The opinion piece in the August 17th WSJ entitled: "Give states the authority to set road funds priority" starts off with a good premise: that transportation funding priorities should not be set by the federal government. However, the author does not go far enough in extending the argument to its logical conclusion: Neither should transportation funding priorities be set by the state government. The best use of transportation funding should be determined by the unit of government closest to the people who will be using the transportation infrastructure.
Appropriate priorities for one part of the state are not always the best priorities for the whole state. While State Rep. John Gard's rural home town of Peshtigo may benefit most by spending every transportation dollar on increasing freeway capacity and infrastructure (presumably to bring in more regional tourism), the transportation situation in Madison, where it is estimated that 12% of trips are made by bicycle, would be degraded significantly by allocating funds exclusively for automobile travel.
It is also worth considering that the powerful special interests (the road builders and automobile manufacturers, for example) have more power when the funding priorities are set at a high level of government. Setting the priorities at the local level gives the people back the power to shape their environment.
Matt Logan Madison
_______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
