Bush Rejects Gas Tax To Fund Bridge Repair, Decries Hill Spending

[rodeodance]

Source: wpost



Bush Rejects Gas Tax To Fund Bridge Repair, Decries Hill Spending

By Peter Baker
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, August 10, 2007; Page A03

President Bush yesterday rejected a gasoline tax increase to repair thousands of structurally deficient bridges such as the one that collapsed in Minneapolis, pointing the finger instead at Congress for what he called misguided spending policies that have neglected high priorities in favor of pork politics.



........

"I would hope Congress would become more prone to deliver pieces of legislation that matter, as opposed to being the investigative body," said Bush, who has instructed aides to defy congressional subpoenas, citing executive privilege. "I mean, there have been over 600 different hearings and yet they're struggling with getting appropriations bills to my desk."

Bush was especially agitated about calls for Gonzales to resign over his handling of the firings of U.S. attorneys and other matters. "We're watching a political exercise," he said when asked why he has not fired Gonzales. "Why would I hold somebody accountable who has done nothing wrong?"

..........

Democrats bristled. "For the past six years, Democrats have worked to fund our nation's most critical priorities, including investing in our infrastructure," Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) said. "Unfortunately, President Bush has neglected these needs while turning surpluses into deficits. Now he wants to lecture us about proper investments for our country."


Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/09/AR2007080902334.html?nav=hcmodule

[sakabatou]

1. So who's gonna rebuild it as fast as possible?

Hmmmm?

[Purveyor]

4. Well....Kellogg Brown and Root, a Halliburton spinoff is capable and 'connected'... n/t.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

2. I will repeat myself here:

Dear Leader has identified that killing off citizens, by any means possible, in the most expeditious manner possible, is the quickest and most effective way of conserving energy.

Call it Energy Rationing with Extreme Prejudice.

[Whoa_Nelly]

5. Chimpy doin' The Genocide Dance?

Naw...ya think?

[Ilsa]

15. As long as his mantra of no new taxes is met, it doesn't matter how many

subjects, oops, I mean citizens, are killed.

I wonder if The Psychopath in Charge would feel differently if it had been Laura or Jenna stuck in a car at the bottom of the Ms River? Naaaahhh.

[Whoa_Nelly]

3. Oh sure! Point fingers at a Dem Majority that's only been in place for 10 months

Yeah...sure, Asswipe McFuckwad..it's been the Dems' reckless spending...yeah...I buy that...and that bridge you're trying to sell :grr: :mad: :grr:

[KansDem]

20. "...and that bridge you're trying to sell"

New bumper sticker idea?

If you think conservative GOP values are good for the USA, I've got a collapsed bridge to sell you...

on edit: too offensive in the wake of the tragedy?

[Theduckno2]

6. Is it me ? Isn't Bush's position on the gas tax purely political?

The gas tax is hardly progressive in my opinion and we all know how regressive Bush is in his economic policy. He has to protect the haves and the have-mores from anything like paying their share.

It would seem that given Bush's recent attempts to reinvent himself as a fiscal conservative, :rofl:
he has talked himself into a corner regarding raising taxes (even on the poor).

[DCKit]

12. Unfortunately, the chimp's right.

There's more than enough money in the highway budget to fix the infrastructure, it just gets spent elsewhere... bridges to nowhere, new interchanges in areas that don't need them and other bizarre earmarks.

When we have real accountability, they'll start spending the money the way they should.

[Psephos]

18. Even a broken watch is right twice a day

And this is one of those times. I agree with you completely, the problem is not availability of funds, but instead, how those funds are misused. There's a reason that Congress is polling lower than Bush, and the earmark thing is a big part of it.

If we want to secure control of Congress in 2008, ridding the system of quid pro quo earmarking is essential.

[Nevernose]

7. The new Repub policy apparently lies entirely in attacking "earmarks" and "wasteful spending"

Democrats are big spenders. Yes, we know this already. They tend to spend on things that will not directly enrich people, but instead make people's lives better.

And even many Republicans would rather see a (Republican-sponsored) bridge-to-nowhere than a bipartisan bridge-over-the-Tigris.

[Igel]

16. Last yea's repub congress had nearly twice the

earmarks that the current, dem, congress has.

However, that doesn't mean that the level of earmarks shouldn't be cut by, oh, 99.9%.

AFAIC, cutting the level of earmarks by 50% leaves 50% of the problem in place.

Why are earmarks esp. bad in infrastructure bills? Because they usually require having some level of marching funds from the state. If what the earmark wants isn't something that the state wants to spend money on, either the state has to conform to a given congressperson's political priorities, or the federal money that's been earmarked simply isn't spent in that year. And either, in my opinion, is a moral wrong.

[onewholaughsatfools]

8. gas tax, no need

what is needed is to tax the 500.000.00 plus income in america and tax them to excess for success requires a contribution more than others who have not reached that level........blessings

[Deja Q]

14. Of course, if we were to migrate many of our roads to light rail, this wouldn't be as much an issue

Still maintenance, but wouldn't be nearly as costly...


Still, time will tell.

[truthisfreedom]

9. Decries spending? WHEN HE'S RESPONSIBLE FOR THE GREATEST CRONY SPENDING SPREE IN HISTORY?

What kind of fucktards do we have in the media eating up this shit?

[JDPriestly]

10. Imagine what would happen if the pump price of a gallon of gas

reflected what it really costs us? By that I mean imagine if it covered the cost of the War in Iraq, the war on terror, the cost of health care for the people who work around it, for those of us who breathe polluted air, the costs of exploration, the subsidies, the highways to transport the oil, the environmental ruin . . . . Why if a gallon of gasoline included all the costs related to it, we just might find that alternative energy is not just cleaner but a lot cheaper.

[radfringe]

11. of course we can't afford to repair our bridges over here

we're spending the money over there to build and repair bridges...

[Deja Q]

13. If he doesn't care about the infrastructure, how many tinfoil hat theories lost some of their tin?

As much as I find Reid loathsome, he brings up a very good point.

And if Governor Pawlenty (R) can see the light about infrastructure, why can't the President?

[TheFarseer]

17. he has about one fourth of a point here

A gas tax would go to the general fund and not as some sort of special fund to fix roads, so raising the gas tax really has very little to do with fixing roads. OTOH, it's disgusting how he has done more to increase spending than anyone in the history of the nation and he has the balls to piss on Democrats for wanting to spend a little money on fixing bridges when they are still fishing bodies out of the river after the bridge collapse!

[Vogon_Glory]

19. More Travelers WILL Have to Die

It is a sad fact, but what with the intransigent attitude of right-wing ideologues like George Dubya, Grover Norquist, and all the cowed Republican solons, more travelers WILL have to die because of crumbling roadways, collapsing bridges, and sudden sinkholes until the American electorate gets the message that the Republican Party, particularly its right wing, CANNOT be trusted to see to the upkeep of America's infrastructure.

Republican voters--turn out your dead! :sarcasm:

[CRF450]

21. Unless your whole post is sarcastic

What the hell does sinkholes have to do with this? They can happen anywhere and bring roads/structures down regardless of what condition there in.