Posted on 11/07/2005 12:46:58 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
While others wage political war over the gay-marriage amendment, the state's anti-toll road forces have launched a vitriolic fight against two little noticed propositions on Tuesday's ballot.
The Texas Toll Party is targeting Proposition 1, a straightforward constitutional amendment to begin the process of moving freight rail lines out of densely populated urban areas, and Proposition 9, which would authorize six-year terms for members of regional mobility authorities.
If blocking toll roads is your passion, opposing Proposition 9 has some logic, although that position is shortsighted.
Toll roads are inevitable. Allowing members of the governing boards to serve six years instead of the two now allowed under the state constitution would enhance efficient and effective management.
Still, if obstruction is your goal, you might as well work for poorly managed toll roads.
But trying to kill Proposition 1 is off-the-wall. Freight trains haul dangerous cargo. They serve an important public purpose, but they should be diverted from inner-city areas.
Because of the huge cost of relocating rail lines, it is unrealistic to expect the railroads to pay the entire cost. Proposition 1 would allow lawmakers to create a relocation fund to help. They'll have to find money for the fund later, and the revenue sources will be publicly debated.
The alternative is an unacceptable risk of accidents that could claim many lives.
But the foes of toll roads are willing to run that risk in their effort to build momentum to become a political force and inflict pain on Gov. Rick Perry.
They base their opposition on the claim that 2001's Proposition 15 contained a poison pill that stealthily approved toll roads and regional mobility authorities. And, they say, Proposition 1 is designed to boost Perry's Trans Texas Corridor plan, although it's not mentioned in the amendment.
"It's not overt in the language. It wasn't overt back in 2001. It's not a real far reach," said Terri Hall, director of the San Antonio branch of the Texas Toll Party.
For the record, the Express-News archives show that toll roads were openly advocated in the 2001 Proposition 15 campaign.
Ray Sullivan, a spokesman for the low-budget Yes Proposition 1 campaign, said the rail amendment is unrelated to toll roads.
"The rail safety and improvements for freight and commuter rail are important issues separate and apart from roads. In a perfect world, there is coordination among modes of transportation, but Proposition 1 stands alone in its importance and goals," Sullivan said.
Sullivan called the anti-toll road activists "a small but angry and vocal group." He added, "They're desperate to find a scalp to hang on the wall to prove their clout and effectiveness."
Sullivan said the group's tactics are "unusually nasty and divisive."
Perhaps he was referring to the Texas Toll Party e-mail calling Propositions 1 and 9 "tax wolves in sheep's clothing."
Hall accused Proposition 1 supporters of playing against the public's fears.
But those fears are justified, and the need for the solution that would be advanced by Proposition 1 is equally justified. Last year, three people were killed in a Bexar County rail accident involving chlorine gas. And the accident was in a sparsely populated area.
The politics at play in the opposition to Proposition 1 are more about next year's gubernatorial race than the merits of the amendment.
Debate over toll roads and the governor will rage on next year. Rail safety shouldn't be sacrificed at the altar of a fledging political movement looking to make its mark.
Trans-Texas Corridor PING!
IF'n the SA Express-News is fer it, then I am agin' it.
Ditto! Tolls on roads (281 & 1604) which are already paid for by our tax dollar amounts to double taxation.
thanks
Thanks for the ping!
My thoughts exactly. You tell by the even-handed writing style that the author of the document is completely unbiased on the subject(s). /sarcasm
BTTT
How you should vote depends on whether you are a Country Club Republican or anti tax/big government or a social conservative.
Prop 1 is welfare for big business and creates great opportunities for developers with connections in cities like El Paso, San Antonio and Houston. CCRs should probably vote yes, small tax/small government types no. Social Conservatives don't have a big dog in this fight.
Prop 2. Social conservatives will vote yes. No real interest to the CCRs.
Prop 3. Corporate welfare again. CCRs should vote yes, others, no.
Prop 4. Law and order types should vote 'yes'. Small government types should probably vote 'no'. Social conservatives may split. Few implications for CCRs.
Prop 5. CCRs should vote yes as should small government types. Social conservatives may want to vote no.
Prop 6. Small government types no. Libertarians yes. CCRs probably yes.
Prop 7. CCRs yes. Libertarians yes. Social conservatives, no.
Prop 8. Property rights types yes, Taxpayer rights type no. (and I bet most people thought that that would be a single group).
Prop 9. Small government folks no, better government folks yes.
See the propositions here:
http://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/voter/2005novconsamend.shtml
Prop.
Thanks pal
My pleasure.
Amen!
You're welcome. :-)
Sorry. Didn't mean to sound like a smartass. If I knew of a voter guide for Texans, I'd link you to it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.