So Governor Kasich

HAS BEEN QUOTED AND sound-bitten as being open to the notion of using bridge tolls to finance the replacement of the Brent Spence bridge (where Interstate 75 crosses the Ohio River at Cincinnati). And it occurs to me that the gas tax was supposed to pay for this — an might have, had politicians not looted the highway trust fund to pay for boondoggles like teapot museums and idiotic boondoggles like a passenger rail line between Sacramento and Modesto. Or worse. What’s next, a spa resort by the Salton Sea?

There’s a lot of that going on. As commenter pointed out at Q&O, a cooking grease — scorn quotes — “crisis” in Arkansas might very well be lessened by proper maintenance of sewer lines. But, of course, infrastructure isn’t sexy and doesn’t get rent-seeking parasites re-elected to public office, so the money taxed away from more-productive sorts to pay for infrastructure maintenance and improvement get stolen to pay for more popular pet projects. And sewerage “crises” engender afafronts to liberty and common sense, such as is reported in the above-linked post.

Which his how you get potholes. Or the thirty-foot breakers in the right turn lane at Marburg and Erie. You know the ones I mean — make your SUV buck like a Conestoga running from the Sioux.

And, as regulars here know, I never voice a complaint without offering up a solution, here’s mine: Stop politicians from looting any pile of money not nailed down.

And quite a few that are — witness the highway trust fund.

Good point, Dolly.

Make any incoming legislator post a financial responsibility bond. He can’t propose or vote in support of any bill that has financial consequences greater than his bond. And, then, when he leaves office, instead of the golden parachute they have now, they forfeit the bond.

Yeah. That’ll work. Until some bright boy figures out how to get around it.

Um. Also a good point. OK. We treat subversion as being a crime on a scale from bad faith intent to treason, depending on the jury’s reaction to the perfidy involved. How’s that? Think it would discourave people from becoming legislators?

Then who would do the People’s business?

That question assumes that “The People” (collectively) HAVE any legitimate business to get up to.

There is that.

Comments are closed.