Anyway, got wind of this from a nice mass transit blog called The Overhead Wire. On that blog they link and quote the latest in 1950's transportation ideology coming out of best known right-of-center think tank in the land:
At the same time, many environmental groups, labor unions, consultants, and construction companies are urging the federal government to redirect federal transportation policy toward 19th century transportation options by shifting federal resources from highways and autos to transit and trains, as well as hiking and biking, in the belief that these latter modes--while slower and more costly (emphasis mine) --are more fuel efficient and environmentally friendly. With an opportunity to receive greater subsidies, the transit and train lobbies have moved aggressively to influence Congress and the media, and many in Congress are already promising to push for these changes.Besides the derogatory and frankly stale references to walking, biking and transit as so "19th Century" (travel in Northwestern Europe to see how backwards these modes really are) the rest of the essay does bring up some interesting statistics about mode share and other strategies to reduce auto dependence. My purpose with this post is not to debate them point to point where I disagree (even though I could easily). Why waste my time (I've got something else to post!) when the entire planning profession has proven their argument shallow and false time and time again. Rather I simply wanted to point out the continuation of this right-wing trash talk.
Not that there isn't room for debate. Some of the points this essay makes are interesting. However to continue to write off the three most efficient modes of transportation on Earth that:
- provide equity in transportation
- have been proven time and time again to work all around the world and here in America
- can often be much faster than a car