Walker Seeking Funds for Rapid Bus Lines

This report <http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/stories/2008/07/28/story1.html?page=1> is a major victory for transit in Milwaukee County.

------------------------------------

Green light on transit? Walker to seek funds for rapid bus lines 

The Business Journal of Milwaukee - by David Doege

"Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker plans to seek $50 million in federal funds for two bus rapid transit lines that could help break the long-running stalemate over upgrades to the Milwaukee area's transit system....

"The funds would be in addition to the $91.5 million in federal funds allocated to the Milwaukee area in the early 1990s that has gone unspent....

"A bus rapid transit line would use new buses that would operate in a dedicated lane at higher speeds with fewer stops than traditional urban bus systems...."

------------------------------------

BusStop - No You Can't

As promised, Scott Walker has vetoed a Milwaukee County Board referendum. The referendum's goal is worthy: property tax relief from parks and transit expenses. Visitors share the costs with a modest sales tax increase. The natives pocket the difference.

To explain why citizens are forbidden a vote in Milwaukee County on their property taxes -- one of the most annoying and unfair taxes ever invented to siphon our wallets -- he ought to step to a microphone and address the citizens with three simple honest words:

"No You Can't."

Laughter would be healthy. History -- which is now moving in the Yes direction - makes this man funny.

There is a way to make a city work for everyone. Walker's politics of "no" are moving against history. Look at him.

Proof of his History Deprived Mind? Well, his veto claim that "There already was a referendum on this issue...."  Lena Taylor actually refused to support a new sales tax.

Where was the Wisconsin State Journal when Tommy was using his wild veto pen? I don't recall the mucky-mucks at the newspaper running daily editorials (or any editorials) calling for the end of Tommy's one-man legislative show. Does anyone else remember or have access to records?

Now, I don't support Doyle's Frankenstein veto any more than I did Thompson's Vanna veto, so I'm not looking to counter the WSJ's current editorials. I'm mainly interested in what appears to be one of the richest hypocricies I've ever seen. It would seem to me that if they support Vanna they've got no right at all to carry on so about Frankenstein.

What say you? Where was the paper?