Democrats have declared war on drivers, GOP says

Contra Costa Times ^ | July 7, 2002 | Andrew LaMar

[John Jorsett]

SACRAMENTO - Tapping into the outrage among conservatives about recently approved legislation to reduce tailpipe emissions, Republicans plan to attack Democrats for a string of policy moves they say amounts to a "war on drivers."

Gov. Gray Davis has backed more than doubling vehicle license fees, borrowing money from the state's highway account and forcing automakers to lower greenhouse gases produced by their vehicles, a measure automobile manufacturers say will boost the cost of cars.

[John Jorsett]

There must be some sort of mistake. The California GOP appears to be growing itself a spine.

[NoKnownPurpose]

This is one problem we'll never have in Detroit... ;)

In my mind though this is simply a means for CA to extract more tax revenue. If they were REALLY concerned about the environment they would invest more heavily in mass transit and provide a viable alternative to owning a vehicle.

[John Jorsett]

If they were REALLY concerned about the environment they would invest more heavily in mass transit and provide a viable alternative to owning a vehicle.

Believe me, they've tried. They've been flushing gas tax money down the toilet of public transit for years, to no avail. Governor Davis, at the dedication ceremony of a new section of freeway a few years ago, declared that it was the last one that would be built in California. Yet no matter what they do: diamond lanes, trolleys, subways, buses, yada yada yada, people just insist on driving their cars. It's time those idiots in government face reality and start spending the money on building more roads and relieving congestion.

[umgud]

California also increases their number of drivers thru illegal immigration.

[Billy_bob_bob]

I tried to use mass transit / alternative transportation in California about twenty years ago. After about six months of that I finally broke down and bought a car. I quickly came to the conclusion that the whole purpose of mass transit is to convince you of the necessity of buying a car.

True story: I was commuting from downtown San Jose to northern Santa Clara, a distance of about ten miles. I was taking one, major bus up one line to get to work, no transfers or anything. Well, the buses proved to be so unreliable that I started leaving earlier and earlier to be sure I got to work on time. I was finally getting out to the bus stop TWO HOURS early, hoping to get one that wouldn't break down or run out of gas(!) on the way to my job. This to travel ten miles, a distance I could drive (at the time) in about fifteen minutes.

The net effect was to not only drive me into owning a car, but to ensure my perpetual hostility to all forms of mass transit. Mass transit is socialized transit. Socialized ANYTHING results in poor, unreliable service, with no-one to be held accountable. To this day you couldn't pay me to ride a bus, I'd rather walk.

[Jagdgewehr]

"Republicans are narrowing their support down to the black helicopter people and other crazies."

Otherwise known as concerned tax paying consumers.

[RANGERAIRBORNE]

"..who represents the Sierra Club in Sacramento, said Republicans are making a mistake trying to capitalize on the auto emissions measure." Oh, do we think that the California shoulod take the advice of the SIERRA CLUB????

Yeah, right. They have the Republicans best interests at heart- you bet.

[RANGERAIRBORNE]

</I>.

I thought I closed that tag- I eally did!

[rintense]

Heh. I thought they were going to try and take my #1 driver from my golf game. As usual, the dems are completely off the mark. They are so far off the pulse of Americans there should be a flat line. I'll be thinking of the dems when I purchase a SUV later this year.

[Reeses]

Larry Fisher said, "I think an educated motorist would say, 'Yeah, I guess I better pay for that.'"

His liberal elitism is showing. If you don't agree with him, you are uneducated. I guess it's the liberals own fault they have to live with us conservatives since they failed to educate us properly in their socialist school system.

[Southack]

Cars are a populist issue. In my opinion, the Democrats' attacks on highway funding (pulling a Billion Dollars out of reserved California highway funds for the Davis energy crisis) and vehicle emmissions standards, along with their support for more expensive annual vehicle inspections, will all combine into one large popular backlash against them in California.

One can look at the outrage over license fees in Virginia to see just how touchy this subject can become.

This is the sleeper issue of 2002. It is an issue that litterally affects, personally, millions of Californians.

And the Democrats are on the wrong side of it.

This is because the Democrats are beholden to the radical greens in their midst. Forget jobs. Forget transportation. Forget unions. Forget the economy. For Democrats, what matters over everything (including putting food on your table every night) is that "the environment" be protected (even if humans pay the price with their lives).

[captain11]

This is one problem we'll never have in Detroit... ;)

Probably not, but then again...

If they were REALLY concerned about the environment they would invest more heavily in mass transit and provide a viable alternative to owning a vehicle.

California has the toughest emission standards in the U.S., which makes it more viable to own a less polluting vehicle. While SoCal has a long way to go on mass transit, BART is one of the best systems in the country. It's not ideal, but it's not bad.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Good catch.

calgov2002:

calgov2002: for old calgov2002 articles. 

calgov2002: for new calgov2002 articles. 

Other Bump Lists at: Free Republic Bump List Register

[Tall_Texan]

Democrat nirvana is to see our streets look like Beijing - the ruling class (read: them) get to ride in automobiles while the peasants (read: us) pedal bicycles (very healthy and environmentally friendly but a real nuisance when it rains). Your Socialist-Democrat party at work, my friends. No reason to be surprised.

[Reeses]

BART is one of the best systems in the country. It's not ideal, but it's not bad.

Yes, it's pretty bad. How much Bart riding do you do? I avoid Bart's strangely damp sticky seats as much as possible.

[Allegra]

In my mind though this is simply a means for CA to extract more tax revenue.

Yes, they need to be very resourceful. Supporting all those illegals can be pretty costly.

[weegee]

Lesee-here-now: California was facing energy "shortages" and they want to run rechargeable cars on electricity.

Just where do they expect this power to come from and what makes them so sure that the generation of that energy source won't cause pollution (nuclear waste, smoke from coal, etc.).

[captain11]

Yes, it's pretty bad. How much Bart riding do you do?

Quite a bit, back in the day but I left the area. BART occasionally sucked badly. More often, it ran on time and got the job done, and it's far better than buses for longer distances.

I avoid Bart's strangely damp sticky seats as much as possible.

Probably a good move. I never paid as much attention to seat humidity, evidently.

BTW, I've got no problem with fuel-efficient commuter cars. Single-occupant SUV's are a bad joke, not to mention that most of them handle like crap.

[dalereed]

Bart, or any other public transportation system is probably great for the guy that lives on a bench in one station and "works" (commonly known as panhandeling) at the station at the other end. for the rest of us it doesn't go from where you are to where you need to go.