You might want to read HB 3588 (passed by the House on May 10, 2003 and by the Senate on May 28, 2003).

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlo/78R/billtext/HB03588F.HTM

Pay attention to Section 307.035, which starts out:

CONVERSION AND TRANSFER OF STATE HIGHWAY

SYSTEM PROJECTS. (a) The commission by order may convert a segment of the free state highway system to a turnpike project and transfer that segment to an authority, or may transfer an existing turnpike project that is part of the state highway system, whether previously tolled or not, to an authority if:

(1) the commission determines that the proposed transfer is an integral part of the region's overall plan to improve mobility in the region;

(2) the commission determines that the public has a reasonable alternative route on nontoll roads;

(3) the authority agrees to assume all liability and responsibility for the maintenance and operation of the turnpike project on its transfer; and

(4) approved by the governor.

Yes, it mentions "reasonable alternative routes" in subsection 2, but "reasonable," as usual, is not clearly defined.

Oh, and I take the bus to work (3 miles from my home). It gives me a chance to read every day. I am a big advocate of mass transit, the reduction of pollution, and trying to be as efficient as possible in how I impact the environment. I can't stand Rick Perry, I do not trust him, and I strongly believe that he will sell out the Texas public for his own monetary gain.

You do not have to agree with me, but I hope that you will at least consider the possibility that the Republican powers in Texas could be holding out until after the election in November before announcing further plans to tax existing roads through tolls. The sudden news that Highway 121 in North Texas is (so conveniently) not going to be ready for taxation this Friday, as has been advertised all summer, suggests that perhaps (although probably not exclusively) political manipulation is part of the process.

You first said:

Perry and his cronies are in the process of converting existing free highways (including interstates, thanks to a recently passed law that enables them to tax these roads) to toll roads. In some places, like Austin, there will be virtually no alternatives other than city streets.

That's a far cry from arguing, as you do next, that:

MoPac may no longer be on the list of future toll roads (thanks to a lot of protests), but other existing roads are still part of the plan.

I assume that you're referring to the Oak Hill section of that article. In almost every situation where a toll road is put in, anywhere in the state, there is an existing road that becomes the frontage road to the new toll road. Think 183 up in Dallas. Yes, that existing road was paid for by taxes. That existing road will continue to be free though, and will actually be less-trafficed than it is today.

I'm no fan of freeways, in fact I avoid them in general, but you're stretching the reality of the situation a bit too far to make your point. Besides, in Austin itself, the main freeways will continue to be 183 on the North, Ben White on the South, I-35 on the East and MoPac on the West, all of which are free, unlike your original wild-ass claim.

Not only that, but what's wrong with driving on the city streets for a change? Or, possibly, going out of your way to live, work, shop and play in a well defined part of town instead of needing to drive for miles to get anywhere? Just curious.

If the Dems can't figure out how to stack the cards in this race they really are beyond help. First, they should open up a "Sugarlanders for DeLay" group. Then they should buy a lot of air time right around the election. Then they should run a bunch of advertisements attacking the Republican write-in as too liberal. Finally, they should end the ad with "Sugarland needs a real conservative in Congress. Tom DeLay has represented us for years. We need him there again. Vote DeLay."

It probably wouldn't confuse too many people, but if they could get just a couple of percent it could swing the balance. Karl Rove wouldn't hesitate to do it. Why should the Democrats?

They might also consider having a Democratic partisan temporarily change their name to something like "Sekala-Gibbs" and run in the race as well.

MoPac may no longer be on the list of future toll roads (thanks to a lot of protests), but other existing roads are still part of the plan.

http://www.texasmonthly.com/textalk/article?sid=3740

Then there is the Trans-Texas Corridor mess.

I'm sure we will hear more about these issues after the November election.

He will probably use money from the new toll roads to pay for this latest scheme. For those who have not heard about the toll situation in Texas, Perry and his cronies are in the process of converting existing free highways (including interstates, thanks to a recently passed law that enables them to tax these roads) to toll roads. In some places, like Austin, there will be virtually no alternatives other than city streets.

Er, I actually live in Austin (and am willing to sign my posts), and this just plain isn't true. Sure, there were some rumors a while back about a new stretch of highway that had already received funding, but that was relatively quickly squashed (and that stretch of MoPac is humming along nicely right now, free of charge). The only toll roads going in are new stretches of highway in pretty congested parts of town; par for the course in most other cities.

The other thing he has done today is announce that the new toll road that runs through the North Texas Metroplex will not be ready until mid-November at the earliest. How convenient for him. This man is spending his week maneuvering for power, both for himself and for likeminded corrupt politicians.