These comments are responses
to the questions listed below,
which were generated in regard to the
interview of 04-06-08.
1. _2.8 average; 2.0 median___ On a scale of (0) strongly
opposed, to (5) neutral, to (10) strongly support, should members of
Congress earmark appropriations for specific highway and transit
projects within their respective districts?
2. _2.7 average; 1.0 median___ On a scale of (0) strongly
opposed, to (5) neutral, to (10) strongly support, should priorities
for transit and highway construction projects continue to be
established independently of one another?
Charles Lutz (7) (5)
Joe Mansky (5) (0)
I think "earmarking" is a more recent term for what used to be called
"log-rolling". It's probably a reality of doing business in Congress.
I also strongly agree that the integrated or multi-modal approach to
transportation planning needs to be revived.
Bill Frenzel (0) (0)
Wayne Jennings (5) (1)
Transportation is such a complex issue involving engineering,
futuristics, local needs, property rights, politics, etc. As an
important high need matter, I'm willing to leave it to non-politicized
agencies to propose solutions. Clearly, it will be costly but so was
the Interstate system, now a valued part of the scene. Let's roll up
the sleeves, pay the necessary gas taxes and get it done.
Ann Berget (8) (0)
Tom Horner (3) (1)
Dan Loritz (2) (0)
Bob Brown (0) (0)
Marina Lyon (5) (2)
Connie Morrison (2) (2)
Al Quie (0) (5)
Study Denver, Portland and Los Angeles and see why their coordinated
system worked. Then check on three successful areas where transit and
highway decisions were made separately. Just setting up a super agency
or putting transit and highway together will not work. Right
relationships with a lousy organizational structure produces better
results than an academically perfect organizational structure with
lousy relationships. The ability to discern the "invisible" enables
leaders to bring their vision into fruition.
John Nowicki (0) (10)
Tom Swain (5) (0)
Dennis Johnson (0) (9)
Peter Heegaard (0) (0)
Clarence Shallbetter (2) (1)
Tim McDonald (1) (3)
Very interesting. Thanks for sharing.
Lyall Schwarzkopf (6) (2)
Pam Ellison (2) (10)
I believe that all states must be able to leverage the federal money
they need to repair infrastructure problems that affect the majority
of people first and that nationwide there are bridges and highways
that a vast number of people use daily that must have priority
regardless of the state they live in, for example main highways that
run across the entire nation, either east to west or north to south
that MUST have priority for the busy transportation that is both
commercially necessary as well as necessary to keep our tourism
Alan Miller (9) (9)
Marianne Curry (0) (0)
I am strongly opposed to earmarks, because I believe 1) they invite
"end runs" around the public process of state/local planning efforts,
2) earmarks create opportunities for political influence-peddling in
conference committees, 3) earmarks concentrate power in too few hands
without oversight or transparency, 4) earmarks make it too easy to
"make deals" to trade votes, 5) earmarks invite irresponsible fiscal
policy and constitute poor governance policy.
Further, as oil approaches all-time highs and energy costs skyrocket
while global warming hits the point of no return, what America needs
now (not 20 years from now) is another Manhattan Project to address
alternative solutions (including multi-modal transportation) and spur
new technologies invented in America. Where is the political will??
Carolyn Ring (2) (1)
Before extensive mass transit is developed, the public must be willing
to give up driving their cars, which is a major deterrent. Maybe, the
current gas prices will be an incentive. Car-pooling, and
two-passenger lanes do not seem to have been that much of an
incentive. Education on the energy crises is a "must" .
The Civic Caucus
is a non-partisan,
tax-exempt educational organization. The Core participants
include persons of varying political persuasions, reflecting years of leadership in politics and
business. Click here
to see a short personal background of each.
Verne C. Johnson, chair; Lee Canning, Charles Clay, Bill Frenzel,
Paul Gilje, Jim Hetland, John Mooty, Jim Olson,
Wayne Popham and John Rollwagen.