SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: TimF who wrote (545842)1/24/2010 1:16:36 PM
From: combjelly  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1577124
 
"claiming that corporations will dominate American politics with billions of dollars in expenditures, are pure science fiction."

This is so much hogwash. Corporations already dominate American politics, so it isn't fiction of any sort.



To: TimF who wrote (545842)1/24/2010 3:49:39 PM
From: tejek  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1577124
 
What We Learned From The Stimulus.

And how to use what we learned to speed job creation in the 2010 jobs bill

The latest data on stimulus spending show that funds spent on public transportation were a more effective job creator than stimulus funds spent on highways. In the 10 months since the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) was signed, investing in public transportation produced twice as many jobs per dollar as investing in roads:

Every billion dollars spent on public transportation produced 16,419 job-months.
Every billion dollars spent on projects funded under highway infrastructure programs produced 8,781 job-months.
As Congress and the Administration discuss a possible jobs bill, the implication is clear: shifting available funds toward public transportation will increase the resulting employment.

The latest data on stimulus spending show that funds spent on public transportation were a more effective job creator than stimulus funds spent on highways. In the 10 months since the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) was signed, investing in public transportation produced twice as many jobs per dollar as investing in roads:

Every billion dollars spent on public transportation produced 16,419 job-months.
Every billion dollars spent on projects funded under highway infrastructure programs produced 8,781 job-months.
As Congress and the Administration discuss a possible jobs bill, the implication is clear: shifting available funds toward public transportation will increase the resulting employment.

Shifting investment to public transportation would speed job creation
The United States has put under contract more than $20 billion dollars in transportation investments through ARRA. States are required to report the job creation and job retention resulting from each contract paid for with these funds. As the Congress and the Administration consider a jobs bill, they should learn from data gathered for ARRA.

The data tell us that every billion dollars in public transportation investments made as of October 31 2009 produced roughly an additional 8,000 job-months compared to highway projects. ARRA transportation funds have so far gone disproportionately to highways. If the total road + public transportation funding in the just-passed House jobs bill were invested equally in public transportation and highways, the same outlay would produce 71,415 additional job-months, equivalent to year-round employment for 5,951 additional people.

Public transportation creates more jobs by spending less on land and more on people
The increased job creation and retention that states are reporting from ARRA spending on public transportation is consistent with the data collected and reported prior to ARRA. Every previous study of the employment impacts of transportation spending has found that investment in public transportation produces more jobs than investment in roads.

The reasons are straightforward: compared to roads, public transportation systems tend to:

spend less money on land acquisition;
be more complex; and
buy and maintain vehicles.
Based on past studies, we can expect investments in public transit to produce even more jobs in the House jobs bill than in ARRA because more funds would likely to be allocated to operations instead of solely to capital investment. Initially, ARRA did not allow states or Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) over 200,000 population to spend any stimulus money on public transportation operations. In June, Congress gave states and MPOs over 200,000 the flexibility to spend up to 10% of federal transit capital funds on transit operations. Largely because so much of the money had been committed by then, we do not know of any meaningful use of that flexibility.

Under the House jobs bill, which continues that flexibility, more public transit funds would presumably be allocated to operations. Because states and MPOs would be able to use the flexibility from the beginning, and because so many systems are in such financial straits, it is likely much of the flexibility would likely be used. This would further add to the number of jobs created by public transportation funds, because past studies suggest that transit operations produce, on average, 72% more jobs than even transit capital investment. These jobs come from driving buses and operating trains; from routine maintenance, and from running the system (dispatching, etc.).

Public transportation saves jobs by allowing people to get to work
The data that this report analyzes counts only the jobs directly created through investing in and operating public transportation. It is important not to forget the jobs preserved by allowing people to continue get to their workplaces. The impacts of cuts in public transportation service around the country underscore how for many workers, public transportation is the only way to reach their jobs. And for many others, public transportation helps to save money, allowing them to pay their mortgage or spend on other goods and services.

The United States needs more transit for a 21st century transportation system
In addition to creating more jobs, investments in public transportation help make progress on an enormous need. America’s public transit systems have a substantial backlog of unmet needs. The American Society of Civil Engineers gives the condition of the U.S. public transportation network a ‘D’ grade in its 2009 Report Card. The Federal Transit Administration says that the nation’s seven largest systems alone (Chicago’s CTA, Boston’s MBTA, New York’s MTA, New Jersey Transit, San Francisco’s BART, Philadelphia’s SEPTA, and Washington’s WMATA) have a $50 billion backlog of repairs necessary to reach a state of good repair.

In addition to the FTA estimates of existing repair needs, there are tremendous unmet needs generated by the gap between rapidly rising public demand and lack of existing access to public transit:

Lack of access. Roughly 50% of U.S. households lack reliable access to public transportation. This number is much higher in rural areas and smaller cities and towns.
Rising use. In 2008, nearly 10.7 billion trips were taken on U.S. public transportation, a four percent increase over 2007 and the highest level since 1956. Public transportation use has increased 38 percent since 1995, nearly triple the US population growth rate.
Public demand. According to a January 2009 National Association of Realtors national opinion survey, a very strong majority of the public (80%) prefer that stimulus transportation funding be used for repairing roadways and bridges and for public transportation.
In sum, additional investments in public transportation infrastructure would help make progress on large and pressing long-term needs, as well as generating a quick boost to employment.

Nationally, ARRA public transportation and road funds are spending out at the same rate
The data reported by the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee also contains useful information concerning states’ productivity in converting ARRA funds into projects. The committee’s spreadsheet shows dollar amounts, state-by-state, associated with key benchmarks in the process: funds obligated, projects put out to bid, projects under contract, projects in which work has begun, and completed projects. These figures can be aggregated to show the process at work on the national level as well.

What do all these numbers tell us? First, there is very little difference in the overall rates at which ARRA-funded highway projects and transit projects are moving forward, with transit actually outperforming highways at most points. This is illustrated by Figure 1, below.



read more............

smartgrowthamerica.org



To: TimF who wrote (545842)1/24/2010 5:23:17 PM
From: tejek  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1577124
 
Washington needs more revenue: Add a penny to the state sales tax

By Remy Trupin
Special to The Times

JUST last spring, state lawmakers facing the fallout from the worst recession since the Depression slashed the state's budget to the tune of $3.6 billon.

People lost medical coverage. Nursing homes suffered. Educational opportunities were lost. It's a sad reality that with a recession comes the greater need for services, but less money to pay for them.

We thought we'd been through the worst. But the economy continued to worsen. So lawmakers will return to Olympia this week needing to find another $2.6 billion.

On the heels of cuts already made, we cannot afford a one-sided approach of slashing away at investments for working people, such as the Basic Health program, which provides medical coverage at a time when fewer people are insured through work.


A more-balanced approach would mean doing what at least 30 other states are doing — cutting spending, certainly, but also raising revenue. And we need sufficient revenue to protect our present and our future.

Lawmakers face some realities. Much of the state's budget cannot be cut because of legal requirements and federal mandates. Only $7.7 billion of the state budget is available for cuts. Trying to cut $2.6 billion from that pot would mean slashing deeply into critical areas like education, the environment and health care.

Gov. Chris Gregoire, in her initial budget in December, gave a glimpse at what a cuts-only budget would look like and, to her credit, couldn't stomach what she saw. Not only would these cuts harm struggling families now, but many of them would cost us money in the future:

• Eliminating state-funded early learning programs for 1,500 lower-income 3-year-olds only means they'd be less prepared to succeed;

• Significant reductions for state water-quality programs erode our quality of life and have consequences later on;

• Cutting health coverage for more than 65,000 people by eliminating the Basic Health program will just send people to emergency rooms;

• Sharply limiting the availability of child-care assistance to working families would only make it harder to find and keep jobs.

• Eliminating funding to reduce premature births and infant mortality through providing support for lower-income women with at-risk pregnancies would lead to health problems for babies.


In fact, we crunched the numbers. Combined with the cuts made last year, the governor's budget would mean slashing some critical areas, like higher education and job training, or such programs as those that help needy families with children and those physically unable to work by a fourth.

The governor has signaled that she'll come out with a more-balanced approach in January that will include $700 million in additional revenue.

But in the context of the state's $11.6 billion budget challenge over these two years, that's a drop in the bucket. It would still mean more major cuts. We can do better with a balanced approach and there's much that we can do.

In the future, the state needs to address its fundamental revenue problems that are weighted for the rich and against the poor, and do not provide sustainable amounts just to maintain our current services.

For now, raising the sales tax by just a single penny for every dollar we spend — while also giving lower-income working families a rebate — would help by raising about $1 billion.

We think the penny increase could be temporary, if we take other steps like closing a loophole on the sales tax for services. Why, for example, shouldn't a person getting a Botox treatment or a spa massage not contribute to the cost of protecting our water quality, as do people who pay sales tax on the purchase of a handheld back massager or a tube of lipstick?

Whatever they do, state lawmakers should take a more-balanced approach than last time. This will be a short legislative session, but the decisions made over the next couple of months will have long-standing implications.

Remy Trupin is executive director of the Washington State Budget & Policy Center, an independent, nonprofit think tank specializing in analyzing and offering solutions on state fiscal policy (www.budgetandpolicy.org).