I-49 in Arkansas

[kphoger]

My idea is do a 10 cent gas tax hike and give every state 1 Billion per electoral vote.

Well, with this thread supposedly being about Arkansas specifically... good luck getting the voters in Arkansas to go along with that proposal!

[US71]

My idea is do a 10 cent gas tax hike and give every state 1 Billion per electoral vote.

Well, with this thread supposedly being about Arkansas specifically... good luck getting the voters in Arkansas to go along with that proposal!

As long as that states taxes "somebody else".

[I-39]

Are they going to renumber the exits between I-40 and Bella Vista once the bypass is complete?

[Scott5114]

I'm curious to see what the incoming federal administration will manage to do regarding roads. There is talk about a big infrastructure project.

We hear this every time a new President comes in, and nothing ever comes of it.

You noticed that too, huh?  It doesn't seem to matter what political party the President is from, either.  Same story.  They enter office with big infrastructure plans, and then that's the last you ever hear of it.

That's mostly because the President can plan until they're blue in the face, but the power of the purse is with Congress. And there are enough penny-pinchers in Congress that any sort of project that spends money is laughably impossible.

That, and the big Transportation Equity Acts used to allow members of Congress to write in specific projects. It's a lot harder to vote against a bill that would specifically build a new freeway in your district. Now, earmarks are against the rules, so nobody has any incentive to get things done–you just vote against the infrastructure bill, crow to the poor deluded saps back home that you're "curbing wasteful spending," and hope to God they don't check what you actually voted down.

[abqtraveler]

I'm curious to see what the incoming federal administration will manage to do regarding roads. There is talk about a big infrastructure project.

We hear this every time a new President comes in, and nothing ever comes of it.

You noticed that too, huh?  It doesn't seem to matter what political party the President is from, either.  Same story.  They enter office with big infrastructure plans, and then that's the last you ever hear of it.

That's mostly because the President can plan until they're blue in the face, but the power of the purse is with Congress. And there are enough penny-pinchers in Congress that any sort of project that spends money is laughably impossible.

Yet the same "penny-pinchers" have no problem voting for trillions of dollars in handouts, as we've seen during the past year with COVID-19. Seems hypocritical to me.

[edwaleni]

I'm curious to see what the incoming federal administration will manage to do regarding roads. There is talk about a big infrastructure project.

We hear this every time a new President comes in, and nothing ever comes of it.

You noticed that too, huh?  It doesn't seem to matter what political party the President is from, either.  Same story.  They enter office with big infrastructure plans, and then that's the last you ever hear of it.

That's mostly because the President can plan until they're blue in the face, but the power of the purse is with Congress. And there are enough penny-pinchers in Congress that any sort of project that spends money is laughably impossible.

Yet the same "penny-pinchers" have no problem voting for trillions of dollars in handouts, as we've seen during the past year with COVID-19. Seems hypocritical to me.

Funding for highways, can take 5-7 years before the first shovel is overturned. When Obama did the "shovel ready", states now spend a lot on studies of getting shovel ready so if there is a windfall.

Funding for transit, airlines and public services are to maintain operations of the existing.

I am not a fan of handouts either, but a pandemic is a little different than a politically derived spending bill.

I personally know several families who have had to switch to working 2 or 3 jobs to not be on the federal dole. They hate handouts simply on principle.

I am also aware of a company that got a payroll protection loan and the economy recovered so quickly they paid it all back plus interest already.

[Bobby5280]

Now, earmarks are against the rules, so nobody has any incentive to get things done–you just vote against the infrastructure bill, crow to the poor deluded saps back home that you're "curbing wasteful spending," and hope to God they don't check what you actually voted down.

Getting rid of earmarks turned out to be a really stupid thing. First, the rule has done virtually nothing to slow down ballooning growth of federal debt. And this is prior to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and its stimulus legislation. Earmarks were an easy, "feel good" scapegoat but pretty insignificant compared to much larger drivers of the deficit. Interest on the federal debt is a giant budgetary cost just on its own.

Perhaps the more costly consequence of banning earmarks: it radically inflamed political polarization. There is very little incentive for Republicans and Democrats to work across party lines on anything substantial because very little REAL deal-making can be done. Cooperating across the aisle is now seen as weak or even an act of betrayal. It's easier to preach to the "base" extremists in a partisan echo-chamber. Both sides now play a zero sum game, treating members of the rival party as an enemy. 40 years ago Republicans and Democrats didn't like each other very much, but the tone (at least in public) was substantially more civil.

[rte66man]

Now, earmarks are against the rules, so nobody has any incentive to get things done–you just vote against the infrastructure bill, crow to the poor deluded saps back home that you're "curbing wasteful spending," and hope to God they don't check what you actually voted down.

Getting rid of earmarks turned out to be a really stupid thing. First, the rule has done virtually nothing to slow down ballooning growth of federal debt. And this is prior to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and its stimulus legislation. Earmarks were an easy, "feel good" scapegoat but pretty insignificant compared to much larger drivers of the deficit. Interest on the federal debt is a giant budgetary cost just on its own.

Perhaps the more costly consequence of banning earmarks: it radically inflamed political polarization. There is very little incentive for Republicans and Democrats to work across party lines on anything substantial because very little REAL deal-making can be done. Cooperating across the aisle is now seen as weak or even an act of betrayal. It's easier to preach to the "base" extremists in a partisan echo-chamber. Both sides now play a zero sum game, treating members of the rival party as an enemy. 40 years ago Republicans and Democrats didn't like each other very much, but the tone (at least in public) was substantially more civil.

I can't emphasize how correct this is. I used to work for the OK Legislature and saw first hand how it all worked. Without the pork barrel horse trading, nothing ever got done when the balance was roughly 50-50.  I never saw the kind of rhetoric that I see today.  Sometimes I despair for our system.

[I-39]

Now, earmarks are against the rules, so nobody has any incentive to get things done–you just vote against the infrastructure bill, crow to the poor deluded saps back home that you're "curbing wasteful spending," and hope to God they don't check what you actually voted down.

Getting rid of earmarks turned out to be a really stupid thing. First, the rule has done virtually nothing to slow down ballooning growth of federal debt. And this is prior to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and its stimulus legislation. Earmarks were an easy, "feel good" scapegoat but pretty insignificant compared to much larger drivers of the deficit. Interest on the federal debt is a giant budgetary cost just on its own.

Perhaps the more costly consequence of banning earmarks: it radically inflamed political polarization. There is very little incentive for Republicans and Democrats to work across party lines on anything substantial because very little REAL deal-making can be done. Cooperating across the aisle is now seen as weak or even an act of betrayal. It's easier to preach to the "base" extremists in a partisan echo-chamber. Both sides now play a zero sum game, treating members of the rival party as an enemy. 40 years ago Republicans and Democrats didn't like each other very much, but the tone (at least in public) was substantially more civil.

I can't emphasize how correct this is. I used to work for the OK Legislature and saw first hand how it all worked. Without the pork barrel horse trading, nothing ever got done when the balance was roughly 50-50.  I never saw the kind of rhetoric that I see today.  Sometimes I despair for our system.

I'd say bring back earmarks, but make them more transparent. The issue before was not so much earmarks themselves, but the corruption surrounding them. Another thing that would help is a constitutional amendment that requires the federal government to enact a full FY budget into law every year, no more of these "continuing appropriations resolutions" that have been running the government more or less for the last 12 years.

*Political rant over*

[Bobby5280]

I'd say bring back earmarks, but make them more transparent. The issue before was not so much earmarks themselves, but the corruption surrounding them. Another thing that would help is a constitutional amendment that requires the federal government to enact a full FY budget into law every year, no more of these "continuing appropriations resolutions" that have been running the government more or less for the last 12 years.

It's exceedingly difficult for congress to pass a straight budget rather than an easier continuing resolution. That's all thanks to the hyper-partisan @$$holes on the far left and far right obstructing the process at any opportunity so they can publicly grand-stand and whore themselves to the gullible idiots in the extremes of their "base."

I'm all for making earmarks more transparent as well. But if we're going to make "transparent" budget reforms in one area it needs to be fiercely targeted to some others.

America's health care industrial complex knows no equal when it comes to corruption and wasting taxpayer money. How many hospitals and clinics in this fake free market system actually advertise any prices? The cost of one specific procedure can change radically from one hospital to the next or even one patient to the next in the same hospital. Let's not forget about all the add-on items that get tucked into a medical bill. I think all that stuff should be made public. Health care is a vital necessity. Yet there are no controls at all over what hospitals and clinics can charge to patients, insurance companies and taxpayers. The runaway costs are making programs like Medicare and Medicaid unsustainable. Meanwhile if a utility company like AEP wants to increase electricity prices for Oklahomans they have to make a case for it in front of the Oklahoma Corporation Commission. They can't just push through the price hike.

Higher education is another industry that has been horribly abusing American taxpayers. The cost inflation rate is nearly as bad in that industry as it is in health care. And that's despite many universities, both "public" and "private" getting giant amounts of funding from taxpayers. Costs for attending a decent college have become so absurd that many universities have become increasingly dependent on attracting foreign-born students from parents with deep pockets. What's really bad is so many fields of study aren't worth the cost of the degree. Meanwhile wage levels for non-college skilled trades like mechanics, electricians, plumbers, etc are rising and even shooting past the earnings levels of some degreed fields.

[I-39]

I'd say bring back earmarks, but make them more transparent. The issue before was not so much earmarks themselves, but the corruption surrounding them. Another thing that would help is a constitutional amendment that requires the federal government to enact a full FY budget into law every year, no more of these "continuing appropriations resolutions" that have been running the government more or less for the last 12 years.

It's exceedingly difficult for congress to pass a straight budget rather than an easier continuing resolution. That's all thanks to the hyper-partisan @$$holes on the far left and far right obstructing the process at any opportunity so they can publicly grand-stand and whore themselves to the gullible idiots in the extremes of their "base."

I'm all for making earmarks more transparent as well. But if we're going to make "transparent" budget reforms in one area it needs to be fiercely targeted to some others.

America's health care industrial complex knows no equal when it comes to corruption and wasting taxpayer money. How many hospitals and clinics in this fake free market system actually advertise any prices? The cost of one specific procedure can change radically from one hospital to the next or even one patient to the next in the same hospital. Let's not forget about all the add-on items that get tucked into a medical bill. I think all that stuff should be made public. Health care is a vital necessity. Yet there are no controls at all over what hospitals and clinics can charge to patients, insurance companies and taxpayers. The runaway costs are making programs like Medicare and Medicaid unsustainable. Meanwhile if a utility company like AEP wants to increase electricity prices for Oklahomans they have to make a case for it in front of the Oklahoma Corporation Commission. They can't just push through the price hike.

Higher education is another industry that has been horribly abusing American taxpayers. The cost inflation rate is nearly as bad in that industry as it is in health care. And that's despite many universities, both "public" and "private" getting giant amounts of funding from taxpayers. Costs for attending a decent college have become so absurd that many universities have become increasingly dependent on attracting foreign-born students from parents with deep pockets. What's really bad is so many fields of study aren't worth the cost of the degree. Meanwhile wage levels for non-college skilled trades like mechanics, electricians, plumbers, etc are rising and even shooting past the earnings levels of some degreed fields.

Good points. I wish I could say more, but it would venture too off into politics.

[Bobby5280]

Yeah, I try to stay as neutral as possible and keep it based on the dollars and cents financial math rather than start sipping the right wing or left wing flavors of the kool-aid.

[kphoger]

so they can publicly grand-stand and whore themselves to the gullible idiots in the extremes of their "base."

Gee, but how do you really feel about it?

[msunat97]

So...back to the roadway itself....is there any activity planned in 2021 to move forward with studies or ROW acquisitions to move the project forward from Texarkana to Fort Smith?  Also, what is the plan to connect the segment in Barling to the I-49 / I-40 interchange?  That Barling segment seems very out-of-place.

[MikieTimT]

So...back to the roadway itself....is there any activity planned in 2021 to move forward with studies or ROW acquisitions to move the project forward from Texarkana to Fort Smith?  Also, what is the plan to connect the segment in Barling to the I-49 / I-40 interchange?  That Barling segment seems very out-of-place.

Nothing concrete for either segment at this point until funds come about.  Both have been considered for Super-2 after 4 lane ROW acquisition, but I would suspect that bypasses around Waldron, Mena, and DeQueen happen before the Super-2 construction starts, ala Fayetteville.  Hope they don't design them in such as way as they need to be rearchitected like Fayetteville's northern one was.

[US71]

So...back to the roadway itself....is there any activity planned in 2021 to move forward with studies or ROW acquisitions to move the project forward from Texarkana to Fort Smith?  Also, what is the plan to connect the segment in Barling to the I-49 / I-40 interchange?  That Barling segment seems very out-of-place.

Nothing concrete for either segment at this point until funds come about.  Both have been considered for Super-2 after 4 lane ROW acquisition, but I would suspect that bypasses around Waldron, Mena, and DeQueen happen before the Super-2 construction starts, ala Fayetteville.  Hope they don't design them in such as way as they need to be rearchitected like Fayetteville's northern one was.

The Fayetteville Bypass was built circa 1970. By the time they got done, they were adding 2 more lanes, plus building north.

ARDOT : building for yesterday, tomorrow .

[abqtraveler]

America's health care industrial complex knows no equal when it comes to corruption and wasting taxpayer money. How many hospitals and clinics in this fake free market system actually advertise any prices? The cost of one specific procedure can change radically from one hospital to the next or even one patient to the next in the same hospital. Let's not forget about all the add-on items that get tucked into a medical bill. I think all that stuff should be made public. Health care is a vital necessity. Yet there are no controls at all over what hospitals and clinics can charge to patients, insurance companies and taxpayers. The runaway costs are making programs like Medicare and Medicaid unsustainable. Meanwhile if a utility company like AEP wants to increase electricity prices for Oklahomans they have to make a case for it in front of the Oklahoma Corporation Commission. They can't just push through the price hike.

Higher education is another industry that has been horribly abusing American taxpayers. The cost inflation rate is nearly as bad in that industry as it is in health care. And that's despite many universities, both "public" and "private" getting giant amounts of funding from taxpayers. Costs for attending a decent college have become so absurd that many universities have become increasingly dependent on attracting foreign-born students from parents with deep pockets. What's really bad is so many fields of study aren't worth the cost of the degree. Meanwhile wage levels for non-college skilled trades like mechanics, electricians, plumbers, etc are rising and even shooting past the earnings levels of some degreed fields.

Good points. I wish I could say more, but it would venture too off into politics.

To your point, when my wife delivered our two kids, I recall the nurses coming into the hospital room each morning to inventory everything in the room:  bedsheets, paper towels, toilet paper, you name it, it was counted. They took that inventory and added it to our bill that was sent to insurance. Can you imagine spending four days in the hospital and being charged $3.00 four times for the same roll of toilet paper that you didn't even use?! That's the kind of crap the hospitals are getting away with, and it blows my mind that no one throws the BS flag on them.

Might I say that defense contractors are just as bad, if not worse. In my nearly 20 years of combined civil and military service, I've seen contractors charge the Government $400 per hour for one of their employees doing work at $25 per hour. You look at the total lifecycle cost for the F-35 has now skyrocketed to $1.3 trillion. To put that into perspective, the entire interstate highway system--all 47,000 miles of it--was built at a cost of $425 billion. What the Air Force is spending on the F-35 program could build and rebuild the interstate highway system three times over!

I apologize for the political rant, and now I'm going to get off my soapbox.

[I-39]

ARDOT : building for yesterday, tomorrow .

I expect nothing less from an organization that can't even bother to build a modern website.

[bwana39]

Not only does ADOT have too much on its plate to juggle that project among the more pressing ones, but there appears to be little pressure to advance beyond the 2-lane initial alignment between Monticello and McGehee, which would, for all intents and purposes, be an expandable project to address local needs.  The reality is that Shreveport-Memphis is the proverbial "red-headed stepchild" of the I-69 corridor; it'll be dealt with well after more vital stuff is behind the various states' agencies -- if funding happens to be available when that occurs.

Yeah I'd say the Arkansas part of 69 is the least important section; traffic wanting to follow the 69 corridor could just use 30, 40, and 49 to get from Memphis to Shreveport. In fact, I feel that that route should be designated Temporary I-69.

Temporary routing... That is such a can of worms. Back in the 1920's and 30's when the US Highway system was getting numbered. US-59 initially had a gap from Boston Tx (The then Bowie County Seat today it is just a part of New Boston, the current county seat) to Page OK because there was no Red River Bridge on what is currently TX-8 and AR-41.. In the thirties, they approved a "temporary routing" following US-67 from Maud to Texarkana, US-71 to Mena, and US-270 to Page OK.  The only change since then was to follow then SH-47 from Linden to Texarkana via Atlanta. This temporary routing is still in place a century later more or less.  Temporary routings create excuses to never build the permanent one.

I am not sure what the originally proposed routing was. I have heard AR-41 to DeQueen AR and US-70 to Broken Bow OK. Then following the approximate US-259 route to Page OK.

[edwaleni]

Having worked with health care (and yes, I am falling off the roadway here), hospitals can't advertise because employer based health care insurance conglomerates negotiate the rates and the contract does not permit them to advertise that rate. That is why you see an EOB with the hospital "cost", then you see a bill with what the insurance paid.

For those without insurance, you *can* call around and ask for a price from different health providers. I know people who have done quite well by it. You ask for the cost first. Then you tell them you are paying cash and you want the cash price. Then you call them back in 48 hours with a competitive price and ask if they can do better.

If you are a hardship case, you can ask for a payment plan. The health care provider has to provide one or they will sell your receivable to a company who specializes in it. If you meet the income requirements, you can get financial aid, just like they do for college.

As for the stuff in your hospital room. You paid for it, its yours.  The TP, the jamas, the sheets, just not the bed and if you have one the TV.

Ok, wheels are back over the shoulder now and headed down the road again.

[Road Hog]

Having worked with health care (and yes, I am falling off the roadway here), hospitals can't advertise because employer based health care insurance conglomerates negotiate the rates and the contract does not permit them to advertise that rate. That is why you see an EOB with the hospital "cost", then you see a bill with what the insurance paid.

For those without insurance, you *can* call around and ask for a price from different health providers. I know people who have done quite well by it. You ask for the cost first. Then you tell them you are paying cash and you want the cash price. Then you call them back in 48 hours with a competitive price and ask if they can do better.

If you are a hardship case, you can ask for a payment plan. The health care provider has to provide one or they will sell your receivable to a company who specializes in it. If you meet the income requirements, you can get financial aid, just like they do for college.

As for the stuff in your hospital room. You paid for it, its yours.  The TP, the jamas, the sheets, just not the bed and if you have one the TV.

Ok, wheels are back over the shoulder now and headed down the road again.

Must depend on the state you're in. In Texas, hospitals advertise freely in print and broadcast. In fact they're some of the more lucrative advertisers.

[Bobby5280]

Having worked with health care (and yes, I am falling off the roadway here), hospitals can't advertise because employer based health care insurance conglomerates negotiate the rates and the contract does not permit them to advertise that rate. That is why you see an EOB with the hospital "cost", then you see a bill with what the insurance paid.

For those without insurance, you *can* call around and ask for a price from different health providers. I know people who have done quite well by it. You ask for the cost first. Then you tell them you are paying cash and you want the cash price. Then you call them back in 48 hours with a competitive price and ask if they can do better.

The price difference between what a hospital prints on a bill versus what insurance companies negotiate can be staggering. The insurance companies still pay out a fortune. But the price without insurance is an entirely different magnitude, which (again) varies widely from one medical facility to the next and one patient to the next. Mere individual patients have very little bargaining power to bring down those prices. Individuals have nowhere near the amount of clout as a big insurer. And individuals rarely have a lot of cash just laying around to get a reduced cash price for an emergency medical treatment.

Patients can only call around to compare prices for elective/non-emergency medical procedures. A person can't exactly call around to compare prices if he gets injured in a car accident or thinks me might be about to have a heart attack. But if hospitals and clinics are more publicly open with their pricing and advertise them then that would influence a patient's decision where to go in an emergency.

Last summer I badly injured one of my fingers in a lawn care accident and wound up having to spend a night in the hospital getting pumped with IV antibiotics following orthopedic surgery. I have health insurance through my employer. It's not a great policy, but better than nothing. The full bill was over $30,000. My share to pay was about $8000. I was able to reduce the bill by 30% by paying cash. I was lucky I had a good bit of savings in the bank.

One of my female friends had emergency gall bladder surgery about 2 years ago. She works in retail and is uninsured. She has a high school age son that has some mental disabilities. Her financial situation is not great. Even with some "charity" write-downs she was still stuck with a bill over $60,000. There is no way she'll ever be able to pay off that debt on her own. Nevertheless she gets hounded by collections people all the time. I wouldn't be surprised if the situation has totally trashed her credit rating.

Must depend on the state you're in. In Texas, hospitals advertise freely in print and broadcast. In fact they're some of the more lucrative advertisers.

I don't see anything like that in North Texas. Wichita Falls is part of our viewing market.

[edwaleni]

Having worked with health care (and yes, I am falling off the roadway here), hospitals can't advertise because employer based health care insurance conglomerates negotiate the rates and the contract does not permit them to advertise that rate. That is why you see an EOB with the hospital "cost", then you see a bill with what the insurance paid.

For those without insurance, you *can* call around and ask for a price from different health providers. I know people who have done quite well by it. You ask for the cost first. Then you tell them you are paying cash and you want the cash price. Then you call them back in 48 hours with a competitive price and ask if they can do better.

The price difference between what a hospital prints on a bill versus what insurance companies negotiate can be staggering. The insurance companies still pay out a fortune. But the price without insurance is an entirely different magnitude, which (again) varies widely from one medical facility to the next and one patient to the next. Mere individual patients have very little bargaining power to bring down those prices. Individuals have nowhere near the amount of clout as a big insurer. And individuals rarely have a lot of cash just laying around to get a reduced cash price for an emergency medical treatment.

Patients can only call around to compare prices for elective/non-emergency medical procedures. A person can't exactly call around to compare prices if he gets injured in a car accident or thinks me might be about to have a heart attack. But if hospitals and clinics are more publicly open with their pricing and advertise them then that would influence a patient's decision where to go in an emergency.

Last summer I badly injured one of my fingers in a lawn care accident and wound up having to spend a night in the hospital getting pumped with IV antibiotics following orthopedic surgery. I have health insurance through my employer. It's not a great policy, but better than nothing. The full bill was over $30,000. My share to pay was about $8000. I was able to reduce the bill by 30% by paying cash. I was lucky I had a good bit of savings in the bank.

One of my female friends had emergency gall bladder surgery about 2 years ago. She works in retail and is uninsured. She has a high school age son that has some mental disabilities. Her financial situation is not great. Even with some "charity" write-downs she was still stuck with a bill over $60,000. There is no way she'll ever be able to pay off that debt on her own. Nevertheless she gets hounded by collections people all the time. I wouldn't be surprised if the situation has totally trashed her credit rating.

Must depend on the state you're in. In Texas, hospitals advertise freely in print and broadcast. In fact they're some of the more lucrative advertisers.

I don't see anything like that in North Texas. Wichita Falls is part of our viewing market.

Agreed. Elective is what i was referring to. If you have an emergency, that is a totally different matter completely. I saw an appendectomy get talked down from $26k to $4200. Everyone is different.

Now if only I can get the ambulance to move faster up I-49 around Bella Vista. Hopefully soon.

[debragga]

I don't see anything like that in North Texas. Wichita Falls is part of our viewing market.

https://www.dmagazine.com/publications/d-ceo/2008/march/how-to-cure-bad-hospital-ads/
https://www.texmed.org/template.aspx?id=2092

[bwana39]

The medical mess is out of place on this thread, even this regional board.

This said, the point is that yes, there is advertising, but it is all brand placement. You cannot compare prices. It only touches the tip of the iceberg as to what the range of services they provide.

There is no real way to determine  the quality of the care they provide. I realize that trying to determine this results in  very objective numbers, that no way resemble a true appraisal of what they actually do in reality. Even "ratings" can be inflated. My wife could say my husband is the best husband I ever had. (in a poll conducted on February 1, 2021 from among all the wives who live in our house.) Ratings are comparative. What was the product being advertised compared to. In this case, I am not just the de-facto winner, I would be the default winner. We got married in our teens.  Even with a greater field of comparison; Stale Pepsi wins against dish soap in a taste test every time.

I remember a candidate for congress  decades ago said that as District Attorney, that he never lost a case.  It was true. As far as that goes, his staff had lost very few. Did it mean he was a great prosecutor? Probably not. It likely meant that he settled every case that was not a slam dunk.  So how does this apply to doctors? If a doctor only takes the easy surgeries, his mortality rate will be far lower than a doctor who takes on the patients that are being passed upon by other physicians because they are too risky.  That is the kind of data that