Posted on 09/12/2008 12:01:23 PM PDT by smokinleroy
Congressman John Peterson praises decision.
HARRISBURG - Federal regulators on Thursday rejected Pennsylvania's plan to impose tolls on Interstate 80, reigniting a sticky debate over where to find billions of dollars to fix roads, repair bridges and subsidize mass transit systems.
Congressman John Peterson (R-5th) of Pleasantville, a leading opponent of the I-80 tolls, praised the decision and said "the 'closed for business' sign has been removed from Pennsylvania."
"I'm excited for Pennsylvania...it's a good day for the economy of Pennsylvania," Peterson said Thursday in a telephone interview with The Derrick and The News-Herald.
Gov. Ed Rendell urged lawmakers to swiftly approve an alternative - a long-term lease of the Pennsylvania Turnpike. Legislative leaders, however, indicated they were in no hurry to act.
Lawmakers last year approved a $1 billion-a-year increase in transportation funding that would be spread to projects around the state. To fund it, they approved putting I-80 under the auspices of the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission and building toll booths along its length.
The Federal Highway Administration said its decision to reject that plan was based, in part, on questions about whether the amount of money that would be paid by the turnpike commission to the state Transportation Department was based on an "objective market valuation" of the highway.
"There is simply no evidence that the lease payments are related to the actual costs of acquiring an interest in the facility," said Tom Madison, the federal highway administrator.
In a memorandum dated Thursday, Federal Highway Administration official King W. Gee said there were also other "weaknesses" in the application, including a lack of sufficient traffic and revenue studies.
Peterson noted that U.S. Transportation Secretary Mary Peters said the application didn't meet the technical and statutory requirements set forth by law.
"I have repeatedly stated that the tolling of Interstate 80 would kill the future economic viability of the Commonwealth," Peterson said. "Today, the Department of Transportation agreed."
"This decision is final and it is not subject to appeal...the application can't be resubmitted," the congressman added. "The people of Pennsylvania have won this monumental battle."
Peterson also said "It's time for the governor and state Legislature to stop using highway funds for mass transit and other non-highway related issues and get serious about fixing our roads and bridges. Until that occurs, Pennsylvania will continue to find itself in a transportation funding crisis."
Congressman Phil English (R-3rd) of Erie, who teamed with Peterson to mount strong, persistent opposition to the tolling plan, also praised Thursday's decision, calling it "a huge win for rural Pennsylvanians." English asked Harrisburg leaders to convene a transportation summit "for more creative thinking."
Rendell told a Capitol news conference Thursday afternoon that leasing the turnpike to private investors is the "primary option" for funding the increase in transportation spending, but that he was open to other viable alternatives.
"We've got to get this done. We have an obligation to the people of this commonwealth," Rendell said.
A spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi, R-Delaware, said the state "should not rush into anything because of this decision."
"We need to go back to square one and thoroughly review all of our options," said Erik Arneson, Pileggi's communications director.
Two House Democrats who are leaders on transportation issues issued a statement asking the turnpike commission to redouble efforts to gain federal approval for the I-80 tolls.
"Is the federal government ready to make the hard choices to help our state now that they've taken away our best method to help ourselves?" said Majority Whip Keith McCall, D-Carbon, and Transportation Committee Chairman Joe Markosek, D-Allegheny.
So far, the turnpike lease proposal has failed to garner much legislative support.
The I-80 tolling plan was widely opposed by residents and businesses along its east-west route, which spans the Poconos in the northeast to the outskirts of Sharon in the northwest. The opponents said the tolls would damage the local business climate and burden them with paying for transportation projects around the state.
Supporters, however, said many out-of-state drivers, particularly trucking firms, would have shouldered the cost of fixing badly needed transportation improvements. Planners also said they would try to limit the tolls that would be paid by local drivers.
How about eliminating waste, fraud, layers of bureaucracy, and millions of dollars for 'diversity training' programs?
If they stop doing the last bit, they'll have all the money they need from existing tax revenues.
Tolling 80 would have been a disaster, driving all sorts of traffic on to backroads & secondaries not designed for heavy truck traffic.
And the whole deal was a scheme to fund Philly transit!
Woo hoo.. I work for a manufacturing company that is 10 miles off of I-80 (SR 220 Clinton County) with plans to build a distribution center literally right off I-80 Lamar exit. The tolls would of been devastating to us.
Yeah, politicians never think of that.
Pennsylvania has one of the highest state gas taxes at 32.3 cents (9th highest in the USA).. Rendell has been moving state money into Philadelphia at an alarming rate and unfortunantely there are few that are willing to stand up to him.
We blew an opportunity to oust him when we nominated Lynn Swann who ran a horrible campaign.
There’s no real GOP rising star here outside of Hazelton mayor Lou Baretta who is running for a congressional seat.
Excellent!
bump
How are Rendell’s casinos working out?
They are creating revenue, but not enough to lower property taxes.....which is how it was sold to citizens.
Fast Eddie needs to be stopped for the next 2 years.
2 major Rendell initiatives are probably dead for the rest of his tenure as governor.
From "smokinleroy": ""Rendell and the dems lose. PA wins."
Without judging the merits of the lease idea, in principal, or the exact proposal, I don't know how "PA wins", in either case, if (1)current slated state revenues dedicated for I-80 maintenance are not doing the job and (b) the end result now is in fact a stalemate on an issue for which the taxpayers need a solution, if I-80 is to remain a well maintained highway along the PA portion of its route without emergency borrowing or budget finagling when deteriorating conditions demand it. It seems to me that no one "wins" anything, at this point.
The people of rural PA may say, for now, they have "won" because there will not be tolls. But the rest of the people of the state (most of the state) may think they "lost" and if they do, then the rural residents along I-80 will know they have lost too, when the winter-created pot-holes, water-run-off systems, bridges and overpasses are not repaired as regularly from one year to the next.
Along most of its PA length, I-80 is overwhelmingly "rural" with very sparse populations on either side. I would guess (from my many travels on it) that 3/4ths of its traffic is people and commerce (long-haul shippers) crossing PA and not originating anywhere in PA.
That rural population there, for which I-80 shortens the travel time between long-distant rural communities along it, could never have paid for I-80 on their own and they require revenues from somewhere - other state taxpayers, or "tolls", to keep the road viable. The rest of the state taxpayers are NOT so much off-base in looking at a "toll" solution, because, as I said, the vast majority of the revenue from it WOULD NOT come from PA residents.
If 0 wins, Act 44 will be rammed through again and the 0 Administration will approve it.
Sure they will.
Like the income tax was only supposed to be less than 10%.
Like social Security was not to be used as identification.
Like the SS payments were put in a lockbox.
Like you'll have weekends off when you join the Navy.
LOL !!
More shenanigans coming !!
Ping.
ping
I had high hopes for Pat Toomey, but when Bush and Santorum torpedoed him in favor of Arlen Sphincter, he seemed to drop off the map.
I supported Toomey too but I wasn’t convinced he could win in the General Election. I think Hoeffel would of beaten him.
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.