Selling Thom’s Toll Road Scheme Proves Difficult

More…

    
Plugin by: PHP Freelancer
This entry was posted in Editorial. Bookmark the permalink.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
13 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
daveburton
10 years ago

So Nicole Revels now calls herself a “Journalist.” That’s pretty funny. She sounds more like a Democrat push-poller (though I guess she might fit in pretty well at the Charlotte Observer).

She starts out with a Big Whopping Lie: that the proposal for I-77 would make people “pay a toll to drive on that road.” Of course, it wouldn’t do that. It would just add new “HOT lanes” with tolls, and allow cars that may not currently drive on high-occupancy lanes to do so if they pay a toll. All of the existing non-HOV lanes would remain toll-free, and the existing HOV lanes would remain toll-free to everyone who can currently legally drive on them. Providing the new HOT Lanes would presumably also reduce congestion on the free lanes, thus benefiting those drivers, as well.

Revel’s dishonesty reminds me of Kay Hagan’s whopper (which was also repeated by some of Revels’ fellow Ron Paul acolytes) that Tillis had called Obamacare “a good idea,” when the truth is that Tillis has always been a consistent opponent of ObamaCare. (Even liberal Politifact called Hagan’s lie “mostly false.”)

As it happens, I don’t support HOT Lanes (for reasons beyond the scope of this comment). But I don’t think you should lie about them like Nicole Revels does, to make the case against them.

Here’s some more info about the HOT Lanes proposal:
http://www.cornelius.org/DocumentCenter/Home/View/117

daveburton
10 years ago
Reply to  daveburton

Huh, there’s something wrong with that link. Trying again…
http://www.cornelius.org/DocumentCenter/Home/View/117/

Nicole Revels (@RevelsNicole)

Who is going to use the toll, Dave? You appear to have missed the point of the video: 99% of people don’t want it and won’t use it. $660 million down the drain and they will be condemned to horrible traffic unless they do wish to pay for what they didn’t want in the first place. Not responsive government. Especially when widening the road where it is needed has been estimated at around $100 million. Legislators wasted money from the highway fund on items NOT beneficial to NC drivers, and now want drivers to pay twice for their road projects. Plus benefit a private company. Shameful representation.

Mitchel Farris
10 years ago

DaveBurton is telling a lie to prop up his boy Tollus.

“The project will do two key things:

Currently, I-77 has one High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane, commonly known as a carpool lane, in each direction within parts of the project’s boundaries. The project will convert those HOV lanes to express lanes.
Crews will also build a second express lane alongside the converted HOV lane on I-77 North and South.
There will be two express lanes on I-77 in each direction, except in the area between Exits 28 and 36. Here, one express lane will be built in each direction.

The existing general purpose lanes will always remain free of charge. Crews will not add or take away any general purpose lanes as part of the project; however, they will resurface these lanes to preserve the pavement and provide motorists with a smoother ride.” http://www.ncdot.gov/projects/i-77expresslanes/

daveburton
10 years ago
Reply to  Mitchel Farris

Michael Farris, if you need new glasses but can’t afford them, try Zenni:
http://www.zennioptical.com/

It is very strange that you accused me of “telling a lie” and then quoted the DOT description which completely agreed with what I wrote. But perhaps you need new glasses.

daveburton
10 years ago
Reply to  daveburton

s/Michael/Mitchel/     Sorry.

BTW, thanks for the useful link.

daveburton
10 years ago

My point, Nicole, is that you lied to the people you interviewed. You told them that the proposal is to make them pay tolls to drive on I-77. That’s not true.

Nicole Revels (@RevelsNicole)

Dave you seem to be confused. Tolls aren’t optional. If drivers wish to use the new i-77 lanes, they will have to pay a toll. The other choice is to not use the lanes that our tax dollars ARE funding, and sit in traffic on i-77. Not much of a choice there. I asked individuals If they would mind paying the toll -- most said they would. Therefore I think the point is clear: the tolls are a racket that residents will not use. I am sorry that your preferred politician will have to lie in the bed that he has made and I am sorry that you find yourself defending policies that you, yourself, say that you oppose in order to defend him! Sad state of affairs.

Nicole Revels (@RevelsNicole)

Also Dave Burton, you may want to watch again. I actually asked the question in several different ways, most of the time asking people, “would you mind paying a toll?” Overwhelmingly people indicate that they do NOT wish to pay a toll on i-77. There were several people, many of them shown, who already knew the plan without me even having to describe what it is. Residents in the area do not like what is being pushed on them. If anyone would like to see more information about the i-77 toll plan, outside of the government- and Tillis-approved messages, you can visit wideni77.org for details.

daveburton
10 years ago

Ms. Revels, I definitely don’t “want to watch again.”

At 0:08 you said, “this relates to the plan to put tolls on I-77, so if you wouldn’t mind paying a toll to drive on that road, if you would just show your support for that plan,” and you held out your clipboard, ostensibly for the lady to sign your fake petition. That was a lie.

After I heard you lie the first time, I stopped the video, for the same reason that I cancelled my subscription to the N&O, years ago.

The primary purpose of the HOT lane tolls will be to finance the construction of additional road capacity, without increasing other taxes or taking tax money away from other uses.

The use of the tolled HOT lanes will be entirely optional. If you’re in a hurry you’ll be able to pay the toll and get to your destination sooner than is currently possible, but if you don’t want to pay the toll you can just drive in the more congested but still free general-purpose lanes.

As I said before, I don’t support the proposal. For one thing, I’ve seen too many cases in which road or bridge infrastructure has been financed by tolls, but when the bonds were finally paid off, the tolls continued, because politicians lacked the will to give up the revenue stream.

However, I do not think that justifies lying about this proposal. The ends do not justify the means. Lying about the project to gin up opposition to it is Wrong.

You lied to that lady to elicit the response you wanted (opposition). That’s no better than Obama and Hagan lying about ObamaCare to get the response they wanted for it (support).

The fact that, like you, I oppose the HOT Lane proposal, and unlike Obama, I oppose Obamacare, does not mean I think lying in opposition to HOT Lanes is any less sinful than lying in support of Obamacare. Except in the rarest of circumstances (e.g., Fräulein, are you harboring any Jews?”), lying is simply Wrong.

Even your description of the video was a lie. You claimed that you “attempt[ed] to find the support for Thom’s I-77 toll road plan.” But, of course, that’s not what you were attempting to do at all.

I’ve noticed that the Ron Paul / Alex Jones crowd lies without apparent pangs of conscience, just like the Democrats do. Y’all just “don’t get” that whole conservative & Christian “virtue” thing, which condemns such behavior.

Nicole Revels (@RevelsNicole)

Hi Dave. I think you made my point even further. I asked people if they would mind paying a toll; overwhelmingly people said they WOULD. Who will use the toll, then, that is being pushed on them whether they want it or not? The only thing that I ever hear from you is when it involves defense of Thom Tillis. Troll on, my friend.

daveburton
10 years ago

Untrue, Ms. Revels. You asked if they would mind paying a toll “to drive on that road” (I-77). But the toll is not to drive on I-77, it is only to drive on new lanes, which currently don’t exist, or which are currently prohibited for use by the people who will have the option of paying a toll to drive on them.

If you really were doing what you falsely claimed you were doing — gauging the level of support for this proposal — then you would have told them the truth: that the general-purpose lanes will remain toll-free. But, of course, that wasn’t your purpose. That was just another lie.