|
|
Post by spokker on Jul 31, 2012 20:55:43 GMT -8
Looking for some input on this. I know many would be devastated if this happened in Los Angeles. Atlanta voted down its road/transit tax tonight. www.macon.com/2012/07/31/2116578/transportation-plan-trailing-in.html“Metro Atlanta voters have rejected a penny sales tax referendum that would have helped pay for billions in transportation projects over the next decade, according to unofficial returns. With 88 percent of precincts reporting, 63 percent of voters rejected the tax, compared to 37 percent who backed it. … Tea party members, the state NAACP and the Sierra Club comprised an unlikely coalition that opposed the referendum, relying on e-mail and social media to urge voters to defeat the measure.” Before they go to the voters to increase taxes, government has to earn their collective trust. They clearly did not have it in Atlanta. I support transportation infrastructure improvements, but this should represent a warning to other regional governments in my opinion. Personally, our state and federal governments have lost my trust over the past couple of years so I am proud of Atlanta tonight if they indeed felt that way. I am inspired and my resolve to vote down our own tax increase measures this November is strengthened (not Measure R+ though since I cannot vote on that, just to clarify). Atlanta is Atlanta, with its own political environment, of course, but my first question when I see tax revolts is, "Will it spread?" I wonder if LA County is going back to voters too quickly to extend Measure R, even though it just doubles the time sales tax is in effect. Its defeat could be symbolic. |
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Aug 2, 2012 9:14:34 GMT -8
Looking for some input on this. I know many would be devastated if this happened in Los Angeles. Atlanta voted down its road/transit tax tonight. www.macon.com/2012/07/31/2116578/transportation-plan-trailing-in.html“Metro Atlanta voters have rejected a penny sales tax referendum that would have helped pay for billions in transportation projects over the next decade, according to unofficial returns. With 88 percent of precincts reporting, 63 percent of voters rejected the tax, compared to 37 percent who backed it. … Tea party members, the state NAACP and the Sierra Club comprised an unlikely coalition that opposed the referendum, relying on e-mail and social media to urge voters to defeat the measure.” Before they go to the voters to increase taxes, government has to earn their collective trust. They clearly did not have it in Atlanta. I support transportation infrastructure improvements, but this should represent a warning to other regional governments in my opinion. Personally, our state and federal governments have lost my trust over the past couple of years so I am proud of Atlanta tonight if they indeed felt that way. I am inspired and my resolve to vote down our own tax increase measures this November is strengthened (not Measure R+ though since I cannot vote on that, just to clarify). Atlanta is Atlanta, with its own political environment, of course, but my first question when I see tax revolts is, "Will it spread?" I wonder if LA County is going back to voters too quickly to extend Measure R, even though it just doubles the time sales tax is in effect. Its defeat could be symbolic. Atlanta has some serious problems and I don't know how this was structured, but it does seem strange that the Sierra Club was against this. Their traffic is horrible and they will pay one way or another. I do know that 68% of the voters in this particular election were republicans and they were trying to vote on this in 10 counties (thank god for our super large LA County and that we don't have to rely on transit backwaters like Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties and their reactionary voters). Even though Atlanta got a headstart by starting their system in the 70s, they are falling behind places like LA and will be less competition for federal dollars to us as well. Your logic on this is flawed. Every tax initiative is different. You are basically saying that you are mad at government so you are going to vote against any tax regardless of the circumstances. I look at each item in depth - cost-benefit and wish everyone did the same. The whole I am taxed enough often misses key points like the fact that in CA, the car tax was cut by 66% and there wouldn't be a need for other tax increases if this were left alone at its original level. On Measure R+, I think it is a tougher sell than the original Measure R and I am not sure now is the perfect time for it. I do worry that they overestimated Measure R revenues and this is just a way to try and make up for it (it is unclear as to whether this is true as half the people say they way overestimated Measure R money and the other half say that isn't the case). |
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Aug 2, 2012 11:22:40 GMT -8
Reading that measure, it's mostly highway projects with minimal amount of transit projects. The only major transit project seemed to be some Marta extension.
I can see why Sierra Club opposed it. This is for building more highways, not more transit. I would probably oppose it myself, too. We are lucky in LA that people are thinking differently now. Georgia still has the 1960s mentality -- build more highways, more room for cars.
|
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Aug 2, 2012 14:37:49 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Aug 2, 2012 14:46:06 GMT -8
Your logic on this is flawed. Every tax initiative is different. You are basically saying that you are mad at government so you are going to vote against any tax regardless of the circumstances. I am mad at government, but the reason I lean no on taxes right now is because I've lost the trust of government. Even if the projects/plans sound good, I don't trust government to carry out such big plans competently right now. To earn that trust again, they could succeed on smaller plans or be replaced by someone I trust more. When I get my sample ballot I pour over it with a pencil and research the hell out of it. I spend hours doing this. I find it very enjoyable. So don't assume that I am not looking at these issues in-depth. That I'm on the Transit Coalition forums at all and get involved is proof enough that I care more about issues and politics than the average person, especially the average 20-something. |
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Aug 2, 2012 15:40:29 GMT -8
Good one spokker, sounding like the perfect Tea Party candidate. |
|
|
|
Post by thanks4goingmetro on Aug 2, 2012 19:23:30 GMT -8
Los Angeles is lightyears ahead of Atlanta and MARTA. Having spent significant time with both LA wins it. MARTA is how not to run a system: it has no state support, little communication (blog, twitter, etc), little ambition, and no trust in the system. Atlanta badly wants to be like Washington, DC but it's more spread out than Los Angeles with less than a quarter of the density of greater LA. They haven't even studied chartering a commuter rail system. It's no wonder than the orphaned federally built MARTA heavy rail hasn't been extended or expanded when their average headways are quite long and their safety record is marred. Los Angeles' light rail alone runs rings around Atlanta's heavy rail MARTA for ridership, safety, quality of service, and even bus connectivity.
The "transit" tax loaded up with highway projects and only one MARTA extension is a typical Republican bait and switch for Georgia, it's projects widening the likes of the already nearly 20-lane wide Interstate 20, 85, and I-285 through Downtown Atlanta.
|
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Aug 2, 2012 22:37:49 GMT -8
Good one spokker, sounding like the perfect Tea Party candidate. Good one LAofAnaheim, sounding like the perfect shit poster. Others offered something of substance. Arrogant people like you act like that and then wonder why the polls were wrong come election day. Supposedly liberal California couldn't even pass a tobacco tax despite it polling very well, and the only response is, "WAHHHH THE TOBACCO COMPANIES AND THEIR EVIL MONEY." No, people voted that crap down because they didn't trust California to spend the money properly. Maybe it's the start of a turnaround after decades of bad behavior, maybe not. Good luck on those tax increases this fall. You've only strengthened my own resolve to vote them down. If anybody else read this forum, a lot of others would have the same reaction from your post. California cities are dropping like flies and it's only the beginning. We have no one to blame but ourselves. It's too bad the thing that could have stopped it was honest discourse. Maybe the next generation will learn from our mistakes. |
|
|
|
Post by macross287 on Aug 3, 2012 5:15:27 GMT -8
Spokker
The tobacco was no voted down necessarily because people did not trust government. The thing was polling really well it until the ads came in. The people who were against it essentially took advantage of low turnout election to to sway votes to their side. It is possible that had the tax been on November ballot the results may have been different especially when more people show up to vote for the president who would not normally come out to vote..
|
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Aug 3, 2012 7:16:12 GMT -8
Good one spokker, sounding like the perfect Tea Party candidate. Good one LAofAnaheim, sounding like the perfect shit poster. Others offered something of substance. Arrogant people like you act like that and then wonder why the polls were wrong come election day. Supposedly liberal California couldn't even pass a tobacco tax despite it polling very well, and the only response is, "WAHHHH THE TOBACCO COMPANIES AND THEIR EVIL MONEY." No, people voted that crap down because they didn't trust California to spend the money properly. Maybe it's the start of a turnaround after decades of bad behavior, maybe not. Good luck on those tax increases this fall. You've only strengthened my own resolve to vote them down. If anybody else read this forum, a lot of others would have the same reaction from your post. California cities are dropping like flies and it's only the beginning. We have no one to blame but ourselves. It's too bad the thing that could have stopped it was honest discourse. Maybe the next generation will learn from our mistakes. Maybe you should think about each tax increase seperately and think if it's worth it. This whole "I don't trust government" doesn't solve any problem. Governments have been hated for decades and centuries, nothing will change. But you can always try to make it better by voting for who you want and where to spend money. If you want to resolve CA's mess, we need to think of a mix of cost cuts and tax increases. However, cuts itself are already too deep without hurting the middle and lower classes. What's wrong with paying a few extra dollars a year to help fund the government that provides essential services likes schools, transit, roads, police, fire, etc...? Anyways, the voters will decide. In 2008, 68% of Angelenos voted "yes" to tax themselves more and now we have Crenshaw and Foothill under construction. Next year, the subway and regional connector will hit construction. That's progress. If you don't think Measure R is working, can you remember how unfunded transit projects were previous to 2008? Do we really want to go back to an era where only 1 transit project was built every 4 or 5 years? |
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Aug 3, 2012 9:27:23 GMT -8
Good one spokker, sounding like the perfect Tea Party candidate. Good one LAofAnaheim, sounding like the perfect shit poster. Others offered something of substance. Arrogant people like you act like that and then wonder why the polls were wrong come election day. Supposedly liberal California couldn't even pass a tobacco tax despite it polling very well, and the only response is, "WAHHHH THE TOBACCO COMPANIES AND THEIR EVIL MONEY." No, people voted that crap down because they didn't trust California to spend the money properly. Maybe it's the start of a turnaround after decades of bad behavior, maybe not. Good luck on those tax increases this fall. You've only strengthened my own resolve to vote them down. If anybody else read this forum, a lot of others would have the same reaction from your post. California cities are dropping like flies and it's only the beginning. We have no one to blame but ourselves. It's too bad the thing that could have stopped it was honest discourse. Maybe the next generation will learn from our mistakes. Actually, it was the complete opposite for me. I voted against the both the stem cell bond a few years ago and the tobacco tax because of the way the funds were spent on medical research. I am all for Stem Cell research and Cancer Research, but our state needs funds for the General Fund. We can't afford to be trying to solve the world's problems when we have infrastructure and education needs that go unfunded. I could easily say that the military and State Dept. wasted money in Iraq. In fact, they clearly wasted tens of billions of dollars dwarfing anything else in government. Given that, I could say that we should just defund the military since they waste a lot of money. Problem solved. Where do I vote? The beauty of Measure R is that you pretty much know where almost all of the dollars are going. I'd have to agree with LA of Anaheim in that it is pretty irresponsible to just say to any initiative I am voting no because I don't trust them. Some initiatives are completely different from one another and that blanket reaction doesn't have any critical thinking attached to it. |
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Aug 3, 2012 14:38:05 GMT -8
Spokker The tobacco was no voted down necessarily because people did not trust government. The thing was polling really well it until the ads came in. The people who were against it essentially took advantage of low turnout election to to sway votes to their side Valid points. At the very least, they are unfortunate realities and if voters are unhappy with these situations, they should simply show up to the polls. No advantage was taken. There are plenty of people, including myself, who voted against that tobacco tax because it created another unelected committee that would decide how to spend the money. If the money had gone to the general fund or earmarked for research by an existing agency, then it would be easier to swallow and I might have voted for it. |
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Aug 3, 2012 14:57:23 GMT -8
What's wrong with paying a few extra dollars a year to help fund the government that provides essential services likes schools, transit, roads, police, fire, etc...? Nothing. Nothing at all. And those things are funded. People voted for Measure R. What I think about that measure doesn't mean much because I could not vote on it, but I supported it from afar. Here's the problem. They asked for 30 years and got it. People were happy to pay the tax. Now they come back and say, we need another 30 years. And we need to borrow from revenues so far into the future that most of us will be dead by the time the bill comes due. Yeah, some people are going to step back and say, "Is this right?" If your response to them is, "Oh, you sound like a Tea Party guy  " it is only going to strengthen their resolve. Let's talk about some of the other things you mentioned. Schools do not lack for funds, to give one example. There is very little connection between increased school spending and achievement. Essentially, our national educational policy is to throw money at the problem. I'll spare you the graph I pocket for situations such as this. The issue is administrative, political and cultural. We have a public school system in which good teachers like Jaime Escalante are either run out or never cultivated in the first place. They didn't show that part in Stand and Deliver. We have unions that advocate rules that bind people cast from the Escalante mold and reject merit-based evaluations. We have families who do not care and do not value education and yet we tell everybody they must go to college. We have dumbed down education to the point where the teachers are getting dumber and dumber. I am also dumb but I am smart enough to recognize that grade inflation is happening. Fire? Police? Great. Don't you think the taxes people pay are enough to fund these basic necessities? Do we need make-or-break tax measures to fund these things? No, many people are fed up with the welfare state and entitlement culture and doing the same thing over and over again but getting the same results. But instead of trying to understand them, they get accusations of being Tea Party supporters or hating the poor or the most ridiculous insult of all, being racist. On the other hand, these people don't do much to understand your point of view either, but you see how this lack of real communication and plain speaking is a problem. On another note, your post screams of hivemind thinking. If I were a Tea Party guy I wouldn't even be on this forum. |
|
elray
Junior Member
Posts: 84
|
Post by elray on Aug 8, 2012 10:21:33 GMT -8
I am always in favor of so-called "regressive" measures like Prop R, which place at least some burden on the people who vote for them, as opposed to the populist "soak the rich" measures which eventually have negative yields.
But even as one who can look to Mr. Anaheim and appreciate his narrow (ok, "spirited and passionate") point of view - as it purports to benefit the transit rider, not necessarily the fence-sitters, I can still find reason to vote against specific measures, like Prop R, when I find that the last-minute "compromises" on our side of town condemn transit to further mediocrity while simultaneously compounding traffic congestion.
30/10 and R+ actually make sense - borrowing against future revenues, given today's interest and recessionary contract rates, could yield a tremendous bargain over future construction costs, if only we could trust the fiscal track record of those who sponsor it.
|
|
" it is only going to strengthen their resolve.