This page was last updated on May 8, 2004.

Naysayers; Editorial; Beaver County Times; May 2, 2004.

Below is a detailed critique of the above editorial.

This editorial worries that 37% of voters rejected the “referendum to approve $250 million in bonds to repair and modernize water and sewer systems in the state.”  In calling this “cutting-off-your-nose-to-spite-your-face negativity,” the editorial assumes a large part of this vote is simply a knee-jerk “no.”

I cannot speak for everyone who voted against this measure, but here is why I voted no.

To begin with, I approve of municipalities bringing their infrastructures up to snuff.  I agree with the editorial that this “repair and modernization represent an investment in the state’s future.”

Where the Times editorial board and I part company is in funding.  I believe each municipality or regional authority should fund its own responsibilities without involving state taxpayers.  For example, I live in Center Township.  If the Center Township Water and Sewer Authorities (CTWSA) demonstrate our infrastructure needs modernization, I would vote in favor of a responsible proposal funded solely by customers of the CTWSA.

If a community has met its responsibilities over the years and kept up its infrastructure, why should its taxpayers have to pay for those who abdicated their responsibility?  The proposed state bond issue is not fair to responsible communities.

This bond issue is just another opportunity for wasteful spending and will be used by politicians to buy votes.

I might agree with a responsible loan guarantee program to lower community borrowing costs, but that is as far as I would go at the state level.  A program like this would need safeguards to make sure it did not turn into a de facto grant and loan program.

© 2004 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.