About | Portfolio | Backup | Archives | PayPal Tip Jar | Amazon Tip Jar | Shop@Amazon
Advertising


Search BillHobbs.com
Stats, Etc.


TTLB Ecosystem Stats
Powered by FeedBurner


« Two Good Bills | Main | Laffer Unplugged »

February 17, 2008

Only One Drink

tnflag.jpgIs Gov. Phil Bredesen misleading the public - and costing the state millions in federal highway dollars - with his stance on proposed tougher DUI laws? State Rep. Stacey Campfield thinks so. First, the Knoxville News Sentinel had this to say in a Tom Humphrey article on Friday:

While there are multiple proposals for strengthening the state's drunken driving laws pending in the Legislature, Gov. Phil Bredesen says he decided to set priorities and focus on just one.

Bredesen's budget plan for the coming year includes $2.2 million in funding to implement an "administrative license revocation" system in Tennessee, but nothing for other DUI legislation - including some recommended by a DUI task for he established two years ago.

"You have to pick from all the good things available," Bredesen said Thursday.

The license revocation proposal, HB4213/SB4196, provides that motorists charged with drunken driving would have their driving license confiscated by law enforcement officers upon arrest. Under current law, the license is surrendered only after the accused motorist is convicted.

Bredesen said members of his task force told him that the legislation is the single most important measure in a package of recommended bills. Bredesen acknowledged that he earlier thought a license revocation bill had passed last year, but "it somehow fell through the cracks."

Among other pending DUI-related bills are measures lowering legal blood-alcohol content levels for conviction in some cases, mandating use of ignition interlock devices for all of those convicted of DUI, a ban on open containers of alcohol in vehicles, and tougher penalties for offenders.

Why won't Bredesen back those proposals, too? Is it because of money? Is he saying that we "have to pick" because these proposals cost money? If so, he's misleading you.

Campfield:

Some of the DUI bills that have been killed, like tougher penalties and the "pass the bottle" bill actually don't cost the state money. They actually bring money into the state from the federal government. This is called a positive fiscal note. The fed is withholding transportation money because Tennessee won't pass tougher DUI laws. You would think with all the gnashing of teeth we hear about there not being enough money for road building that the Gov would be all for these changes. I guess toll roads or raising the price of gas even higher are a more pleasant idea for him.

The governor saying we have to choose is not honest. It is not a lack of money issue that these things are not getting done, it is a lack of will.

Oh, so true.


Comments

So... due process is out the window too. Nazis.

Posted by: BenDover at February 18, 2008 2:05 PM

According to the following, Tennessee is working on three bridges already.

http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2008/feb/09/tdot-costs-outgrow-revenue/

It is clear to me that TDOT works on projects that the legislature is not aware of in spite of the questionable legality of doing so. I suspect that Wilbur Smith Associates was being paid to do toll studies well before they were authorized by the legislature and may be doing that again by hiding their real effors inside the task of studying Corridor K. Wilbur Smith Associates, a world class engineering firm, already studied Corridor K and found that it was well beyond TDOT's ability to afford. So why they are studying it again?

According to this, any government will be able build its own bridge with its own money as soon as it is approved in the Senate. This was passed with a voice vote so nobody could be held accountable. Probably, Memphis or some other large city could set up a toll facility and have the income treated as a business activity. This prevents the debt from being perceived by creditors as being dependant upon the power to tax. Financial stability is instead perceived as flowing from the generated revenue. These business activity bonds are always more costly than General obligation bonds. Cities need to get into the highway fund to build these bridges and I don't blame them, they actually account for most of the money going into the fund.

http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/bills/currentga/asp/WebBillInfo/BillCompanionInfo.aspx?BillNumber=HB1205

Posted by: Danny L. Newton at February 18, 2008 3:34 PM
Post a comment
Comments Policy: Your comment is subject to deletion if it is off-topic or includes foul language or personal attack. Readers, please email me if you find comments that include egregious violations of this policy. Comments may not post immediately - do not post twice!









Remember personal info?






Email this entry to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):




back to top
Advertising

Lamar!

Find the Good
and Praise It
I Also Blog At...
button-fcs-blog.gif
Archives
Blogroll