Turnpike lease would be model for investing in infrastructure
Patriot News editorial notes that the proposed Turnpike lease deal would make PA a model for the nation.
It's not that the public-private partnership concept being pushed by Rendell is unique. Twenty- five states have either sold or leased highway and transit infra structure to private enti ties, including eight in the past three years, as an alternative funding mechanism in the face of tight budgets. Other parts of the world, particularly Europe, have long used these partnerships. Rendell's proposal has generated intense interest because it would be the largest deal of its kind ever in the United States.The P-N editorial board remains "neutral" on the proposal. However, the Scranton Times Tribune is not, arguing that "By the Numbers ... For drivers, the turnpike lease is a better deal."
In related news, the Conservative Reform Blog has picked up on a Toll Rolls News report that federal government is preparing to deny the Turnpike Commission authority to toll I-80.
12 comments:
It is also Anti- American to let foreign companies control our infrastructure.
The only thing this lease offer would do is show the world how to rip off American taxpayers. Basically, a non-american business (no wait, I mean a non-american government) would be making profits off American taxpayers.(Oh, I mean PA taxpayers!)
The turnpike might be a better deal for people along I-80, but probably not since it is out-of-state drivers that will be hit the hardest. This is a STATEwide issue 12.8B is insulting.
I dont understand how anybody who lives in this country, could support giving control of our states highway to foreign investors. We wont have to worry about a terrorist strike from abroad.....they are undermining the country right in front of our eyes. Its an outright crime to even support this issue. It shouldnt even be debated, on whether its a good deal or not. Its UN-AMERICAN. You can crunch all the numbers you want on the 12.8 billion offer, but there is no shot in hell i would ever support giving up a state asset and see money leaving the country to produce a quick fix. Anyone who supports this should be shipped to Spain and never allowed to enter this country again. You want to support Spain.....Go to Spain and dont come back!!!
Dear "Anonymouses"
While we can't help you with your xenophobia, we can address all of your other fears about this being a bad deal for Pennsylvanians. Unfortunately, you'll have to do a little bit of readying, but surf on over to www.TurnpikeFacts.com where we address all of your concerns, even your fear of foreigners!
I sincerely hope the owners of this website put in as much effort into trying to find a way to save the residents of Pennsylvania money when the cap is lifted from the electrical companies. You can write all the anti-turnpike articles you want, but if you are "so worried" about the state and saving taxpayers money, I think you should focus your attention elsewhere. Maybe you could make a difference with your "Think-Tank" gang if you went after the real problems the residents of PA will experience this winter and the next year. There is no dodging the 40 percent increase most will see in the next year or so, and the residents are held over a barrel. Lets face it, its a total option to drive the turnpike, if you dont have the money to afford tolls you simply find an alternate route. You dont pay your electric bill....you know what happens next.
Does politics and wastefull spending exist at the Pa Turnpike Commission-yes,but not any more than other public/private agencies.Taxpayers beware,do your homework and investigate who the players are behind the lease deal and you will find the political connections.You will understand why Gov. "Fast Eddy" Rendell thinks this is a good deal for himself.(Sorry ,I meant to say for Pennsylvania) Remember the turnpike is a state asset ,we own the golden goose-why give up the golden eggs??
We have a report on electricity in the works, you will just have to wait a couple of week. In the meantime, check out our PolicyPoints on Energy Policy, The BOX programs on Electric Shock and Energy Myths and Facts.
If you are truly worried that we aren't tackling enough issues, feel free to help us expand our capacity.
Long term leasing of public infrastucture is as close to giving away the public's patrimony as you cna get. In the short term the lease may bail out poor administrators and elected officals who need cash because they are afraid to make hard choices on what to cut. The public infrastureture was paid for by tax exempt bonds to encourage public purpose activities, not to make bond funds and special intersts wealthy at th public expense. Truning control of these assets funded for a opublic purpose fo the politician's immediate ends is wrong. At lest we can dump elected ofdicals on a regular basis if they deserve it. There is no protection against a private entity once they have the lease.
I'm not able to understand how the Commonwealth Foundation continues to support this lease arrangement in the face of exceptionally poor financial prospects, the lack of controls over the very large amount of money put into the state hands, and the fact that we already own this system. Why would we give away known revenue from a property owned by us in favor of the *possibility* of increased revenue from a *very small* up front payment? What discussion has there ever been about the propriety of funding any government function, let alone our most important one - the maintenance of common property and infrastructure - by investment income, rather than by known quantities of taxpayer money? I have previously commented anonymously that this is a back-door bond issue and a boondoggle. Let me add now that it is a betrayal of the public trust. If the TPC is corrupt, FIX IT! If we want to be rid of the responsibility of running the turnpike, sell it outright, for a fair price. If we need infrastructure money, FIND the money by cutting the WAMs and other waste in our corrupt government. DON'T give Harrisburg yet another revenue stream!
ALL of the fears you cite are present with the current schemes to pay for our transportation infrastructure. They are not in better hands by NOT leasing the Turnpike. Indeed, they would remain in the very hands you already distrust, with fewer controls than would be provided in a Turnpike lease.
How so? Is there fear of investment loss in the current system? Is there fear of the government raiding a very large nest egg before it can provide income? No, to both. The additional risk of leasing the turnpike is that we will lose the guts to fix our broken system and display some fiscal responsibility. How does giving Harrisburg carte blanche to look for more and more revenue streams (slots, and now table games, investment of public property, - and where does that stop? - money from bogus liability issues such as the tobacco settlement), in addition to more and higher taxes, promote the fiscal responsibility that will eventually become necessary (look at Wall Street right now, to see the future) if we are to prosper as a Commonwealth? Fix the system, don't keep feeding Harrisburg money. Infrastructure is the government's highest priority, because it consists of common property held in trust for all residents. It should be the first funding priority as well, not the last on the list. If the state can't fund the maintenance of what is held in trust for all of us, it must rethink the other things it uses our money for.
Post a Comment