level in another field may not be an option due to years of study and cost of education involved. There is also little incentive given that the jobs in their new field could also be outsourced as well. Proportions of workers trained for Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) fields fields in developing nations are viewed to outstrip traditional technology leaders such as the U.S. Thus jobs considered previously to be protected from international competition may not continue to be so.
[from wikipedia]
Yes, we've lost so many jobs that our unemployment rate jumped to 4.6%. LOL!
A Zogby International poll reports that 71% of American voters believe that “outsourcing jobs overseas” hurts the economy and another 62% believe that the U.S. government should impose some legislative action against companies that transfer domestic jobs overseas
Wow! A poll of people who believe (did I miss some facts in there?) that our economy ($10.67 trillion in 2Q04, $11.39 trillion in 2Q06, in chained 2000 dollars) is damaged by how many (did I miss some facts in there?) outsourced jobs?
Did this poll also ask them about astrology or their lucky numbers?
[from wikipedia]
FYI, serious people don't consider Wikipedia a serious source.
I'm aware of discrepancies with wiki. Fact is, there are plenty of other sources with similar data.
The offshoring of high wage jobs from the United States to lower cost overseas locations is currently contributing to unprecedented levels of unemployment among American electrical, electronics and computer engineers. Offshoring also poses a very serious, long term challenge to the nation's leadership in technology and innovation, its economic prosperity, and its military and homeland security.
Prudent steps must be taken to ensure that offshoring, if it does occur, is implemented in ways that will benefit the United States and all its citizens, including high tech workers. To this end, IEEE-USA recommends that:
The Federal Government must collect and publish reliable statistics on the kinds and numbers of manufacturing and service jobs that are being moved offshore.
Government procurement rules should favor work done in the United States and should restrict the offshoring of work in any instance where there is not a clear long-term economic benefit to the nation or where the work supports technologies that are critical to our national economic or military security.
New U.S. workforce assistance programs should be created to help displaced high-tech workers regain productive employment and ensure that employed workers can acquire the knowledge and skills they need to remain competitive.
The H-1B and L-1 visa programs should be reformed and new trade agreements should incorporate such reforms. These temporary admissions programs for skilled workers are often used to import lower cost labor and can result in displacement of U.S. professionals, exploitation of foreign workers and accelerated offshoring of engineering and other high tech jobs.
A coordinated national strategy must be developed to sustain U.S. technological leadership and promote jobs creation in response to the concerted strategies being used by other countries to capture U.S. industries, jobs and markets.
Federal investments and tax credits for research and development should be limited to work performed in the U.S. R&D that must, by its nature and content, be carried out offshore, is not covered by our recommendation.
[from ieeeusa.org]
Unprecedented? 2%? 5%? 10%? 30%?
The Federal Government must collect and publish reliable statistics on the kinds and numbers of manufacturing and service jobs that are being moved offshore.
Sounds like what I was asking for, actual numbers. Does this mean you don't have any actual numbers?
Government procurement rules should favor work done in the United States
Sounds good to me. Don't forget to take cost into account as well.
and should restrict the offshoring of work in any instance where there is not a clear long-term economic benefit to the nation
Great, we can have Jack Abramoff help our Congressmen decide what is good offshoring and what is bad offshoring.
You know, you can include the links to your sources in your post.
http://odysseus.ieee.org/ieeesearch/query.html?col=allieee&qp=&qs=&qc=allieee&ws=0&qm=0&st=1&nh=25&lk=1&rf=0&oq=&rq2=0&rq=0&qt=outsourcing&submit.x=44&submit.y=11
I won't be apologizing for being lazy.
Yes, you're right. I'm sorry for not showing sources, as that is something I am usually quite meticulous about. I don't like fuzzy math and blanket statements just to hear my own lips flap. But you could hardly have known that about me, could you. Again, sorry. Truly.
Actually, an envirowhacko lawsuit halted reconstruction of U.S. 281 at the beginning of 2006.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.