A bad bill
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Thursday, June 13, 2013, 8:55 p.m.
Hopefully, the Pennsylvania Senate's $2.5 billion transportation bill will not become law.
Our esteemed benefactors in Harrisburg think of the citizens as cash cows to be milked over and over. We are serfs to an elite ruling class of state senators and representatives to whom we provide a lavish living complete with free lifetime health insurance and $82,000 salaries for what — maybe six months of work?
This bill creates a traffic-enforcement-for-profit racket, boosting citations by $100. Now that's an incentive for more speed traps and more dangerous red-light ticket cameras.
Yep, we need more money for roads so we can keep funding our legislators' guaranteed pay and pension raises and funneling money to their favored contractors.
Harrisburg must stop preying on drivers. Harrisburg must stop wasting highway taxes on airports, rail freight, water ports, walking and biking routes, petting zoos and museums. The taxes called “license and registration fees” need to be reduced, not increased. Does anyone in Harrisburg know that we're in a virtual depression and millions are out of work? I guess not.
Common thieves used to commit highway robbery. Now our legislators and bureaucrats handle that function. Who says government can't do a better job than the private sector?
Let's finally put a stop to it by rejecting the Senate transportation bill.
Berwyn, Delaware County
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Strong enough
- Budget & business taxes
- Telling facts
- Islam & women
- Invest in pre-K
- Medicaid’s future
- Zealots’ tactic
- Funding priorities questioned
- ‘We the people’ are veterans
- Our nation’s testing obsession