Toellner Tells it

40 cent increase in gas taxes?

Yesterday, the Feds announced a proposal that would increase the overall gas tax by 40 cents per gallon over the next 5 years.  That's 200% increase over the next five years.

The reason for the tax increase is the US, at all levels, should be spending between $225 billion and $340 billion in surface transportation each year -- but is generally spending about 40% of that.  The Kansas City area alone has an estimated $5 billion in shortfalls on roads -- including upgrades to K10, K7, 69 Highway in Johnson County, and I-70 in Eastern Jackson County.

That's a lot of $$$.

There was an interesting quote by Missouri Rep. Sam Graves:

"Americans are already paying too much at the pump for gasoline. I believe that we should invest in our roads and infrastructure, but the way to do it is to cut spending on wasteful federal programs."

Hard to argue about wasteful federal programs...however, he's wrong about Americans paying too much for gas. In spite of many, many increases in the price of gasoline over time, Americans continue to trend upward in terms of total travel miles.  I'm no economics genious, but if we continue to buy more gas, in light of rising prices, the price isn't too high...ESPECIALLY when we are burning gas faster than mother earth can make more.  Supply and demand would indicate that Graves is wrong.

Overall, we NEED to do something about the increased shortfall in money spent on transportation.  The gas tax may be the answer.  However, cities, and the Feds, need to be investing in better public/mass transportation systems so that people who cannot afford the higher prices of gas have other options.  We can't afford as a society to just hike up the price of gasoline and not provide other alternatives.  It would be a complete disaster for the lower income brackets (and thus all of us).  All signs point toward inproving public transit.  This means light rail, better bus service, and better rail service between cities (aka Amtrak).

For those of you who don't think that light rail is a viable option given the costs -- I want to remind you that the KC Area alone is looking at $5 BILLION in road improvements over the next 10 years...on non-sustainable traffic improvements. $5 billion, at a cost of $40 million a mile, would build 125 total miles of light rail line over the next decade. That would cover a lot of area.

If this comes to fruition, look for a short-term decrease in urban sprawl, and increased demand for homes closer to the city, and a major increase in demand for public transportation.  Is our city prepared for this?  We should be preparing.  Now.

Some thoughts regarding KC's immenent smoking ban

I've posted before my thoughts on banning smoking in bars. As a general rule, I think that government should allow the businesses to either allow or disallow smoking in their private business at their discretion.  And as a rule, I think people completely underestimate their ability as consumers to affect the change they want.  If people who say they want non-smoking laws would spend their money in non-smoking restaurants and bars, there would be many more non-smoking restaurants and bars....and supply and demand would give us more non-smoking places.

Instead, people want the government to take care of them.

However, I can see the argument that we should ban smoking for the good of the employees at these bars and restaurants. I get the luxury of working in a smoke-free environment.  Unfortunately, these workers don't have this same luxury.

I still don't understand why our first step is to ban smoking in these places instead of pushing for better ventilation systems.  While these are expensive, at least the affected places would have options.  This would completely help with a solution on whether or not we restrict smoking in Casinos (which isn't currently something that is being considered.  I think it's completely unfair in some ways to make different legislation for bars and restaurants and then not enforce it on bars...however, it would absolutely kill the casinos in KC to have a smoking ban as other casinos in the KC area are in smoking-friendly communities).

Given the health of the employees, and the need to keep the casinos open in KCMO, I can, begrudgingly say that maybe we can justify  banning smoking in restaurants (I think bars that make something like 75% of their profits off of liquor, not food, should still be able to allow smoking).

So let's come up with a viable solution so these restaurants may find a "win" in this law.

Non-smoking ordinances will almost instantly create a demand for more, and better, outside dining options where people will be allowed to smoke at their table.  Kansas City, Mo's current laws on allowing sidewalk seating make it completely cost-prohibitive for most restaurants to create this environment.  Current ordinance (Sec. 64-164) has a ton of restrictions on sidewalk seating...and a hefty $250 annual fee for using the sidewalk (that was paid for by the busines). 

Maybe lightning up the restrictions on sidewalk seating would be a win for everyone.  Smokers would have a place to hang out outside their favorite restaurant and smoke. Restaurants would benefit by being more accessible to smokers -- and get additional seating space during the spring, summer and fall months. All of us benefit when KC can have a more vibrant street-life with outside seating that would put us in the same urban atmosphere as more sidewalk-friendly places like Denver and Montreal. 

Could it be a win for everyone?  Possibly.  The least we should do is look at it if we're going to start hurting how local restaurant owners run their businesses.

Words I think everyone should read

This is completely off-topic of my blog, but I read this yesterday and after some thinking, wanted to post a link here because I think it's as touching as anything I've ever read.

This post is by someone who posted under the name G'Kar.  He was a soldier over in Iraq and in the event of his death, left his parting words with one of his co-bloggers.  Unfortunately, he died in Iraq on Thursday.  His final post is here.

One bit of what he wrote:

As passionate as I am about personal freedom, I don't buy the claims of anarchists that humanity would be just fine without any government at all. There are too many people in the world who believe that they know best how people should live their lives, and many of them are more than willing to use force to impose those beliefs on others. A world without government simply wouldn't last very long; as soon as it was established, strongmen would immediately spring up to establish their fiefdoms. So there is a need for government to protect the people's rights.

Read the rest here -- and have a tissue handy.

Hat tip, Marginal Revolution.

Should KCMO start promoting alternative schooling option

I've heard the conversation many times -- from friends of ours that are looking at moving from Kansas City, MO to the Kansas Side of the state line.  "We're moving because 'jr' is going to school next year, and, well...", and everyone nods in understanding.

The reverse conversation is also true, when people say -- "gosh, that bar/restaurant etc sounds really fun, and we really like the local restaurants, but they're so far away, and we can't move to the Missouri side until 'Kimmie' heads off to college.

Maybe its time that Kansas City starts promoting its vast array of alternative schooling options.  KCMO has a variety of great schools for kids to attend. Oh, sure, Rockhurst and Pembroke Hill come to mind as great private schools for those who can afford it.  But there are also a lot of Charter Schools and Academies that cost far less money -- many are even free -- that offer great, and sometimes unique, educations.  Schools like Academie Lafayette and the Foreign Language Academy offer language emersion education that is unique in the area.  Not only does your kid get the opportunity to learn history, math and social studies, but he will also come out being bilingual.  Which in today's culture, is pretty cool.

Other charter schools are also great.  University Academy, Cristo Rey and the new KIPP school offer outstanding alternatives to the struggling Kansas City Missouri Public Schools.  What's more, most of these schools do an outstanding job of meeting the grades on standardized test scores and equal many of their suburban counterparts based on the Kansas City Star's report of test scores for 2007.

Many people seem unaware of the availability -- and overall quality -- of our Charter school system.  I think many people who move from Kansas City, Mo to the suburbs when they have children might consider staying if they only knew about these schools and programs.  I also think people on the Kansas side might consider moving over if they realized these alternatives.

Additionally, based on one recent study, more education of the value of these charter schools may help those who need it most.  Based on the abstract:

We find in both cases that providing parents with transparent information on the academic achievement at schools with their school choice forms results in significantly more parents choosing substantially higher-performing schools

Yeah, duh.  But there's more:

There is growing empirical evidence that low-income parents place lower weights on academics when choosing schools, implying that school choice plans may have the smallest impact on the choices of the families they are targeting.

And:

Suggest a small policy change that lowers information or decision making costs for these parents had a substantial monetary impact on their children's lifetime earnings, adding to growing evidence that small changes in information can greatly affect choices, program participation, and outcomes.

So not only would the middle class folks likely benefit from this increased promotion, but also many of the city's most underpriveledged would benefit from knowing, and understanding, the importance of this improved education.

I haven't completely given up on the KCMO school district, but it has a long way to go. A short term solution may be to help promote educational alternatives that would lead lead to short-term growth of young families in Kansas City and slow the demand for sprawl in our suburbs.  Meanwhile, giving neighborhoods control of their schools to allow to rebuild the city's schools at a grass-roots level would benefit us tremendously. 

Maybe it's time we start focusing on our good qualities in promoting the city while we fix the problems behind the scenes.