Comments

1
O!-Bamma!, O!-Bamma!, O!-Bamma!, O!-Bamma!O!-Bamma!, O!-Bamma!, O!-Bamma!, O!-Bamma!O!-Bamma!, O!-Bamma!, O!-Bamma!, O!-Bamma!
2
Shovel is the new pork.
3
Wait, what?? Who do we complain to about this?
4
HRC wanted a gas tax holiday - Obama wants to build highways - man got to sit and wonder why, why why.
5
So many naive transit supporters-- of course they gutted transit, they want this passed immediately. And besides, throwing money at projects can get incredibly stupid, like funding transit in states that get more than a dollar back in federal tax revenue.
6
Cars are popular. High gas prices and congested roads aren't. Methinks more groundwork is needed before Obama's going to be willing to spend political capital on transit. Sad, since like gay marriage, a real push from the top could help change widespread public opinion on this, but at the expense of his ability to make good on more pressing matters (Iraq, the economy, Guantanamo, etc.). I agree with Krugman and Yglesias that transit is good for long-term economic growth, and it's that kind of thinking that we really need right now. But it's also a tough fight in D. C. and I'm hoping at least that Obama wants to get some top-priority bills through Congress before starting a fight over transit.

But now would be a good time to head over to whitehouse.gov and leave them a note. On the Urban Policy agenda, there's this:

Build More Livable and Sustainable Communities: Our communities will better serve all of their residents if we are able to leave our cars to walk, bicycle and access other transportation alternatives. President Obama will re-evaluate the transportation funding process to ensure that smart growth considerations are taken into account.


... but there's also this:

Strengthen Core Infrastructure: President Obama and Vice President Biden will make strengthening our transportation systems, including our roads and bridges, a top priority. As part of this effort, Obama and Biden will create a National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank to expand and enhance, not supplant, existing federal transportation investments. These projects will directly and indirectly create up to two million new jobs per year and stimulate approximately $35 billion per year in new economic activity.


Nothing in there about transit, just roads and bridges. Don't give up yet, though. Keep writing and engaging. A groundswell just may get his attention.
7
If only Obama would follow the wishes of the nation and appoint ECB Secretary of Transportation.

God, some days I hate Erica.
8
For better or worse, Obama has never been particularly bullish on transit. He seems to approach the issue from a typically realist viewpoint, i.e. instead of reinventing the way Americans get around, how can we get them into cleaner, more efficient cars?

Getting them out of their cars isn't really--at this point, anyway--on the agenda.
9
@6 for the constructive proactive win.
10
Am I stupid or did Erica totally mischaracterize what she linked to? I read the links twice and don't know where that $17 billion figure is coming from. It looks like some Rep asked for 12.5 billion and we're getting $10 billion. That comes out to a $2.5 billion slash with my math.
11
But new highways can be named after statesmen who aren't dead yet.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.