| Opinion/The Review

Larger text Larger text Smaller text Smaller text | Order Photo Reprints

Paying for roads

Email Newsletters

Click here to sign up for one of our email newsletters.

Letters home ...

Traveling abroad for personal, educational or professional reasons?

Why not share your impressions — and those of residents of foreign countries about the United States — with Trib readers in 150 words?

The world's a big place. Bring it home with Letters Home.

Contact Colin McNickle (412-320-7836 or

Daily Photo Galleries

Letter to the Editor
Wednesday, Jan. 1, 2014, 9:00 p.m.

The authors of the column “When is it enough? Pennsylvania takes another dive into taxpayers' pockets” don't get it. The fact is that Gov. Corbett and the state legislators who voted for the transportation-funding bill in November get what these authors do not — that the cost of doing nothing was greater than the cost of addressing the problem.

If politicians are always so quick to spend, why has it been more than 16 years since Pennsylvania enacted a meaningful transportation-funding program, seven years since Gov. Rendell's transportation commission report and two years since Corbett's transportation commission report?

Furthermore, when these professors/authors complain about paying more fuel taxes in Pennsylvania than in other states, they are not making a fair comparison, since many states use other funding sources, which are not true user fees, to pay for highways and bridges.

As a civil engineer employed by local construction contractors in highway work for 46 years, I have seen firsthand how the historic lack of funding to do it right the first time has resulted in problems such as in New Stanton, where economic development has made it almost impossible to build an efficient, safe intersection of major roads.

John McCaskie

East Huntingdon

Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.



Show commenting policy

Most-Read Letters

  1. End climate change
  2. March of the lemmings
  3. Another fee billed to drivers
  4. Pipelines to the future
  5. Home, sweet home?
  6. A fresh face needed
  7. Not as it seems
  8. Historical precedents
  9. The Vick ‘rub’
  10. Refugees ruse?