The Pennsylvania House of Representatives should be ashamed of itself for its inability to pass a comprehensive transportation bill that would have dedicated $2.5 billion to fix our deplorable roads and decrepit bridges. Every time a car carrying a family crosses a bridge in Pennsylvania, drivers must wonder just how safe it is.
The state's secretary of Transportation recently announced he would begin posting weight limits on even more crumbling bridges. With more than 5,000 structurally deficient bridges already, this is the last thing Pennsylvania's families need.
The House blew it. That chamber is controlled by Republicans, whose majority leader is Rep. Mike Turzai, R-Bradford Woods. Last month, Turzai did the unthinkable by tying booze to bridges.
Instead of urging his members to put up the necessary votes for a meaningful transportation bill, Turzai played a stunning game of “chicken” with the Senate — also controlled by Republicans — to get privatization of the state's liquor stores in exchange.
That's not leadership. Holding Pennsylvania's roads and bridges hostage is callous, shortsighted and foolish. Inaction is inexcusable and also hurts our workers.
According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, $1 billion worth of investment creates 27,800 jobs. Thanks to Turzai, nearly 70,000 jobs will remain on the shelf.
Turzai and his Republican colleagues need a wake-up call and should be held accountable for their failure to act in the best interests of all Pennsylvanians.
The writer is president-business manager of the Laborers' District Council of Western Pennsylvania (laborpa.org).
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.