I just read some of the comments on the Globe coverage of issues on the Turnpike this weekend. My office overlooks Exit 13 (Framingham/Natick) of the Pike. It was backed up to my office from about 3:30 PM for several hours on Friday afternoon. I could not figure out why it would take them so longer to clear an accident.
On Sunday, it was backed up to just a little East of the rest area. I have a fast pass and know where the lanes are. It didn’t help. I could easily have taken Route 9, if I had known. Eventually we changed plans and went through to Boston, instead of 128. When we went through the Allston Brighton tolls, there was just one cash booth open.
Thoughts?
Please share widely!
Alan LeBovidge just ensured Deval Patrick’s defeat in 2010.
<
p>The Mass Pike “sick in” and “budget crisis” are viewed as political ploys to discipline voters into voting for higher taxes. The level of outrage looks sky high, and there will be political ramifications.
<
p>I wasn’t on the Pike on Sunday (thank God) but everyone who was won’t be voting for Deval.
If anything this gives leverage to those (including, I believe, the Governor) who want to merge the Pike with MassHighway.
I could be mistaken, but Mitt Romney appointed Alan Lebovidge to Springfield’s Finance Control Board — Deval Patrick replaced him (and the other Romney appointments) when he took over.
<
p>This is a pretty good political reason why state agencies should be under the governor — does Deval Patrick have any control over the MTA? Did Patrick’s appointees appoint Lebovidge, or were those Romney appointees who did it? Is this a little political payback by the opposition party? The MTA reflects on the governor, so he should have the ability to actually control them.
Below is the administration statement we issued today on this issue:
<
p>”The Governor appreciates the work Alan LeBovidge has done in cutting waste and inefficiencies at the Turnpike Authority while also managing through tremendous financial burdens brought on by decades of mismanagement and flawed leadership.
<
p>The Governor and Secretary Aloisi have asked Director LeBovidge for a full accounting of Sunday’s traffic back-ups, including whether disciplinary action is warranted for any employees. In addition, the Governor and the Secretary have charged the Director with developing and implementing plans to alleviate Turnpike congestion for future high traffic weekends.”
That is what I was hoping for. Are there consequences to their actions.
<
p>Are there habitual offenders that should face disciplinary action. These are the staff members who impact fellow employees without a care and remove fairness in schedules and make other toll collectors face the additional work due to their absence. Forget about everything else, if you were a business would this be acceptable is the question. If not, there should be action.
Seriously, is there any type of screw-up short of a federal indictment that will get Deval to stop supporting someone? If Deval remains so unwilling, unable, or unready to reform his own executive branch, he has zero credibility slamming the Legislature on their supposed inability to pass reforms.
Does Governor Patrick have the ability fire him?
<
p>Perhaps somebody familiar with the arcane regulations of these “independent” agencies and their relationship to the executive branch can clarify what options are available to Governor Patrick.
<
p>In the same vein, just what does it take — legally and constitutionally — to dissolve these agencies altogether in order to create a new “Massachusetts Transportation Agency”, reporting to the Governor.
Lebovidge was appointed by the Secretary of Transportation (Cohen at the time) and so the Secretary should be able to unappoint him, although who would be shocked if this isn’t the case.
Part of the whole point of these myriad “independent agencies” we have running around this state – like the Turnpike Authority, and HEFA (of Marian Walsh fame) – is that they are independent. That means that the Governor has no authority to fire them. If the Governor could fire them on a whim, they wouldn’t be very independent, would they?
<
p>This is more or less what the SJC said in 2001 when Acting Governor Swift tried to push Christy Mihos and Jordan Levy off the Turnpike Authority board. The SJC ruled that the Turnpike Authority is “not part of the machinery of the government” and, therefore, Swift doesn’t have power over it in that way.
If that was true of the executive director (as opposed to the board, for which it is clearly true). I couldn’t find anything that addressed it in a quick search.
The Executive Director is appointed by the Pike board. (MGL Chapter 81A, section 2(d))
<
p>And the Turnpike Authority is “not be subject to the supervision and regulation of [the executive office of transportation and construction] or any other department, commission, board, bureau or agency except as specifically provided in any general or special law to the contrary”. (MGL Chapter 81A, section 1)
I somehow suspect this won’t mean anything to JohnD.
This was nothing but a flagrant attack on Pike drivers right down to closing specific Fastlane booths to maximize the disruption. What will be next… closing highway bridges deemed unsafe, shutting traffic lights to save electricity, no police in heavy crime areas, no plowing of roads during the winter… I can just picture them sitting around a table conjuring up a psychological warfare to get revenue increases. This has only just begun!
I think we should definitely keep the unsafe bridges open, right? Do you seriously think the state is currently overstating the structural problems with our bridges? Seriously?
<
p>The toll-booth operators should work the holiday weekend without pay, right?
<
p>During the winter, the private contractors should plow the roads for free, right?
<
p>You folks have been slashing taxes for years, what did you think was going to happen? Of course they’re playing hardball, hasn’t your side been doing the same?
<
p>You sound like the bully in the schoolyard who pushes the scrawny kid around for weeks, then goes whining to the teacher when the “scrawny kid” finally gives him a good and much-deserved whack upside the head.
<
p>Are you saying they are allowing us to drive on “unsafe” bridges and overpasses? Don’t they have some legal responsibility to not allow this. Didn’t the Ted Williams tunnel collapse instill any concern over lawsuits?
<
p>
<
p>How much would it have cost to employ a few more toll collectors during a “HOLIDAY WEEKEND”… 10 people working 8 hours at $40/hour… $3,200 or double it to be safe… $6,400? How much was Deval going to pay Sen Walsh… $175K? This was nothing but a punitive assault by the Gov and the Pike.
<
p>
<
p>We collect plenty of money for plowing the roads. More bullshit from the state and from you.
<
p>We folks have been trying to keep controls on a spending machine which would have spiraled out of control. Thank God we had Gov Romney for a few years or things would be so much worse now (that should get some blood flowing). BTW, how do us “folks” do so much slashing with a major list to the left of Democrats in the MA House and Senate for all these years?
<
p>Bullies do things like the Pike did this weekend, bullies cut mental health budgets rather than cronies or state union workers. Gutless wonders balance the budget by hitting the rainy day fund or increasing sin taxes vs. standing up to Carmen unions, teacher’s unions, state worker unions…
“We folks have been trying to keep controls on a spending machine …”
<
p>Who is “we folks”?
‘You folks have been slashing taxes for years, what did you think was going to happen? Of course they’re playing hardball, hasn’t your side been doing the same?’
<
p>Come, Sabutai, be an equal opportunity heckler of the non-specific.
<
p>Carry on.
Guy a transponder! Even if you rarely use ut, the state makes $0.50 a month. What’s next? Taxing kids?
I had no idea I was paying $0.50 a month for the transponder, especially after I had to shell out $30 to buy the thing and they’re now giving it away for free (or rather, lending it, as they should have been all along).
<
p>Is that for all transponders or just for the ones acquired after a certain date (like the date when they stopped charging folks $30 or whatever to buy the dang thing)? I know I could look online, but I don’t have the login info handy…
It’s called school user fees. Charter schools are so well funded they are immune. Public school districts had to jack up the fees when Romney cut school aid 20% in 2003.
and blatant dishonesty. First JohnD writes, “What will be next… closing highway bridges deemed unsafe…” then he writes “Are you saying they are allowing us to drive on “unsafe” bridges and overpasses? Don’t they have some legal responsibility to not allow this.”
<
p>He seems incapable of discussing anything in good faith. What is the point of giving him a voice here?
Our bridges are safe but if the government can bust our chops by closing them I’ll be they would. But thanks for trying to silence a dissenting opinion (not the the first and probably not the last to do this). You would be wise to allow alternative and differing thoughts (the American way…).
<
p>I want you to have a voice here, however misguided.
to give any weight to the words of someone whose line of argument spins 180 degrees from one comment to the next. Yours is not a ‘dissenting opinion,’ it’s partisan nonsense, and your ‘thoughts’ are just vehicles for your constant slurs against progressives.
Plenty of “partisan slurs” on BMG besides mine. You on the other hand are an even tempered moderate no doubt (that too was sarcasm kirth). You may not enjoy admitting your deficiencies but you certainly are partisan and you certainly have little patience for opposing views. The turnpike issue has partisan overtures but IMO is a non-partisan issue at heart. Screwing the tax payer to pay for bloated bureaucracy should have no allegiance to either party and critiquing that “screwing” should be open to every citizen (including blowhards like me). If you don’t like the dance then sit and watch. I won’t disagree with your subject title.
JohnD will never, ever, ever admit he’s lost an argument. It’s part of of the troll creed.
I haven’t lost this argument.
<
p>Yes. Or finding other excuses — such as the perpetual “sidewalk repair” on the BU bridge — to close lanes.
<
p>Let’s not forget the emergency lane closure of the Longfellow a few months ago — remember, the federal inspector’s report that came as a complete shock?
<
p>I am absolutely saying that the state has been burying the truth about the condition of our bridges for years, the “leftist” Globe has been cooperating. Take a walk along the Charles, and look up at the understructure of Storrow Drive. Yes, it’s finally getting some belated attention (after the chunk of concrete fell onto the passing car).
<
p>
<
p>By pandering to the anti-tax populists in the lege who lack the courage to tell the truth about the real long and short term impacts of these cuts, and who lack the integrity to resist the temptation to continue doing favors for their “supporters”.
<
p>Your harping on “left” and “right” ignores the reality of what’s being going down in this state for years.
the problem with this state is the Democrats. The majority Democrats in the House and Senate who…
<
p>”… lack the courage to tell the truth about the real long and short term impacts of these cuts, and who lack the integrity to resist the temptation to continue doing favors for their “supporters”.”
<
p>We should vote them all out of office immediately. I could not have said it any better. Do you want the link the join the MA GOP?
bridge inspection are a problem all over the country. MA is not unique in this situation, so this isn’t evidence that “…the problem with this state is the Democrats.” That may be true, but the state of bridges are not evidence for that. Last I checked, bridge inspection would be a function of the executive, and for most of the last 25 years these were GOP administrations.
Buried in the comments, someone says that at the booth he/she went through, the toll taker told them that no one had called in sick, but that this was the number of people who were scheduled. Anyone have anything more on that aspect of it?
Haven’t you been reading the complaints of “unsubstantiated” evidence of this incident. Defenders saying this was nothing more than a worker shortage due to some “Pike authority” flu…
<
p>THanks for putting in some comments Kate but since it counter to the left it will be dismissed.
A commenter on the Globe site said.
<
p>
<
p>It was commenter number 5. I did not make any representation as to whether or not this was true. The lack of other reports like this caused me to question the accuracy of the information. Did the commenter misunderstand what the employee said? I was looking for clarification on a factual matter.
The MTA should provide the public with the number of collectors scheduled to work this Easter (along with the number scheduled on the last several Easters) and the number who called in sick this Easter.
<
p>The public’s reaction to this depends on these numbers. It feels like a “sick out” or a “strike” or intentionally bad management to make a political point (raise taxes and tolls or else Christmas will look this way too!).
<
p>I hope I’m wrong, but that’s how it looks. My personal reaction to this depends on these numbers. Was it a political ploy? If so, it’s heinous. If not, the agency should defend itself.
“long live automation”
<
p>Please not entirely. There should be one lane at least manned by an actual person at all times, in case any glitches need to be worked out or manually overriden. In DC all the gates to Metro parking lots are now automated. Before if you entered a lot and discovered there were no spaces available you could explain that to the attendant and the gate would be opened for you at no charge. Now you’re stuck paying the exit fare even if all you did was drive around for a couple of minutes. I don’t know what a similar situation on the Pike would be, but I am just generally uncomfortable leaving something to computers and robots with no possibility for human backup. As much as machines can do they do not, and in my opinion will never, actually THINK. Besides, you are cutting real jobs in the process and I think the consequences of that should be considered.
that there is one human tolltaker at all toll locations.
<
p>What I don’t understand is: who are all these people on the holidays who don’t have EZPass/FastLane? After all, it’s available in all the following states: Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia, and West Virginia.
<
p>So — who are all these Pike users who don’t have electronic toll gadgetry?
except for visiting family or going away for the weekend. Probably a vast majority of drivers in the state.
the state to have the technology to determine how/where they travel in a private vehicle.
<
p>Or those who drive cars and don’t want to get charged at the 18-wheeler rate “by accident.”
The first Sunday after Thanksgiving that I got to zoom past miles of traffic at Sturbridge.
<
p>The $27, plus the money that they keep “on account” is worth it for that weekend, alone.
But as for me, I’d rather put up with a slight inconvenience than give the government the technology to track my every movement in my own car. Thankfully, this is still a free country, so you can do what works for you, and I can do what works for me.
All they can track is the instant your car passes one of a dozen or so points in the state, and that’s only when you leave your FastLane transponder on your windshield. Want to go “under the radar”? Put it in it’s metallic bag and pay cash that time.
<
p>P.S. They’ve still got a photo of your license plate. If they (whomever they are) were interested in tracking, using FastLane or paying cash at the tolls would make no difference whatsoever.
simply to do what you describe is too much, in my book. What business is it of the government’s to collect any of that data about private citizens? I’ve worked in high tech for all of my professional career, and I can think of all sorts of ways, via data mining, the government can use even that much information . . . sorts of ways that go far beyond merely collecting tolls.
<
p>But if you’re cool with giving the government that sort of insight into your movements, go right ahead. It’s still a free country.
a much higher proportion of those driving over a holiday weekend don’t ordinarily take the Pike.
If you live anywhere in the Northeastern US, you live near a toll road with an EZ Pass. Yeah, you might not take it everyday, but even a few times a year will justify the use. I bet it would have justified it for all those poor schmucks on Sunday.
<
p>That’s just a waste. Make sure the tolls are properly manned and if not just open them up.
the fact of the matter is that this job action completely clogged traffic so that Fast Pass users were snarled in the same traffic (and if you were listening to WRKO about 6:15am when some indignant toll collector called in and inadvertently spilled the beans, you would know that this was no accident).
<
p>Living on the South Shore, I’m probably on the Pike once or twice a year tops. Why should I have to get a transponder, especially now that they’re going to be charging a monthly fee? We don’t all live up and down the MA pike.
Lets intall tolls on Rt. 128! That will justify your buying a transponder. Surely you won’t mind.
but I personally don’t drive on any of the highways enough to want to buy one.
I don’t even own a car and I own a transponder, precisely for when I rent a car for holiday travel.
<
p>Look, I get that some folks cite privacy concerns — but nowhere near the percentages of folks who aren’t using the transponder.
<
p>One problem is that it’s still a hassle to get the transponder. It’s easier than it used to be, but nowhere near easy enough. The state has to figure out how to get these devices in the hands of more motorists.
<
p>Another problem is that approaching the tolls, the lanes aren’t signed far enough ahead during holiday rush. Then, they don’t use jersey barricades to divvy up the highway ahead of the tolls so that those with transponders can get in a walled off lane free of people cutting in and out and just cruise through the tolls laughing at all the suckers who don’t have a transponder. It’s the lane-hopping which makes the pre-toll jam so difficult, and just walling off one lane for a few miles would do wonders to reward those with the transponder, creating one more incentive for those without the transponder to get one, thereby helping to reduce long term costs.
<
p>
<
p>All motorists are better off every time any motorist gets a transponder. Not only does it increase throughput dramatically, but it lowers the costs to boot! Heck — set up a transponder distribution setup at rest stops so that holiday travelers see the electronic sign, pull in, show a license, registration, and credit card, and get a transponder on the spot. It might not help them any more in the direction they’re going, but it would help on the return. Do this for a few holidays in a row and increase the saturation of the transponders dramatically… and ease the congestion.
I would raise the tolls for non-transponder vehicles by some amount sufficient to cover the cost of the paper tickets and the person to collect them.
I’ve lived in or visit often a few other areas that have toll roads. The transponder use, particularly in Illinois is FAR ahead of where we are in MA. While holiday weekends obviously see more occasional users than weekdays, I’m amazed at the backups at the manual lanes on many weekday mornings or afternoons. You can tell me that all of those people who are driving into Boston during rush hour are only “occasional” Pike users.
<
p>I also agree that the state has done little to make it really easy to get a transponder. Either you have to drive to one of the service centers or order it online. In Illinois, they sell the I-Pass transponders at grocery stores (Jewel/Osco) and I believe some other places. Why couldn’t the Pike cut a deal with Stop & Shop, Shaw’s, or multiple chains to sell them?
<
p>As for the people who complain about the cost, even if you’re driving the Pike occasionally, you’re probably spending a lot more than $27 bucks a year for gas, maintenance, etc. The time I save with the FastLane probably saves me $20 a year in gas alone, and I’m not a daily Pike driver.
<
p>
Transponders cost money. Why pay for something you will hardly ever use.
and not “hardly” ever but NEVER use.
You certainly do use them. How safe do you think your business and neighborhood would be if there was no safety net for the unemployed and no place to segregate criminals?
Good point about paying for services to keep the low lifes in our society out of my neighborhood. A wall would be far too expensive.. and ugly. THanks!
and pay for everything through taxes.
<
p>That way I don’t need to acquire another stupid device and add yet another stupid bill.
Why should I buy a transponder if I only drive on the pike a couple of times a year? Besides, in my experience having a transponder during the holiday rush doesn’t save you that much time compared to the rest of the time you are stuck in traffic.
I have yet to purchase one…and beLIEVE me, I’ve lived to regret it occasionally going up Rte 3 to Manchester…when I inadvertently forget to bring cash or change…
bite the bullet. Buy it. Better yet, have Mr. Lynne get one for you for your birthday or anniversary or something. It’s sooooo freaking worth it.
I’ve been asking ZipCar to put transponders in their vehicles for years now. It can’t be that hard. We own one car (with a transponder), and use a ZipCar for local trips that need a second car.
<
p>Of course, I’d prefer to see the gas tax bumped up by $0.25/gallon or more (and adjusted for inflation afterwards), and the tolls removed altogether.
<
p>The payroll for toll-takers on the Mass Pike and “information booth” attendants on the MBTA is high on my own list of targeted excesses. Both are enormously expensive, and neither is remotely justified given current technology.
I rarely drive the Pike, but when I do the tolls drive me nuts. What an ineffective, expensive way to get money. I don’t want higher taxes. But we need to get rid of the tolls, which are a huge waste of money, a patronage dumping ground, and a net negative on the quality of life in Massachusetts.
<
p>Here’s a simple solution: average the tolls collected in the state for the past three years. Divide by the number of people paying excise tax every year. Figure the amount per excise payer and add it to our excise tax bills as an “eliminate tolls” fee. In a few years, people will complain and we can work on eliminating that fee. In the meantime, at least we won’t be dealing with toll booths.
Most of the lanes at the toll plaza were closed, even on the onramps where electronic ticket machines are located. I have a transponder and it was of no help until I got within 50 to 100 feet of the plaza.
If 10% of the people who were paying cash got a transponder, then everybody would have gotten through faster, because that 50-100 feet becomes 70-120 feet or somesuch. The key is to get more and more drivers to have the transponder so that it “opens up” further in front of the toll booth.
<
p>Of course, that’s not the only thing that’s needed, and this thread is full of other ways to reduce the holiday tollbooth crunch.
I dread the Sturbridge exit during the summer months, there are ways to get around it. Guess it’s time to do some mapping strategies for summer travel this year. I won’t be wasting my time held prisoner in a traffic jam for the sake of disgruntled employees. No thanks.
I use the Pike twice a year. I’m not paying for the transponder plus a monthly fee to avoid paying cash. I used to have a transponder which I got for free when I lived in a neighborhood that got a discount to use the tunnels. When I moved out of the neighborhood, I did the honest thing, I called the MTA, informed them and provided my new address, assuming I would keep the transponder but have the discount for the tunnels removed from my account. Instead, I was told that I could pay $25 to keep the transponder. I turned it in the next day. The turnpike is paid for. Do what they promised when it was built, remove all the tolls once it was paid, and operate the road like any other in the state, which it is. The Big Dig needs to be funded. That’s not the responsibility of commuters on the turnpike.
Make transponders mandatory, ticket anyone who doesn’t use one.
<
p>The DMV could issue them with every registration and tack the $30 bucks onto the fee. If you don’t want one, you can opt out, however, the toll for driving on the pike or a bridge or through the big dig is $40 if you don’t have a transponder. If you’ve got privacy concerns, don’t drive on the pike or cross a bridge.
<
p>Tear down the toll booths and take pictures of anyones license plate driving without a transponder – mail the ticket to their house. Will there be some mistakes? Sure, make the appeal process easy and cheap. Rental cars entering Massachusetts need to have a transponder issued, folks traveling from another state can buy one out of a vending machines at rest stops, mail it back for half your money if you’ll only use it once. Keep your car registered in another state? Get one from there or tough luck. This is a problem technology has solved.
<
p>
how all you self-styled progressives simply sweep all the privacy issues surrounding transponders under the rug as if they don’t matter. I thought progressives were supposed to stand up for privacy issues and civil rights? You guys really have no problem at all giving the government the technology to track your movement wherever you go in your private automobile?
<
p>Is expediency more important than protecting privacy?
A gas tax increase, together with eliminating the tolls altogether, solves the problem. It spreads the burden more fairly. It has no privacy implications.
<
p>No wonder it meets such resistance.
There is nothing at all inaccurate about what you posted.
… include the part about “spreads the burden more fairly”? If so, why would you be against it?
However, I oppose any increase in taxes until serious reforms are made that enable the government to do more with the revenue they currently confiscate from the MA taxpayer. Until whatever system in place is blown up and rebuilt to make fiscal, logical, and moral sense, any increase in taxes is simply throwing good money into a burning fire. And I’ll bet a year of mortgage payments that they could make much better use of the money they currently have—who knows, maybe a tax increase isn’t necessary at all.
<
p>I can stomach paying my fair share of taxes. What I can’t stand is any government waste whatsoever, because that’s my money they’re wasting. That’s money that I could be using to feed my family . . . to keep a roof over our heads . . . to save for our future. I earned that money, not some government hack. It belongs to me, not the government, and it pisses me off to no end that they think so little of me and my contribution to the “common wealth” that they piss it away like they do.
<
p>Why would I trust anybody who pisses away money like they do and then comes around with their hat in their hand begging for more?
I strongly suspect that Microsoft, Verizon, Comcast, and Symantec collectively waste far more of my money than anybody in government.
<
p>The world is chock full of people who strive mightily to take away money that each and every one of us needs to “feed my family . . . to keep a roof over our heads . . . to save for our future.” Some of them are in government. So what?
<
p>For me, the more important question is “who is most likely to help me make the best use of whatever limited wealth I have?”
<
p>I share your frustration with the flagrant waste (and worse) on full display in Massachusetts government.
<
p>I see little or no evidence that “private enterprise” — in the form of Bechtel, Halliburton, Bank of America, Bain Capital, and a host of others — is any better. In fact, my own experience is that they are far worse, especially now that the anti-tax “anti-regulation” laissez-faire populists (of both parties here in Massachusetts) have so completely destroyed the few workable protections our parents and grandparents put in place to protect us from these “free-market” pirates.
<
p>If you have a problem with people who “piss away money like they do” and then come around “begging for more” (or demanding more), then ditching effective government in favor of un-regulated private enterprise is surely jumping from the frying pan into the fire.
<
p>When the prior administration pulled the plug on the Microsoft anti-trust action, do you think that helped or hurt your day-to-day cash situation? When Microsoft used their monopoly stranglehold on the PC hardware vendors to force Vista onto an unwilling market, do you think that helped or hurt your situation?
<
p>Which government did more good for the average consumer in their respective turfs, the EU or the Bush administration, in their handling of Microsoft?
but again—and it probably won’t be the last time I have to make this basic distinction between public/private entities here on BMG—I don’t have to do business with private companies if I don’t want to. I DO have to “do business” with the government.
<
p>You don’t like the way Comcast does business? Find another source for TV/internet/what-have-you, or forgo those services. If you don’t choose to do business with Comcast, they’re not going to come after you with a gun and demand that you pay them for what they offer. You don’t like Symantec? Find another anti-virus software provider—there are plenty of them—or better yet, switch to Mac. Symantec isn’t going to come after you with a gun.
<
p>The government of Massachusetts—like all governments—compels you to play ball with them via a threat of force. You are compelled to purchase government services, via taxes, at the rate they demand. You can’t turn elsewhere for the same services. You can’t opt out of services you don’t want or don’t need. Unless you want to go to jail, you are compelled to pay, and pay whatever they force you to pay.
<
p>Yes, you can argue that some private companies suck just as much as the government sucks, and yes, you could be exactly right. But so what? We’re talking about something entirely different. The comparison you’re trying to draw here is essentially meaningless.
Good luck attempting to “not do business” with predatory monopolies in an unregulated (for the big guys) economy.
<
p>For too many communities, Comcast is the only game in town. Don’t forget that they need permission of your town to put their trunks on your street — and they demand long contracts, often exclusive contracts, to “protect their investment” in those trunks.
<
p>If you prefer living in an economy where predatory monopolies can do whatever they want to anybody they want, you’re welcome to your opinion. I look around at the results it created, and I — together with a large and growing majority of people like me — conclude that it doesn’t work. Just like it didn’t work in the 19th century, when it was tried the last time, and with the same outcome.
<
p>What’s your answer to my final question, regarding the kid-glove treatment Microsoft got from the prior administration? Was it better or worse for the individual consumer?
How does a company like Comcast get away with being the only game in town? The government. Because Comcast couldn’t do jack-squat to any community without government stepping in to exercise its power to compel. What you’re bitching about is really a collusion between private enterprise and government, because without government’s power to compel, private enterprises and governments couldn’t conspire to create these artificial monopolies.
<
p>I don’t know enough about the Romney administration’s relationship with Microsoft to comment one way or another. When it comes to things MSFT, I run away as fast as I possibly can. I loathe MSFT and Ray Ozzie with a passion, and I just glow inside whenever MSFT fails, a la Vista and the Zune.
<
p>
… the relevant details, but I suspect the relative geographical monopolies of cable companies (not just comcast) may have come out of the way in which the initial investment of laying out the coax resulted in a ridiculous amount of private right-of-way. Once created, it’s a relatively simple matter to buy off the right politicians to ensure that the terms under which they would (or would not) have to ‘open up’ their own private infrastructure to competition would be favorable.
<
p>I take it from this discussion that we can count on you among us who yearn for meaningful campaign finance reform?
The cable companies need the permission of the town to use phone poles (and dig underground conduits in) the town. Licenses run for long periods (10-20 years) and the companies often drive hard for exclusive rights if they think the town will let them get a way with it (Billerica, 1980s). Brookline is VERY fortunate to have two (Comcast and RCN), and it isn’t likely to happen again next time around.
<
p>It isn’t about bribery (although that may happen), it’s about pure capitalistic power-politics: “We’re the cable company, you’re not, either give us what we want or you want have cable.”
<
p>The industry works very hard to make sure that only one player is at the table at a time, and local governments don’t have a prayer of significantly altering the outcome.
It’s the collusion of private enterprise and the public sector that creates the environment that causes the sort of harm to the consumer that you don’t like. If the government could not bring the power to compel to the table, there would be no dynamic whatsoever by which any private enterprise could exercise any sort of compulsory behavior from its customers.
<
p>And you’ll notice, of course: how does government do this? By eliminating the natural marketplace through artificial means. In a normal marketplace, customers could give providers the middle finger by switching to a competitor or forgoing the service. When government steps in and rigs the marketplace, bad things can happen, especially when it creates un-natural monopolies.
<
p>So again, your original beef with private enterprise is wholly unreasonable. Private enterprise simply can’t do the things you claim it can do without the help of government.
<
p>
“By eliminating the natural marketplace through artificial means.”
<
p>This presupposes that the natural marketplace is always a preferable solution to ‘consumer’s wants and needs’. Not really true in all cases. A pure free market for health insurance is a disaster.
it’s probably true for the vast majority of cases, however, is it not?
<
p>I don’t know much about the health insurance market, except for that I’ve been screwed over royally by Blue Cross/Blue Shield of MA. Could you elaborate on why the free market would be disastrous for it?
<
p>My take: government can, and probably should, make the guidelines/rules/regulations by which a market operates, but shouldn’t be a major player in it after that except when it comes to enforcing those guidelines/rules/regulations. Kind of like the way professional sports leagues make the guidelines/rules/regulations that govern their sports, then the teams themselves play the games by those guidelines/rules/regs. The governing body doesn’t affect the outcome of games; it just establishes the boundaries by which the games are played.
<
p>
efficiencies by the quality of their risk pool. If you’re ok with leaving people who actually need insurance out of the risk pool, that’s the way to go. If you decide that basic coverage should be at least affordable to everyone, then the best efficiencies are to spread the risk pool across the largest possible population. The biggest best risk pool where everyone gets covered is a single pool that includes everyone, which pretty much means government and leaves out private actors. Even if you regulate insurance such to restrict the manner in which they can choose the makeup of their pool in order to ‘make it fair’, what you wind up with is a race to the bottom among competitors. If one of these private companies gets ‘really good’ at some particular kind of care coverage, people who actually want it and need it might flock to that particular provider. When that happens the particular provider’s risk pool goes south and they wind up at an instant competitive disadvantage. Thus the incentive is for nobody to ‘stick their necks out’ and the normal market forces that encourage innovation through competition are thus stunted.
<
p>I have many posts in the past about the above issues and I’ll link to them later (having to go and dig them up) if you want.
<
p>Also, regarding free markets in general. It’s been demonstrated that given no constraints in a market, wealth will stratify. This is because wealth’s ability to leverage itself gives it a marketplace advantage that balloons as such leverage pays off and translates to more capital opportunity to leverage and so on. This is why when the country was the least regulated 1% owned 99% of the wealth. Thus, while market forces can be beneficial, it is almost never the case that what is perscribed is a ‘pure’ free market. This means that regulation will always be part of the ‘best practices’ for running a free market toward the ends desired. The problem is that the inevitability of the need for regulations combined with campaign finance just creates another tool for wealth to leverage itself by getting in on writing the rules. I think it may be the single biggest problem of our current system of representative democracy. You’ll never get rid of wealth having power, but you can write the rules such to limit the potential for damage. We’re living in a time where such damage has be demonstrated, as was put elegantly last night by Professor Elizabeth Warren from Harvard Law last night on TDS:
<
p>http://www.thedailyshow.com/vi…
http://www.thedailyshow.com/vi…
<
p>I fully recognize the market as a legitimate tool and it’s forces as useful phenomena that can be exploited for good, but the zombie mantra (not that I’m accusing you of this) that gets repeated about the markets ability to be a panacea belies the history we should have learned from markets past and foreign. I’m a realist when it comes to markets. They can be useful and even helpful, but they always bare watching and restricting because markets should really be viewed as a tool to be utilized toward an end, not an end in and of themselves. Thus your point about markets usually being the right prescription is well taken, but as has been painfully pointed out by recent events, one would do better with a very healthy bit of skepticism when prescribing market solutions, especially those proposed by monetarily interested parties.
for the education about the health care market. What you wrote makes perfect sense; perhaps health care (or maybe insurance in general) is one of those modes of commerce in which normal market forces don’t provide the best possible opportunities for the broadest number of consumers.
<
p>I’ll note, however, that it seems that “good” or “bad” really depends on the goals you have for the marketplace. If your goal is “universal coverage,” then yes, normal market forces might prevent that from happening due to the nature of commerce involved in the marketplace. If your goal is “increasing profitability for insurance carrier X,” then maybe market forces absent artificial government restraints are best.
<
p>Begs the question, perhaps: should the delivery of health care be de-coupled from the insurance model altogether? Is that even possible? I don’t know enough about the industry; I’ve read that health insurance really boomed as a tied-to-employment thing during World War II, when government restrictions on salaries prompted employers to compete for employees by offering additional compensation packages like health insurance.
<
p>Good stuff, Mr. Lynne, and thanks for the education. I think we found a point of consensus. I depart from my libertarian brethren in that I do not think a free and unrestricted marketplace is a panacea.
… a liberal or even socialist. That being said, I also consider myself a conservative and a libertarian. I believe in not wasting money. I believe in personal freedom. Labels are a great exercise of tribalism, but for me actual solutions are much more important than stroking my id by securing my place in the tribe. It’s been my observation that socialism has been awfully tarnished lately. You’d think that the citizens of allegedly socialist Europe live in relative purgatory. I find that when considering many of the problems that face a society collectively, they are often the product of a problem of collective action paradox, which markets alone are oftentimes ill-equipped to address. With this in mind, I find it perfectly acceptable that socialist governmental solutions can be employed. What’s left is to decide what are the problems that the society wants to collectively address and what problems seem permissible to leave unsolved or are addressed better in private non-collective solutions. It just so happens that most other western democracies (many labeled socialist by the right) have made a collective choice on society’s obligations that differ from ours. Of course there are trade-offs, but if relative happiness is any measure, they are doing something more right than wrong.
<
p>With regards to your specific question: “Should the delivery of health care be de-coupled from the insurance model altogether?”
<
p>England has a system that could be described as such. But effectively this is an illusion IMO. “De-coupling” would presumably mean straight private market ‘fee for service’. The problem is there would be a great many people priced out of that market through no fault of there own, which is exactly the kind of situation that risk spreading is supposed to alleviate. England solves this by making health care itself non-private. In doing so it effectively is functioning in spreading risk anyway, since it’s all payed for by taxes.
<
p>You may find this useful.
Government services are necessary. The public sector provides services that the private sector won’t. Sometimes it provides services the private sector will provide but government does it cheaper or provides fairer access to them.
<
p>Engaging in economic activity collectively can improve society. The “private sector only” model makes that impossible.
<
p>And if you want an example of unavoidable waste in the private sector that we’re all paying for, look at the financial crisis.
And if you don’t think that the government played a HUGE part in creating the current financial crisis, you’re not paying attention.
<
p>In a just world, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd would have been tarred and feathered and paraded through every main street in the nation by now . . . along with the people in private enterprise who came up with credit default sweeps . . . along with the Wall Street executives who give themselves bonuses for destroying their companies . . . along with those in Congress who rolled over and changed the rules so that investment banks could act like commercial banks . . . etc., etc., etc.
<
p>
I enthusiastically agree that “the government played a HUGE part in creating the current financial crisis.”
<
p>The claim that Barney Frank and Chris Dodd were the ringleaders is total horse-pucky.
<
p>In fact, it exemplifies the flagrant distortion, if not outright dishonesty, that so characterizes the fascist (in its technical sense of “the intentional intermingling of corporate and governmental interests) dogma of the Cheney/Bush era and the Reagan era that preceded it.
In their zeal to eliminate red-lining—a wholly worthy endeavor—they opened up Pandora’s Box. They were supposed to be watching the hen house, and they let the foxes in.
<
p>The shit sandwich was created by the big THEM: Dems and Pubbies alike.
Government contributed to the financial crisis by not functioning like government.
<
p>By not regulating. By repealing Glass-Steagall. By semi-privatizing agencies like Fannie and Freddie which then acted too much like private corporations. By being overly controlled by the financial sector.
<
p>I agree that the failure occurred in both political parties. The Republicans championed the free market ideology and the Democrats, all too frequently, followed.
who were arguing for increased regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 2004/2005, and it was the Dems, championed by Barney Frank, who were saying keep your hands off?
<
p>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…
remembers it.
The last thing I want is to be forced to pay for something else. Why do we always assume higher-tech is better? I pay my tolls the old-fashioned way and it seems to work just fine, especially since I’m one who rarely uses the Pike.
Aye, and there’s the rub. It is broke. Therefore, it must be fixed. This weekend’s catastrophe is only the latest manifestation of the current system’s brokenness.
…this weekend’s backup was deliberately created, rather than the cause of natural traffic volume. I’d rather take out the tolls entirely, especially if they are paying for something other than the Pike. I also agree with another suggestion that was made that if the backup goes back a certain distance, just open the gates and get people through.
while Deval was Governor to save money.
Let me check on that tomorrow.
Story
<
p>
I don’t know why you bring up Deval. Last I checked the Turnpike was distinct from the executive.
It must have been quite the surprise that he had influence over the Sen Walsh hiring since the “authorities” are “distinct from the executive”.
<
p>Strange though…
<
p>”Walsh, who stood beside Gov. Deval Patrick outside his Statehouse office as she addressed reporters, said she is withdrawing from the appointment as assistant director at the Massachusetts Health and Educational Facilities Authority. The job had been vacant for 12 years.”
<
p>”Walsh’s hiring on March 12 by the agency’s board drew allegations of patronage against Patrick and stirred anger in a down economy. The board is controlled by Patrick appointees.”
<
p>”Mr. Darnell Williams … In February 2008, he was appointed by Governor Deval Patrick to the Board of Directors of the Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority.”
<
p>I could go on but I appreciate the reminder that the Governor is “distinct” from the authority. BTW, does “distinct” mean someone controls it but leaves no DNA on it?
… for some agency boards. As I recall, his powers for appointments to the T are not total. He doesn’t appoint all of them. Someone correct me if I’m wrong. He can try to gain control of the board, as many executives have over the years, but ultimately the only way to hold the Governor truly responsible for what the turnpike does is to put it under the executive branch.
<
p>And here I was mis-remembering all those cries by previous governors for more control over the Turnpike…. whodathunk?
What I am saying is he has significant influence over them and that influence carries some responsibility. You cannot appoint people such as Authority boards, judges, staffers… without being accountable for those people (IMO).
When you lie as much as you do, pretty soon, you’re going to get caught.
<
p>Mr. Lynne nailed you.
… were full of it when they complained about not being able to control the Turnpike? Can’t have one without the other.
The system is broken, Sunday’s traffic jam is clear evidence of that. If everyone was like you and used the pike infrequently and didn’t use it on holidays contributing to massive backups (which also occur in less spectacular fashion when there isn’t a sick-out going on) we wouldn’t need to solve this problem, but they’re not. My solution solves two problems, it gets rid of the inefficiency of toll booths but allows toll collection to continue.
<
p>As far as pricing goes, sell ’em at cost, or take a loss, make it tax deductible if you use it infrequently enough.
<
p>And Old Scratch, I’m actually not concerned about my or your privacy here. I don’t think it’s a civil right to keep the time you entered and left the turnpike a secret and it isn’t today – cameras can and do photograph your car coming and going. Technology often forces society to redefine privacy. This doesn’t make the misuse of this data a concern, but I’ll knowingly err on the side of improving technology and trying to regulate government behavior.
or mine . . . I’m concerned about it. And if you have no problem giving the government the technology it needs to amass the kind of data profile on you that it could get via a transponder in your car–i.e., every single solitary detail about when and how you travel in your private vehicle—then I submit you don’t really give a snuff about privacy in the first place. It is flat-out none of the government’s business to know that much about me and what I do.
<
p>What you guys seem to be failing to understand is that if you don’t keep the government at arm’s length from you, it’s going to snuggle right into you as close as it can get, and you don’t want it there at all. How soon you all forget that not too long ago, the government could criminalize sexual activity between consenting adults in the privacy of their own homes. You really want to roll back all the progress we made . . . for the sake of expediency? How short-sighted.
<
p>There’s a very, very simple, low-tech solution to this whole thing that doesn’t require a transponder. In fact, there are two: Exact fare lanes. Tokens. Have one booth manned for those who need to make change; all other lanes are exact fare lanes or token lanes. I can blow through an exact fare lane just as quickly as the people next to me blow through E-Z Pass lanes.
you’ll force me to get one of those, too. I do not want a transponder. I have so little use for it that it would be stupid to burden me with yet another thing belonging to the State that I have to take care of and pay for. Also, if you think that privacy issues only arise when you go through a toll booth, technology has solved some “problems” that you don’t know about.
<
p>Raise the gas tax enough to pay for the Turnpike, and take out all the toll booths. Turnpike commuters might even save enough gas to offset the increased tax.
With a $2 billion budget hole to fill you really think the state is going to invest in sensors that can read RFID tags throughout the state to track your whereabouts? If they don’t do that, that’s the only thing your transponder can tell them. Something needs to pick up the radio frequency.
<
p>You’d better throw away your GPS enabled cell phone as well, the Marines might track you. Don’t get a passport, they’ve got RFID tags too. Be sure not to wear clothes, there might be a RFID tag in the tag for inventory purposes. Don’t walk in downtown Boston, much of it is constantly watched through surveillance cameras. If you’ve got privacy concerns, don’t drive on the road.
<
p>Eliminating tolls with an increase in the gas tax is okay, but it doesn’t allow for implementing things like peak demand toll pricing. My proposal would allow tolls to be placed on I93 to get the folks on the North and South shore to pay their share of the Big Dig. It would allow for a system that can be integrated into parking systems (meters and garages).
<
p>
You can get most to do it without mandatory.
<
p> * Registering your car? The transponders are at RMV, and you “get one” unless you fill out form A-47 which is your opt out (don’t want one, already have one, etc).
* Buying a new car? The forms are at the sales desk, and you get a transponder with your license plate unless you fill out A-47.
<
p>If you just make it easier to get one than to not get one, loads of people will just get it. Most people don’t care about privacy, don’t care about $0.50 a month, don’t care about a sick-out. They care about traffic, but only when they’re the ones sitting in it. So, let people opt-out, but set it up so most people choose not to. Then, Easter and Thanksgiving will become much easier.
Good job Patrick and LeBovidge.
<
p>This is what needs to be shown to the public. The holiday “sick in” by the toll takers is now public. No more of this should go on. What if we did this at hospitals or other jobs. If you don’t want to work during holidays, then get a different job.
<
p>It’s in the forefront now thanks to Patrick and LeBovidge, the Turnpike Authority hasn’t done it’s job where this is a common practice and taxpayers have to foot the overtime pay.
<
p>Toll takers need to swap days just like everyone else. The long lines are due to mismanagement and now it’s out there for everyone to see. Guess what, we let it happen and Patrick wants to fix it.
<
p>It’s going to be hack-o-rama time next. Who’s taking bets on a Herald story attacking Patrick, Aliosi, etc. by some insider tip in the coming days? Lets put that in the forefront too, turn the skewers on the reports who push the hack agenda.
<
p>We want reform!
… and EZ Pass is the solution.
<
p>Toll collectors know that they are an anachronism. They are going the way of the manual telephone operators. The Gov and Pike Authority want to phase them out (or at least pare them down very sharply) and they certainly don’t want to sink any more money into paying them. The collectors obviously aren’t happy about that, so they do this wildcat strike to make a point.
There should be a law that if the lines are backed up past a certain point that tolls are just opened up and no tolls are collected. Forcing people to waste that much time, especially on a holiday is simply wrong, never mind the amount of gasoline wasted and extra pollution it caused.
<
p>I think whoever is in charge of the toll booths should loose their job. There should be something in place so this does not happen! I wasn’t stuck in that mess and I’m getting furious just thinking about it.
I’ve been in holiday Pike traffic in the past (thankfully not this weekend), and I’ve always thought that there should be a “wave through” provision required. It would force the MTA to staff appropriately.
<
p>A better solution, though, would be to get rid of tolls altogether. I said it before, and I’ll say it again. What a terrible, punitive way to collect tax revenue.
never mind how much gas gets burned or pollution from traffic waiting in the lines.
I never considered the environmental impact. Like it wasn’t a bad enough situation already…I’m getting mad even thinking about it.
… and can’t believe the low number of Fast Lane users. I can only blame the Turnpike for charging people to have the tag. I know now it is only $.50 a month but that is $6 a year and reason enough for people who occasionally use a toll road to avoid having the tag. This was especially true when the tag cost $25. The pike authority just probably thought it could squeeze more cash out of people. It didn’t work as people avoided the new technology. The pike could’ve saved money in the long run had they not charged anyone to have the tag as people would’ve adopted it earlier and the toll workers would have become obsolete.
<
p>Better yet in a compact region like New England where there are toll roads abound the tag should be handed to the driver when they register their car. Period. Choose how you wish to fill it, via credit card or online payment. It is a matter of efficiency. In the 21st century there is no reason why we don’t have such automation. I am sensitive to the previous commenter who said there should be human backup – of course people from a non-tolled state might pass through needing to fork over greenbacks.
<
p>Lastly, if I were in charge of the Turnpike I’d close half the cash lanes forever and force people into the Fast Lane system. Its a matter of demand vs. supply planning. I’d also put in lanes like those in Jersey where you never have to even enter a toll booth rather keep going at 55 and force the drivers off into the cash lanes.
<
p>Part the battle with taking tolls as a source of revenue for roads is the fact people end up in traffic interminably. We have the technology to abate that its time the Pike get with it. But I guess they have to do that on dozen different fronts.
<
p>Tolls cannot go away as a revenue raising mechanism entirely as the gas tax alternative will see dwindling revenues as gas prices go back up and people drive less, opt for alternatives or buy more efficient vehicles (and gas prices will go back up – see peek oil). Further is it wise to tie almost all the revenue generation to a gas tax. This recession should be a clue – people are spending less, and driving less which equals less revenue. It is like that brilliant idea to fund the MBTA with a 1/4 of sales tax revenue. Didn’t anyone ever think maybe spending and therefore sales tax revenue would constrict? I guess not.
<
p>That presumes we can’t tackle new problems as they emerge. In reality, we can. I’m always baffled by people who get worried about minor problems that may or may not happen several decades from now. It’s one thing to look ahead, it’s another to be paralyzed from fear of the future.
… the Federal Highway Trust Fund is in deficit and needed emergency funding because the federal gas tax is no longer providing enough income because increased efficiency and less driving is already proving to be a revenue threat. In many other places around the country states are moving to tolls to supplement their own state gas taxes. Mass is probably the only state with tolls looking to scale them back.
<
p>I’m not paralyzed from fear of the future – I’m thinking thoroughly and logically. If you take tolls off the roads now and realize down the road you need them back again go ahead and try that one on for size. In Montreal they took the tolls of the bridges decades ago after they paid for the bridge construction and the two main bridges are nearly falling in the St. Lawrence. One of the options that would pay for major repairs or a new bridge? Tolls. Dead on arrival. Folks won’t even hear it.
<
p>It interesting though that you have faith that as new problems emerge in the future we’d have the ability to tackle them. Well we have problems now that people foresaw years ago – were they paralyzed by fear? No they were beat down until they shut up and the problems festered until they became the crisis we have today. Do you see the legislature, governor or authorities rushing to fix them. No they are squabbling and tripping over themselves trying to make good political moves while the drivers and transit riders are suffering.
<
p>Jimmy Carter saw the energy crisis of the 70s as something that needed to be fixed so that we could be prosperous in the future. Instead gas prices headed back down and everyone forgot what had happened. I guess you’d like to forget again and then when $4 a gallon comes back you’ll be wondering why we are in a crisis and looking for quick and swift action to tackle that problem we saw years ago. Well they are about to slash MBTA service so you’ll be lacking that option.
<
p>Any other ideas we should ponder but not put into action because the problem isn’t at the level of crisis? Lets stop putting out fires and be proactive!
<
p>Cars of the 2000s are no more efficient than they were in the Reagan era, when the Carter-era restrictions were lifted. Cars didn’t get more efficient, like they could have, they got faster. This is well documented and reflective of the fact that you haven’t looked at this issue nearly as ‘thoroughly’ as you claim.
<
p>Here’s what’s really going on here: the gas tax hasn’t been going up, all the while costs have skyrocketed. There’s your relatively minor deficit, which was more than dealt with just this year, “emergency” or not (histrionics, much?).
<
p>And, moreover, what’s tolls got to do with it? Was my point not that we can simply deal with emerging problems as they come along — and that all we need is a simple increase to the gas tax?
<
p>
<
p>Perhaps, but only because it’s a lot harder to build the political will to put a small tax on everyone then to point to one small corner of the room and say “fuck them.”
<
p>A relatively small, core group of legislators – and many (rightfully) angry constituents would love to scale tolls back. But you’re really stretching to say this state is “looking to scale them back.” At best, the Commonwealth is looking to make sure they don’t double. Sheesh. (BTW – how is that different from any other state? If you don’t think there’s angry constituents from areas persecuted with unfair and quickly skyrocketing tolls in other states, I have a bridge to sell you.)
<
p>
<
p>Sorry, hate to break it to you, but you’re not. You’re looking at a hypothetical problem far off in the future and getting all worked up about it. That’s neither logical nor thorough, but it is – as I stated previously – paralyzing. That’s right along with the people who want to “fix” social security. There’s nothing to fix. It’s not going to be insolvent for decades. And when it is, there are very, very simple and relatively painless ways to address it. Same with funding our roads. The current gas tax isn’t enough? Raise it. Simple. Fixed. Done. And far more efficient than tolls.
<
p>What does that have to do with anything? Just because I generally don’t support tolls – because they’re bad policy (and they are bad policy) – doesn’t mean I don’t want to fix our transportation system. Indeed, I’m a huge proponent. I would love to see this state and country make large investments in its transportation infrastructure, but there are dumb ways to do it and smart ones. Tolls force some people to pay literally thousands and thousands of dollars a year, instead of everyone paying $50-150 more, depending on how efficient your vehicle is and how often you drive. Meanwhile, a good 10-20% of that toll money may as well be flushed down the toilet, because that’s the cost of collecting it in the first place. Like I said, bad policy.
Both tolls and the gas tax are direct taxes, both are regressive, for some tolls are more regressive, for others the gas tax is more regressive. Tolls are not “bad policy” if deployed properly, just as a gas tax is not “bad policy” if deployed properly.
<
p>You’ve got a beef because you feel paying tolls is unfair to you. Someone living in western mass has an equal beef if raising the gas tax subsidizes the elimination of your toll. Especially if they drive for a living (like a housekeeper, driver, apprentice or other low wage trade) and will have to pay far more than your $150 upper limit with a $0.19 cent increase in the gas tax.
<
p>Tolls are part of the current revenue system and capture folks from out of state who wouldn’t ever pay a gas tax. That alone makes maintaining them a reasonable starting point.
The Wall Street Journal profiled the declining thrist for gasoline Monday: http://online.wsj.com/article/…
<
p>Here are some salient pieces of info:
<
p>
<
p>Massachusetts is pinning more of its hopes on that dwindling fuel demand. I understand your point that gas taxes haven’t risen and that does indeed contribute to the problem. What I don’t get is how you intend to keep up with the gas tax increases with the projected decline in gas consumption. It would be one thing if this was a problem on the horizon for the year 2100, but its 2030 and we have transportation plans in effect that go through that same period: “Journey to 2030” found here http://www.bostonmpo.org/bosto…
<
p>If any part of that plan is to remain in tact then it would be fair to look down the road and see that revenue sources are going to be in place and stable so that we can plan accordingly and effectively.
<
p>As far as tolls being scaled back the last I heard the Gov wanted to nix the tolls west of 128. That is about five exits worth of tolls. The Gov has only stepped back from that line of rhetoric since the legislature stalled his reform package.
<
p>Back to the WSJ:
<
p>
<
p>Doesn’t seem like a minor deficit to me. And it wasn’t more than dealt with this as they didn’t do anything to fix the problem that will bubble up next year. A cut to the skin isn’t healed if it temporarily stops bleeding. That is all that happened the trust fund stopped bleeding. Blow up that 3% drop in revenue experienced last year to the full 22% expected by 2030 and the deficit would much more difficult to sustain year after of stop gap measures.
<
p>Finally, if Exxon thinks declining gasoline consumption will hurt its bottom line shouldn’t we be concerned too?
<
p>
<
p>I’m curious to know what you think about a vehicles mile traveled tax. I personally think that is the solution out from under tolls and gas taxes. There are major kinks to be worked out, but with time that will resolve itself. This is why I look down the road to see the problems so that there is time to research the problem, test it (Oregon is doing so right now) and then implement it accordingly. Its not because I want to scream the sky is falling or because I like to be in histrionic fits.
<
p>I would like to think with our engineering, research capabilities and overall intelligence in this state or nation for that matter we would put those skills and talents to use before we have crises. You have more faith than I do that those skills and talents can be deployed in swift action with correspondingly swift outcomes. I just see what is going on now with our transportation mess as something that was foreshadowed and without anyone paying proper attention to it we now have what we have – deficit laden agencies abound risking the stability of our transportation system.
<
p>We keep identifying problems that will occur on the horizon and shrugging it off until we get there. The outcomes keep getting worse and worse. I so want to open the social security can of worms but I’ll relent.
FastLane and MBTA monthly passes are tax deductible, up to $750 per household per year. So, if you’re filing Sched Y (and why wouldn’t you), this helps a little.
<
p>To be sure, at 5.3%, you’d need $113.20 of FastLane tolls to cover the $6 you pay for the fee. So, in that strict financial sense, it’s not worth it. But, when you combine the time savings with the occasional toll savings (some tolls still cheaper with transponder) with the Sched Y savings, it’s all the more reason to go ahead and get that transponder.
<
p>P.S. The MBTA is funded with 1/5 of sales tax rev, not 1/4. Were it 1/4, they’d be in good shape right now, even have the ability to pay down some debt ahead of time.
The turnpike is just another highway. It doesn’t need to be better painted, better plowed, or better mowed than any other highway in the state. For that matter, it doesn’t need an executive director, an accountant, or several hundred toll takers. Eliminate them all, top to bottom, take down the toll plazas, and watch stories of Easter weekend backups melt magically away. Fund it via the general fund supplemented by gasoline taxes. Tolls are just another way of politicians to pander to the ‘If I’m not using it, I’m not paying for it’ school of public finance. Instead of debating whether or not to have a transponder, or how to manage it, study what mechanism to pay for the Pike’s operation, and pay the Big Dig debt, then stop rationalizing maintaining the Authority with its cushy jobs and self perpetuating, totally unnecessary hierarchy.
The Sturbridge exit is obnoxious in the summer months. Have been stuck there for more that 20 minutes many times. Not a great way to start a 3 hour drive to the Cape. So I can’t even imagine being stuck in a 7 mile back up. I would have been pretty upset. News reporting that Governor Patrick was stuck in it too. He is requesting an investigation.
<
p>Patrick asks for ‘full accounting’ for Pike toll mess
<
p>
If the MTA were reporting directly up through the executive branch to the governor, as opposed to functioning as an independent state agency, he wouldn’t have to demand an investigation. Heads would roll. And everyone would learn a lesson. I hope the MTA is abolished ASAP.
No slap on the wrist here. What if there had been an emergency, someone having a heart attack or a baby being born. Even no emergency, what an incredibly frustrating experience that must have been.
We have traffic jams all the time, tollbooths or no. That’s why emergency vehicles have sirens and flashing lights, and why we build shoulders on roads.
<
p>There’s plenty of legit reasons to have beef — no need to invent new ones.
Pulled the idea out of the sky with no reason to believe that such a situation could occur. Traffic jams by chance are one thing, an intentional one to create chaos is irresponsible and psychopathic.
because “an emergency” isn’t really a problem in this situation precisely because there are shoulders on the roads.
<
p>Like I wrote, there’s plenty of legit reasons. Why create one so easy to dismiss and erode your point?
I just don’t know what to say! I guess you’ve never been in a traffic jam where people are driving down the shoulder so they can get ahead of everyone else, before you know it, the shoulder is another lane of cars. If you’re trying to change my mind about how a traffic jam can seriously compromise a rescue mission, you can stop, because I stand by the point. If your trying to sway others opinions, then have at it.
Really, the traffic was a disaster. For lots and lots of reasons. Whether or not emergeny vehicles could or couldn’t get by doesn’t change the fact that it was a bad, bad situation.
<
p>But, because I can’t help myself, as a long-time Boston driver, I can attest to frequently being stuck on 93 in horrendous traffic and watching an amulence, lights-and-sirens on, trying to get traffic to pull over to…nowhere. It makes me ache every time. Cars do the best the can, but I’ve seen emergency vehicles inching by at what looks to me to be no more than 20 mph. For a while. I’m not as sure of how the Pike is designed because I don’t drive it as frequently. Maybe it’s better. But, if the overall question is, “Can serious traffic slow down emergency vehicles?” on 93 outside of Boston, in cases I’ve seen several times, the answer is yes.
I honestly can’t believe I had to defend my position on that one. I tried to ignore but couldn’t help myself.
You are right that it was a bad situation in many many ways.
After listening to Lebovidge on Dan Rae’s WBZ show last night, it did strike me the difference in government thought v. private sector thought.
<
p>Think we have two explanations of what occurred on Sunday:
<
p>1) This was a deliberate stunt on the part of the Pike to draw attention to their plight.
<
p>If so, heads should roll.
<
p>2) They are so incompetent as to realize that at expected peak times, you don’t willingly cripple your capacity to deal with volume because you don’t want to pay to adequately handle the traffic. Anyone over there ever heard of Operations Research?
<
p>Let’s face it: especially with the none too veiled threat that this will occur in the future, what is a rational driver to do going forward, knowing that you will be facing massive backups at the tolls? Find an alternative to the Pike.
<
p>Certainly there are areas (airport tunnel) that the Pike is the only game in town. But for many others, there are alternatives to getting on the Pike in the first place.
<
p>Heading to NYC from Boston? SE Xprsway to 95; trade the Hartford experience for New Haven (and it doesn’t cost you a dime).
Heading West? Route 2 and then cut over after Sturbridge. Longer ride, sure. But you can make up a lot of time moving rather than creeping at 5 mph for an hour.
Out to Framingham for shopping? Local roads.
<
p>I always thought that part of the bargain of paying the tolls was a faster ride. If I’m going to be facing hour long backups at tolls, kind of takes the bloom off of that rose pretty quick. Heck, think you could have made better time in a golf cart going down the side of Route 20 then being on the Pike from Sturbridge to Boston last Sunday.
<
p>This argument of can’t pay for the overtime is specious at best. If you have 10-20% of drivers in the future searching for alternatives to being stuck on 90, think that you’re going to be worse off than if you adequately staffed for holiday traffic in the first place. Government thought at its finest.
there’s also timeshifting.
<
p>Sure, it doesn’t work for everyone. But, if just a few percent of folks see the backups coming and choose to drive very early in the morning or very late at night, it reduces congestion dramatically. Folks could also take the bus or train — bus reduces overall congestion, train even moreso.
<
p>I’m not arguing that everyone should or even can exercise these options, but certainly some can, and the more who do, the better for everyone.
… for MBTA commuters with the new schedule.
and this coming from someone who has the joy of commuting from Duxbury every day to Needham (Friday afternoons in the summer mean exploring the backways – forget about highways).
<
p>Problem for the Pike is on one-day trip times such as Easter or Mother’s Day for the trip for the family meal. Doesn’t work too well as there aren’t a whole lot of options for travel. A reason why Memorial, Labor Day and Thanksgiving traffic is so awful v. a 4th of July and Christmas.
I have never posted a diary that had so many comments!
<
p>Kate