<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3059" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Below are some 'talking points' I have been working on
regarding mass transit. Now is the time to bring these issues to the
attention of our politicians. Especially in Oklahoma City, with the
upcoming bond and Maps 3 proposals, we need to make some noise to get mass
transit higher on the agenda. Right now it is obviously at the
bottom. The only way this will change is if we speak up. If anyone
else has ideas about talking points for mass transit, please send them so we can
add them to this list.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Bob Waldrop, OKC</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>1. Opponents of mass transit often claim that "cars
and trucks pay their own way, while mass transit is subsidized by the
government". But this statement simply isn't true. If it was,
Oklahoma City would not have to borrow half a billion dollars to fix its roads,
on top of all the other bond issues that have been applied to that same
purpose. Trucks do not pay the full cost of the damage they cause to the
highways. All transportation modes are subsidized by taxpayers.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>2. Funding mass transit takes some traffic off the roads
and thus lessen the life and the maintenance costs of our existing investment in
roads. Mass transit helps us use our roads more wisely and
prudently.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>3. We need a dedicated source of funding for mass
transit operations (which will also bring in more federal money) and we need
strong investments in mass transit in the upcoming bond issue and Maps 3
programs. The present mass transit allocation in the proposed 2007 OKC
bond program is woefully inadequate. We should oppose and vote
against the bond issue if mass transit does not get a larger investment than is
presently proposed.</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>4. Mass transit is PRO-BUSINESS. Workers and
customers need to be able to get to work, shop, dine, and
entertain irrespective of the good will of Middle Eastern fascists and the
price of gasoline. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>5. Mass transit drives SMART GROWTH. It reduces
the need for wasting scarce urban space with acres of parking lots.
Everywhere that commuter rail goes, economic investment follows.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>6. Mass transit is PRO-FAMILY. Many families
struggle to maintain one or two cars because people have to get to work and
shop. With an adequate transportation system, some families could decide
to not own a car at all, and take public transportation instead.
Other families may decide they can do without a second or third car. This
saves these families thousands of dollars every year. That means
less financial stress on families. And that brings greater family
stability, which leads to less divorce, less abuse of women and children,
less alcohol, drug, and nicotene dependencies, less crime, and lower rates of
school drop-outs. Money invested in mass transit can thus have many
benefits not related to transportation. And likewise, a poor mass transit
system, starved for funds, can drive many social problems not related to
transportation.</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>7. Mass transit is important for SOCIAL
JUSTICE. The most important thing that Oklahoma can do to help the
working poor is to fund adequate mass transit. Because the capital and
some of the operating costs are spread over the entire population, the
additional tax burden is minor (especially when compared to the taxation costs
of other, less beneficial programs). </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>8. For Oklahoma City, our original Union Station remains
the best option as the multi-modal transportation center. Moving it
elsewhere (as is presently proposed) will cost the taxpayers additional millions
of dollars. Since money is scarce, it makes no economic sense to waste
money re-creating a facility that is already available.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>9. Union Station makes an excellent south-end anchor for
the "Core to Shore" program. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>10. Oklahoma City should learn from the experience of
Dallas, Denver, and Salt Lake City and not sabotage the rail yard at Union
Station. "Those who do not learn from the mistakes of history are doomed
to repeat them." One of the worrying aspects of present plans is that they
don't take into consideration the experiences of other areas.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>11. Mass transit is a matter of NATIONAL SECURITY.
Thanks to our petroleum addiction, we are constantly at risk of petroleum supply
lines being cut by war and terrorism. Petro-dollars fund the terrorist
crusade that is slaughtering innocent civilians and killing our service men and
women in Iraq and Afghanistan. These wars and threats of terrorism will
continue as long as petro-dollars fund terrorism. More money
spent on gasoline inevitably means more money is available to
terrorists. Attacks that could destroy Saudi Arabia's primary
oil export facilities could send gasoline towards ten bucks a gallon, crash the
stock market and our economy overnight, throw millions out of work, and usher in
a second Great Depression. During the Great Depression, there were
Oklahoma counties where 90% of the property went into foreclosure and was sold
at public auction. Removing this threat to our local economy
requires fast-track, emergency funding of a multi-modal mass transit
system.</FONT></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>