The ongoing dispute between our state leaders and the federal government over roadside tourism signs is one of the more moronic wastes of time I have seen from those who run our state and country. And that says something.
You can debate the need and merit of the signs on interstates that advertise New York products and attractions, and whether the expense was justified. Personally, I think they do (did?) not do much for promotion.
However, the federal government's claim that they are a distraction and "unsafe" is laughable, frankly. Signs adorn pretty much every highway on which we drive. On interstates, which are fairly straight and unobstructed, they are less of a distraction.
Drive along state highways and count the signs and billboards, often on winding, two-lane highways in rural areas. They seem to be much more of a distraction on roads that are more dangerous than fairly innocuous signs next to interstates.
Can anyone explain why "distractions" are okay on some roads, but not others?
Meanwhile, countless high-paid bureaucrats on both the state and federal sides continue to joust over this issue.
-- Don Lehman