Minnesota House votes to cut spending...

Minnesota House votes to cut spending on transit programs

There are 62 comments on the TwinCities.com story from Mar 29, 2011, titled Minnesota House votes to cut spending on transit programs. In it, TwinCities.com reports that:

The Minnesota House has voted to slash spending on state transit programs, prompting fears of future rate hikes.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at TwinCities.com.

First Prev
of 4
Next Last
Mark

Manchester, CT

#1 Mar 29, 2011
How are the poor and elderly supposed to get around???? They must have affordable bus services.
Larry Pullmyfinger

Monroe, LA

#2 Mar 29, 2011
ask Bernie Sanders
America is Adrift

Fargo, ND

#3 Mar 29, 2011
Again, this is bad policy because if the poor can't get around, they can't work, and if they can't work, they're going to need more public assistance, and if they can't get public assistance, there will be more homeless folks. Not only that, a lot of people from the suburbs use public transportation. End this service, and now, all of a sudden, you've increased more cars on the road, more wear and tear on the road, and longer commute times to work. The Republicans just aren't thinking at all really. They are letting emotion run them, and that just makes for bad policy.

It makes more sense to stop building roads, which costs a lot more money than public tranist programs.
uggg

Minneapolis, MN

#4 Mar 29, 2011
3,2,1, veto.
Jim B

Saint Paul, MN

#5 Mar 29, 2011
Most of these first-term, Republican legislators come from outstate Minnesota or suburbs where transit is used mostly by a handful of commuters. They have no interest and no insight into why and how larger metropolitan areas need and use public transportation.

The Legislature could have eliminated monies from much less traveled outstate transportation projects and maintenance and diverted it for area transit and road repair in the more heavily traveled nine-count metro area. But that would have been equally unfair!

The only solution is for Republicans in the legislature to be faithful to their mantra of "govenment needs to be run more like a business" and do what small and large businesses sometimes have to to do: raise prices which in government means raise taxes and increase fees!
CorporateCorrupt ion

Broken Arrow, OK

#6 Mar 29, 2011
If people can not get to work they will not pay taxes and the state looses revenue.
Tennessee Tuxedo

Boise, ID

#7 Mar 29, 2011
More Great Reporting!!

Is this an actual "cut" or is it "reduction" in increases??

Don't you think that the tax payers would like to know?
America is Adrift

Fargo, ND

#8 Mar 29, 2011
Jim B wrote:
Most of these first-term, Republican legislators come from outstate Minnesota or suburbs where transit is used mostly by a handful of commuters. They have no interest and no insight into why and how larger metropolitan areas need and use public transportation.
The Legislature could have eliminated monies from much less traveled outstate transportation projects and maintenance and diverted it for area transit and road repair in the more heavily traveled nine-count metro area. But that would have been equally unfair!
The only solution is for Republicans in the legislature to be faithful to their mantra of "govenment needs to be run more like a business" and do what small and large businesses sometimes have to to do: raise prices which in government means raise taxes and increase fees!
I agree! In fact, if we really want to put this into perspective, let's take the typical family example Republicans keep tossing out. Yeah, families cut spending, but once they can't cut spending, families encourage their kids to get jobs, and they, themselves, take on second jobs to help boost their income. And if memory serves me correctly Minnesota has one of the largest populations of individuals working two or more jobs. And when neither of these solutions work, families often apply for better paying jobs so that they can afford the things they need and the things they want. At some point, families realize that they have to BRING IN SOME MONEY, a point our Republicans still keep missing.
bill majors

Washington, DC

#9 Mar 29, 2011
So how long should we keep funding systems that suck tax dollars up. We built the light rail and I sit and watch it drive by with never more than a handful of people who pay 1/100th of the cost.
Truth and Consequences

United States

#10 Mar 29, 2011
Jim B wrote:
Most of these first-term, Republican legislators come from outstate Minnesota or suburbs where transit is used mostly by a handful of commuters. They have no interest and no insight into why and how larger metropolitan areas need and use public transportation.
The Legislature could have eliminated monies from much less traveled outstate transportation projects and maintenance and diverted it for area transit and road repair in the more heavily traveled nine-count metro area. But that would have been equally unfair!
The only solution is for Republicans in the legislature to be faithful to their mantra of "govenment needs to be run more like a business" and do what small and large businesses sometimes have to to do: raise prices which in government means raise taxes and increase fees!
You've demonstrated that you have little critical thinking ability. The truth is that there are not enough people in outstate MN, to elect enough legislators to outnumber those that live in the city. Get it? The only thing that needs to happen to deal with our transportation budget is to stop the light rail, and divert that money to useful things. To your point, I live in a poor neighborhood, and my neighbors take taxis, and use their subsidized programs to pay for vehicle transportation. Some use the buses. Taking more money from people against their will, is not the same as simply raising a price and waiting for someone to buy something - like a business would. In business, you go out of business if your prices it too high. In politics, you don't get reelected if you tax too much. Does this help you see the world with something other than a red sky?
Will

Minneapolis, MN

#11 Mar 29, 2011
T T - This is an actual cut to the transit budget.

Transit in MSP is funded through three primary sources: user fees (fare), a portion of motor vehicle sales taxes (MVST), & state general fund.

This bill COMPLETELY eliminates the contribution from the general fund.

Although small in size, the metro-area transit system is well used by riders who are unable to drive (too young, too old, etc) or who choose NOT to drive (commuters).

It's odd how we don't have enough $$ to provide a well-run useful service but we somehow do have enough $$ to make our highway system wider. If we need to save $$, lets' maintain the roads that we already have and focus on transportation systems that work most efficiently for today and tomorrow!
Tennessee Tuxedo wrote:
More Great Reporting!!
Is this an actual "cut" or is it "reduction" in increases??
Don't you think that the tax payers would like to know?
butch

Wayzata, MN

#12 Mar 29, 2011
Cutting costs is increasing revenues in the private sector.

Given none of the routes is self supporting, time to cut all subsidy and compel the union to get real on wages and benefits if they want to have jobs. Fees need to cover greatest amount of service or change the model accordingly.

This is what happens when the music stops the gravy train and those on the wagon have to get off and help pull if they want to keep getting a check of other people's money!(OPM)

DFL" unreality syndrome" of more money is over and the time for reality checks and day of reckoning is upon everyone!!!
David

Minneapolis, MN

#13 Mar 29, 2011
Funny comment. Hiawatha Line has grown in ridership year after year. For the latest year I could find info about (2009), the light rail served 12.3% of total rider but only required 8.6% of total operating expenses.

Hiawtha seems to be the most economically run part of the transit system around here.
bill majors wrote:
So how long should we keep funding systems that suck tax dollars up. We built the light rail and I sit and watch it drive by with never more than a handful of people who pay 1/100th of the cost.

JTY

Since: Sep 08

Olathe, KS

#14 Mar 29, 2011
Will wrote:
T T - This is an actual cut to the transit budget.
Transit in MSP is funded through three primary sources: user fees (fare), a portion of motor vehicle sales taxes (MVST), & state general fund.
This bill COMPLETELY eliminates the contribution from the general fund.
Although small in size, the metro-area transit system is well used by riders who are unable to drive (too young, too old, etc) or who choose NOT to drive (commuters).
It's odd how we don't have enough $$ to provide a well-run useful service but we somehow do have enough $$ to make our highway system wider. If we need to save $$, lets' maintain the roads that we already have and focus on transportation systems that work most efficiently for today and tomorrow!
<quoted text>
What is a better use of tax payer money? Roads for 99% of commuters or mass transit for 1%? Add into that that hiways are ~80% paid for by drivers while mass transit is only ~25% paid for by riders.
CorporateCorrupt ion

Broken Arrow, OK

#15 Mar 29, 2011
butch wrote:
Cutting costs is increasing revenues in the private sector.
Given none of the routes is self supporting, time to cut all subsidy and compel the union to get real on wages and benefits if they want to have jobs. Fees need to cover greatest amount of service or change the model accordingly.
This is what happens when the music stops the gravy train and those on the wagon have to get off and help pull if they want to keep getting a check of other people's money!(OPM)
DFL" unreality syndrome" of more money is over and the time for reality checks and day of reckoning is upon everyone!!!
Yes cut all corporate subsidies also and close all tax loopholes and force corporations to pay there taxes and stop free loading off the tax payers. Corporations need to get off the gravy train and tax payers welfare program and pay there taxes.
not a utopian

Minneapolis, MN

#16 Mar 29, 2011
Always been a bus person, and this lite rail system is Wrong!! IF your'e gonna do it, then do it for outlying areas....This is just going to put busses Under the bus!!!

I would love to go visit other parts of mn, and this would be the way to do it, NOT by destroying the bus system!
same old whine

Minneapolis, MN

#17 Mar 29, 2011
But since it's the lower income level that uses mass transit, repubs naturally want to cut it. Only affects the "lazy poor"....
Neek

Minneapolis, MN

#18 Mar 29, 2011
I'll start paying attention when they start talking about 25-50% cut across the board!
What a taxpayer sink hole!!!!

All these talks about cuts?!?!!?
Effff...my property taxes increased and the value decreased?!?!?!
Kind of a lose-lose situation for me!
Hopefully, they spend that money on "important" things?!?!?!
What a joke!!!
Common Sense

Shakopee, MN

#19 Mar 29, 2011
I agree with this action. People will have to change plans or make alternate plans. We cannot afford more spending. What do people not get about the State of Minnesota being in a major deficit.

We have all had to deal with, in some way, shape or financial form, incur the fall-out from Democrats and their lust for spending programs. The majority of this spending problem is the feet of liberal democrats and any moderate republicans that voted with these liberals. Please people, we cannot afford spending like we have and are currently. I thank the Republicans for reducing these costs - keep cutting.
Common Sense

Shakopee, MN

#20 Mar 29, 2011
Neek wrote:
I'll start paying attention when they start talking about 25-50% cut across the board!
What a taxpayer sink hole!!!!
All these talks about cuts?!?!!?
Effff...my property taxes increased and the value decreased?!?!?!
Kind of a lose-lose situation for me!
Hopefully, they spend that money on "important" things?!?!?!
What a joke!!!
It is not a joke, it is a crisis. A spending crisis caused by Democrats. Don't blame Republicans, they were elected to a majority last November due to the electorate demanding a balanced budget.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Shakopee Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Review: Home Buyers Inspections Inc (Oct '08) Jul '17 upsethomeseller 2
Review: iLoveKickboxing - Savage (Oct '16) May '17 Tammy D 7
News Prison sentence for notable defense attorney Sa... (May '11) Aug '16 Post them 19
News Minnesota Man Drowns While Trying To Save Famil... (Aug '16) Aug '16 Luda 1
News For inmates, a healing process through journaling (May '15) May '15 cowboy chris 5
News Snubbed Girl, 10, Gets Party of a Lifetime (Apr '15) Apr '15 Xstain Fumblement... 7
News Shakopee Residents Asked to Approve High School... (Jan '15) Jan '15 Eleese Elise 1

Shakopee Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Shakopee Mortgages