Senator Clinton wrote an Op-Ed about Public Transportation.
http://www.nydailynews.com/...
Millions of Americans are clamoring for more public transit. In just the second quarter of this year, Americans took more than 2.8 billion trips on public transportation - 140 million more trips than over the same period last year.
I don't agree with that statement.
The more truthful statement would go like this:
Because driving a car is no longer affordable to them, Millions of Americans are turning to public transit as a last resort. In just the second quarter of this year, Americans took more than 2.8 billion trips on public transportation - 140 million more trips than over the same period last year.
Before I keep going, I want to point out this diary does two things. It proves that I'm not just a one trick pony Puma apologist Clinton loyalist, and it proves that I'm equally incorrect about everything else.
But here's the problem. Public transportation in America sucks. People don't clamor to sit down with someone's crotch two inches away from their face for 40 minutes a day. They do it cause they have to. They thought about it a lot, and decided they had no choice.
But what's the point and why is this contentious? It's contentious because I have a serious issue with a certain group of Progressives who SEEM to think that a reduction in the quality of life of the American middle class is unavoidable given the future we face.
I very strongly disagree with that.
But that's not because I don't care about the planet. That's because I think I shouldn't have to choose between saving the planet and putting myself through some malthusian nightmare two times a day getting to and from work. Now. That's elitist. I know that. (good thing i'm not a politician!) One of the things people like to talk about when they talk about Biden is how he takes the train to work every day. And that's awesome, and if I was Biden I would do it no other way. Cause lets not kid ourselves. If you're Joe Biden, sitting at a table, laptop out, ipod on, listening to debussey while you're updating your schedule is a great life.
Wedged between strangers because you couldn't get a seat for 50 minutes is not a great life. When you're accustomed to driving your car, and then have to adjust to that, that means the quality of your life just got worse. You can try spinning it, but that would be putting the proverbial lipstick on the proverbial pig.
Let me explain how this is regressive? It's regressive because I don't just think about my bank account when I consider class issues. I think about other things too. I think about the quality of my life.
But the more straight forward way to put it is to talk about the gas tax. Now because it was a minor skirmish during the primary, I'm going to say something here to show that I don't care about rehashing that. Hillary Clinton pandered like the shameful politician she is on the gas tax. There. Now that we have that out of the way.
The fact remains, a gas tax is a sales tax, which is a flat tax, a tax that applies to everyone, the rich and poor alike, equally and is therefore regressive. Everyone knows I'm the most selfish of voters, and I'm saying if I made over 300k and drove around in my Hummer and you gave me a choice between a 5% increase in income tax (to repair highways) and a 20% increase in gas tax (to repair highways), I'll take the 20% increase in gas tax every day of the week, and consider the less traffic on the roads (those little people in their damn Prius's) an added bonus.
Ok. We agree that in it's inception the gas tax was created by republicans because they wanted to transfer the burden of highway repair to the middle class. Some progressives care about the environment but are they willing to admit that they are shifting most of the burden of the changes we need to go through to the middle class and away from the rich?? When you start seeing Republicans shrug off high gas prices we do know that it's just an updated version of Marie Antionette's "let them eat cake," -----------> "Let them take the bus."
I'm glad we agree on all that. Ha!
Now. to move on.
What am I looking for from a Politician? I am looking for someone to address the quality of our public transportation system. I know Bill Clinton didn't do that. He and Al Gore took a different approach towards the environment and that may have been a mistake. Bill seemed to believe the problem could only be solved, for political reasons (americans will never change), by inventing a PRIVATE transportation vehicle that doesn't kill the planet.
http://www.newyorker.com/...
That may have been a mistake to focus primarily on that (no reason not to do both), but I do know that Bill's and Al's attempts to do that were abandonned the second Bush took office. There is no telling where we would be with respect to that goal if Gore had taken office as was his right to do so.
I am not looking for someone to do what Carter did which was give a malaise speech.
http://en.wikipedia.org/...
I am not looking for someone to tell me that standing nose to armpit with a stranger makes me a better American. I also think that would not pay off politically. Carter's numbers rebounded for a couple weeks after his malaise speech, but eventually people start asking: "Ok what are you doing to make our lives BETTER????"
My bargain with any politician is that if you can provide a public transportation system that is a qualitatively better experience than driving to work, then I'm there. I'm on board. Trust me. I'll pay more for it!! Fighting traffic is no fun. But dammit, it's still funner than public transportation as it exists today. Which is a sad commentary on the public transportation system.
And providing such a system might require doing some things that we don't want. Like raising the price of public transportation. Re-defining it so it only exists for the middle class, and not for both the middle class and the minimum wage earners. Right now, and people with numbers can probably prove me wrong, but I believe the public transportion exists to move fixed and lower income people around. Which is great. They should have a right to that public service. But, and if we're going to accomplish the following goals:
- maintain a decent quality of life for the middle class of America.
- resolve the energy crisis with public transportation.
then we will be re-defining the role of public transportation in America to the more European model that is cleaner, has more emenities, but is not as accessible to people in Europe who can't afford it. (I'm talking about trains here. Urban to ex-urban transit.)
Is that a trade-off people are willing to accept?
Maybe people on more fixed incomes will receive rebates and that's great.
Either way, we re-define the purpose of the system.
I have no conclusions here.
For those who think I'm inherently irrational and think I sound like this:
I provided that video so you can re-read this diary while you listen to it. Which I think would be funny. In a really good way. Cause either way, it's a great song and belongs in this diary. If we're going to re-define the way Americans think about public transportation (which is what that song is ripping on) then we're going to have to create a public transportation system like Europe has. One where you don't feel like a loser the second you use it.
Cheerio.