Bill, What did Walker do to the state's share of Bicycle Funding in the 2011-12 budget?
What about Walker makes you think he is going to be able to resist tea-party activist pressure to line-item-veto the word "bicycle" right out of the legislation we would like to see passed? I'm in independent, and I am in no way saying Democrats don't have their faults. But it is tea party faults that are the major factor for the next few years. Let's focus on getting something passed that Republicans will support rather than going for broke with a low chance of success. Ther is no need to water anything down, we just need to pick the full-strength agenda that Republicans can support. =Matt -----Original Message----- From: William Hauda [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, December 03, 2012 11:33 AM To: Matt Logan; 'bikies' Subject: RE: [Bikies] Tracy Sorum on CTH TT/T in CG? SORRY Matt: That was Perry. This is Walker. I'm sorry to disturb the paradigm, but Walker has been better for bicycling than Doyle. Doyle pretty much killed bike funding until the leaders of Wisconsin's bicycle industry (we are the nexus of the nation in the bicycle industry) marched in at BFW's request and told him how important it was to the state's economy, in both jobs and general economic impact. Doyle declined to make appointments to the Nonmotorized Recreation and Transportation Trails Council suggested by the Legislative Council and created by the Legislature. Walker did make the appointments and we are now up and running. Walker had an opportunity to opt-out of federal transportation funding for cycling, and he didn't. People may believe the crap that's voiced on talk radio and in blogs, but that's not political reality. We are going to enact a law that further protects all of us from the acts of irresponsible motorists. Bill At 08:24 AM 12/3/2012, Matt Logan wrote: >The bicycle advocacy groups in Texas also partnered with other groups >and believed in their bill until Rick Perry vetoed it last year: > >http://www.chron.com/news/article/2-Perry-vetoes-catch-some-Texas-lawma >kers- >off-1742119.php > >"We are stunned because he's our guy, and we feel disappointed, even >betrayed by our guy," said Robin Stallings, executive director of >BikeTexas, the educational arm of the Texas Bicycle Coalition. > >"While I am in favor of measures that make our roads safer for >everyone, this bill contradicts much of the current statute and places >the liability and responsibility on the operator of a motor vehicle >when encountering one of these vulnerable road users," Perry said. > >I hope you at least have fun wasting BFW members money on this issue >this year. > >-----Original Message----- >From: William Hauda [mailto:[email protected]] >Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2012 5:30 PM >To: Matt Logan; 'bikies' >Subject: Re: [Bikies] Tracy Sorum on CTH TT/T in CG? SORRY > > > That's not my assessment, Matt. Much of the early resistance >to this legislation actually came from liberals, who seem adverse to >increasing penalties from a philosophical legal perspective. That said, >the legislation is not just a ped-bike bill; it intentionally brings >together an array of vulnerable allies on this subject, ranging from we >peds/bikers, to motorcyclists, first responders, good Samaritans and, >yes, even operators of farm machinery. BFW will be leading a powerful >coalition on this legislation. This will become law. > Bill > >At 04:24 PM 12/2/2012, Matt Logan wrote: > >Too bad a vulnerable user law has very little chance of passing > >muster with the rural republicans who dominate our state government. > >If you ever have listened to conservative talk-radio on the subject, > >you would know that they believe there is no point to building > >infrastructure or passing laws - they believe you simply can't fix > >the problem of the perception of safety for bicyclists so that the > >majority feels comfortable >bicycling. Therefore any > >money spent is a waste of time. Yes, the conservatives are wrong. But > >they are wrong about the science behind global climate change too, and that > >doesn't stop them. If it isn't something that makes life better for rural > >conservatives, rural conservatives won't support it. Rural > >conservatives are more likely to view a vulnerable user law as big > >government coming in and taking away their driving freedom to benefit > >the elite spandex douchbags they like to complain about. > > > >Any chance the Bike Fed will work on something that rural > >conservatives could support this year? Like improving bike > >infrastructure for children attending rural schools? Yes, I know > >this isn't something that is the #1 priority for most BFW members, > >but our priorities don't matter - it's the priorities of rural > >conservatives that are going to matter for at least the next 10 years at the state level. > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: [email protected] > >[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of William Hauda > >Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2012 6:38 PM > >To: Michael Rewey; bikies > >Subject: Re: [Bikies] Tracy Sorum on CTH TT/T in CG? SORRY > > > > > > Mike: > > No need to apologize. We all know where you are coming from. > >This stuff generates horrible emotions. Thanks for updating everyone > >on the circumstances of Jessica's death. This is one of the current > >increasing litany of cases of irresponsible motorists killing and > >maiming >cyclists. > >Her memory is going to help us pass the vulnerable users law we at > >Bike Fed have written and which will be introduced in the upcoming > >session of the legislature. > > Bill Hauda > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Bikies mailing list > >[email protected] > >http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
