Transportation bill is "Bad bill"

I would say that the country is waging a war on obesity, yet they don't want to provide the infrastructure to promote walking and biking en mass. Hmmmmm.

As far as it's economic effects I'd have to see the bill first.

Maybe I am misreading this but it sounds like a good thing to me. 

We pay taxes to the federal govt, which then turns around and gives it back to the states if they agree to spend it on certain things and meet certain requirements.  It appears this gives more control back to the states.  Now if we could just get that money going to the federal govt to stay with the states.

Doesn't do what we want to do for bikes, but... we NEED a transportation bill.  This "okay we'll fund a temporary measure every ten minutes" business is BAD for planning, BAD for jobs.  (How do you bid and fund a major construction project without knowing whether it will be paid for or not?)  Ideally these transportation bills would be done with a 5-year time horizon or more, but 2 years is at least something.

SO: I'll take a "bad" bill, from a bike perspective, over another mickey-mouse temporary extension, at this point.  It's all we're going to get through the current House, so let's do it.  Those of you who vote for anti-bike people in Congress can work on changing their minds.  (Given my affiliation and where I live, you would be correct in guessing I don't vote for anyone I send to Washington, so I feel a little powerless here.)