The mission statement for the Department of Transportation says it is to ensure a fast, safe, efficient, accessible and convenient transportation system that meets our vital national interests and enhances the quality of life of the American people.
It is kind of atrocious for the Department of Transportation to use fast, and safe, and efficient all in the same sentence as their mission statement. Especially when we have all been taught that driving fast is NOT SAFE, and NOT efficient as it makes the vehicle use more fuel.
What is a grant? The definition I found is; a giving of funds for a specific purpose. With that being said, where does this money originate? Do they just print it up, or what? Tax dollars are spent in hundreds of ways. They pay federal salaries, fund public schools and libraries and ensure that our military is well armed and protected to defend us.
There is also an allotment of revenues that are set aside to fund a variety of causes supporting organizations and individuals. A major portion of grant money is coming directly from taxpayers. So actually when the president, senator, representative or even this administration’s secretary of transportation shoots off at the mouth about how this is a “grant” you – the taxpayer – are still going to pay for it, one way or another.
With the results of the November elections and the republicans gaining control of the house, reports of some of the GOP candidates that won their elections are now saying they don’t want the money they were given for Obamas high-speed rail. Which is very understandable when one takes a closer look at a little thing like how are they suppose to afford it.
The reason I entitled my post “LaHood: TIGER II Grants Removing Trucks From Highways” is because this is one reason that @RayLahood says it is a benefit in his Thursday morning blog-post. Another important benefit? Removing 15,000 trucks a year from congested local roadways. In Chandron, Nebraska the president of Nebraska North Western Railroad (NNW), “There’s nothing cheap about running heavy trucks down a highway. A 120 car train takes 400 trucks off the roads. That’s a reduction in wear and tear and emissions.”
So LaHood touts that these TIGER II grants are creating jobs. But says it is going to be used to “remove 15,000 trucks a year from congested local roadways.” Sorry Mr. secretary, but removing trucks from the road is not creating jobs – as you keep indicating that these grants are creating all these jobs. How many other truck driver – jobs – are you planning on removing?
© 2010, Truck Drivers News Blog. All rights reserved.
This isn’t a new proposal, this has been in the works for years now. What the Big Whigs fail to see is that the logistics don’t work. The only trucks this would affect are the over the road trucks. Loads still have to be delivered and picked up at the rail by trucks. What this would do is create more rail heads, but in the creation of rail heads it slows the delivery time. Right now rail heads require a two week notification of a load and a two week delivery time to its final rail destination.
For years now UPS and other LTL carriers have used the relay system for OTR loads with some success, but as loads increase and delivery requirements change for the customer they now have OTR trucks as well.
In short reducing the amount of trucks on the road will never work as the population continues to grow and expand so must the transportation industry, not shrink as LaHood suggests.