Generally speaking, Republicans are not in favor of public transportation. It's expensive, takes a long time to pay for, provides more economic benefits for sectors that support Democrats (like union workers) than support the GOP. New Jersey's Governor Christ Christie is not an exception to this rule, and made his name in part by nixing a major cross-river tunnel to New York in 2010. His argument at the time -- one he stands behind -- is that New Jersey was responsible for far more than its share of the costs.
Yesterday the Government Accountability Office issued a report on that decision which found that many of Christie's claims about the cost of the project were exaggerated, if not entirely false. Democrats, of course, have jumped on the report as evidence of Republican malfeasance. Paul Krugman joined that band wagon in today's New York Times with an op-ed called "Cannibalizing the Future." The Times editorial board added a comment of their own in the same edition.
The back and forth about the costs and Christie's estimates misses the essential piece. The GAO says that the tunnel would have achieved its primary purpose of decreasing the environmental impact of having so many people commute to and from New jersey, and would have provided a needed boost for the infrastructure of one of the most heavily populated places on the planet. Sometimes government must spend money -- yes, the money of "the people" -- to achieve its purpose. Road bills, public transportation bills, bills to fund better water and electrical service should all be no-brainers. Unless one refuses to call Alexander Hamilton a "Founding Father" one can not dispute that such things were the among the fundamental tasks of government when the Constitution was written, and they have been favored by such radicals as Dwight Eisenhower and Richard Nixon ever since.
It's time to stop debating whether government should spend any money at all and get to the actual business of deciding how it should be spent.
No comments:
Post a Comment