Sunday, November 15, 2009

Green Festival?

Two non-profits, Global Exchange and Green America (formerly Co-op America), hosted the eighth annual Green Festival in San Francisco on the weekend of November 13-15, 2009, at San Francisco's Concourse Exhibition Center. But just how 'green' was this event? Perhaps that depends on how you define 'green'.

Green?

For example, are plug-in cars really 'green'? Or do they just make us feel 'green'?

Woody Hastings, Seeker ...

Woody Hastings, the husband of one of the people who has been integrally involved in Global Exchange for years, stopped to talk to me about the event when we ran into each other.

"We're seekers," he said. "This is where the envelope is pushed on sustainability and where the conversation is happening. It's not happening at the United States Chamber of Commerce," an organization which is widely perceived to be obstructing legislative action on curbing greenhouse gas emissions.

The event had started in 2003 with the intent of bringing together like-minded people who were and are concerned about the planet, knowing that we can't go on, business as usual.

"It's ground zero of sustainability and social justice," he said, adding that the products that are marketed at the event are reusable and made from sustainably-harvested natural resources.

So, I set out to explore ...

How many bicycles can fit into one car parking space?
How many bicycles can fit into 10 car parking spaces?
Do what extent does valet bicycle parking draw people to events versus how many car parking spaces draw people (and their wallets) to events?

The San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, as it always does, had free valet bicycle parking. Considering the rate of bicycle theft and vandalism in this city (at a recent event in Golden Gate Park in which there was no bicycle parking, someone stole my water bottle ...), secure bicycle parking is a really important amenity if you want to encourage people to ride their bicycles more often.


And inside, three sets of bins for waste could be found throughout the event, black for garbage, green for compost, and blue for recycling. People staffed most bins helping people sort their waste correctly.

An obsession with recycling and compost is almost genetic in my family -- one of my sisters is the recycling coordinator in her Massachusetts town, and when she and her family visited last year, she took photographs of bins out on the sidewalks and did everything she could to convince her daughters and husband to go with her to the SF Dept. of the Environment (to no avail).


Here, an exhibitor demonstrates proper disposal of paper cups for me -- they go into the composting bin.

I told these two volunteers that I wanted to volunteer at the bins next year, and they immediately -- and in unison -- said, "No, you don't ... ." Still, they had lovely smiles. But why were they so convinced it was a bad job? Perhaps because ...

... despite all the help, visitors still couldn't get it right. If you look closely, you can see small clear cups inside this black bin. The clear cups were not made from plastic. They were made from something compostable and should have been in the green compost bin.

And the papers cups and plastic cups in this bin should also have been in the green bin, and packaging that was clearly garbage had been thrown into the black bin, and ...


.. outside, people hauled bags out of the bins non-stop. Still, I looked at this operation out back and was impressed and energized. I think I'll sign up for this next year.


I once stumbled upon this surprisingly empty passageway, and wondered why there were so few people mingling in front of the booths. And then I looked at the banners in the booths: capitalism ... Aren't we done with that system yet?

Obviously not -- one of the Democracy Now! headlines from November 18, 2009 read that Wall Street is headed for record profits in 2009, which just boggles the mind considering the unemployment rate and the ongoing fallout from the last three Reaganesque decades of deregulation. Still, people were not flocking to these booths. I think that's because this event is really a rejection of the system that brought us to the edge of the financial abyss that we now teeter on. And I think the speakers underscored that.

In previous years, a space had been cleared in the long main hall for speakers, a tent had been erected outside next to the Concourse, or the event organizers had rented the pavillion across the street. This year, one end of the interior of the building was cleared out for speakers -- a space that seemed smaller than in years past. I don't know if it really was, but everything about the event seemed less bustling than in past years -- perhaps a reflection of the economy.


Here, Ocean Robbins, introduces his father, John Robbins, heir to the Baskin-Robbins ice-cream fortune who turned his back on the family business in order to seek a life of greater meaning -- and a better diet.

Bryant Terry also introduced John Robbins. Terry got turned onto veganism in the early 1990s when he first read Diet for a Small Planet by Frances Moore Lappe. He said that at that time he became a hell-on-wheels self-righteous proselytizer for veganism. He has since come out with his own book, Grub: Ideas for an Urban Organic Kitchen.

John Robbins, author of The Food Revolution, Reclaiming Our Health, Diet for a New America, and The Awakened Heart among other writings.

Alisa Gravitz, founder of Co-op America/Green America, presents Robbins with an award made out of recycled glass and sustainably-farmed wood. On it is this quote: "It is the love in our hearts that underlies and makes possible our greatest healing."

"It is imperative that we enlarge our sense of what's possible ... and [work] to transform what has been an insane cultural disease," he said. I guess he was referring to western consumption patterns at the expense of global ecological balance and personal physical and mental well-being.

And, "The purpose of life ... infinite gratitude to all things past, infinite service to the present, and infinite responsibility to the future ..." You can fill in the dots with words that will express the intent of this partial quote.

I was taking notes furiously, as I always do, but did not catch everything. No matter, I caught his drift.

"Pain ... we're here to feel those things so that it can awaken within us ... [thoughts] about career choices [and shifts in] consciousness ... [so that we can] transform the way we relate to money."

Ok, I'll admit, I'm not sure I have conveyed the exact meaning of what he was saying, but I sure can tell you this: I have conveyed the vague sense of what I am experiencing and feeling as I head into one more year of underemployment and the belief that this current recession -- and the looming resource shortages and ecological crises that confront us -- is going to change the world and the way people live on it forever. And the belief that we have to adapt to these changes -- and do so enthusiastically and with the joy of discovering knew challenges -- or we are doomed.

Amy Goodman

The featured speaker, as it is every year, was Amy Goodman, co-anchor with Juan Gonzalez of the show, Democracy Now!, a public radio alternative to All Things Considered and Morning Edition. Her newest book is Breaking the Sound Barrier, and that was the theme of her talk this year.

Trickle Up Everything

As she had in years past, she extolled the independent media and exhorted audience members to go out and produce public access television shows (a difficulty this year in San Francisco because the public access station has been largely defunded), noting that by chance, the first television broadcast of Democracy Now! happened at a public access station in New York City -- on September 11, 2001. Pacifica Radio, the national station that is linked to KPFA and a number of other independent local radio stations that broadcast Democracy Now!, she noted, is the oldest public radio station in the country and serves as an alternative to National Public Radio for people who wish to avoid stations that receive financial support from corporations that profit from war.

She also talked about the hot button issues of the moment such as congressional efforts to reform the American health care system such that comprehensive, quality health care is available to more people at affordable prices. Of course, the most logical way to do that would be to transition to a single-payer public option system, perhaps through the expansion of Medicare. In fact, she had a sound byte at the ready for this concept: "Drop the age of medicare eligibility to zero. Drop the age of Medicare eligibility to when you're born ... ." But it does not appear that that is what will happen. Based on her observations of the health care struggle so far, she said, "Congresspeople will be rewarded by the insurance industry next year," just in time for mid-term congressional elections.

"It's trickle up everything, " she said. "Those who can least afford it are bailing out those who can most afford it."

Continuing the theme of our broken health care system -- 45,000 people died last year from lack of adequate insurance -- she brought up the Fox television show "24" and its star Jack Bauer. Bauer, played by Kiefer Sutherland, is a member of a counter-terrorism unit who resorts to extra-legal torture and murder in order to protect the country. The show apparently served as a fount of ideas for the folks at Guantanamo Bay in the early 2000s when they were trying to figure out ways to extort information from detainees.

But the legality of torture -- and whether or not it is actually useful at extracting important information -- was not the point of Goodman's reference. She brought him up to suggest that perhaps Jack Bauer -- or some real life character -- could swoop in and save Americans through the creation of a more just health care system. Because Jack Bauer -- no, strike that -- Kiefer Sutherland himself has deep connections to health care reform in Canada.

Sutherland's grandfather was Tommy Douglas, a Canadian politician who "led the first socialist government in North America and introduced universal public health care to Canada," according to Goodman and Wikipedia. He died in 1986, but in 2004, he was named the greatest Canadian by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.

On Global Warming to Global Warring ...

Goodman had some of her own heroes closer to home that she wanted to mention, such as:

-- Bidder 70
-- The Yes Men
-- A Tweeter
-- And the sad parents of Chance Keesling

In December 2008, Bidder 70 -- aka Tim DeChristopher -- a student at the University of Utah, found out about Bureau of Land Management plans to auction off public land and went to the auction, registered as a bidder, and, with the highest bid, bought 22,000 acres worth $1.7 million in money he did not have ...

The Bush administration did not charge DeChristopher, but -- and here's the ironic twist -- the Obama administration IS prosecuting him -- though Interior Secretary Ken Salazar has agreed not to sell the land. DeChristopher's attorney is a former director of the BLM, Patrick Shea, who thinks that the sale of public lands that DeChristopher was opposing was immoral and illegitimate.

The Yes Men -- those merry pranksters who set up websites that imitate the websites of major bad-deed-doing corporations, and then get mistakenly invited to corporate shindigs -- are now being sued by that venerable institution, the United States Chamber of Commerce. Oops!!! I meant venal!

The Chamber is suing the Yes Men for trademark infringement, unfair competition and false advertising. What did the Yes Men -- Andy Bichlbaum and Mike Bonanno -- do? Posing as Chamber representatives Jacques Servin and Igor Vamos, they held a fake news conference to announce that the Chamber was reversing its opposition to climate change legislation, a position that had actually caused many corporations -- including Apple and PG&E -- to leave the Chamber. "Without a stable climate, there will be no climate," was the theme of the conference, said Goodman.

Goodman added that according to James Hogan, author of Climate Cover-Up, "The PR stunt was not pulled off by the Yes Men but by the Chamber of Commerce."

And Copenhagen? When Goodman was speaking, President Barack Obama had no plans to attend the global summit on climate change that is to take place in December. But Goodman noted that he planned to be nearby in Oslo to receive the Nobel Peace Prize right about the same time and thought that his presence in Copenhagen would "elevate the conference" -- but it would be up to us to pressure him into going.

Unfortunately, when I got home that night and checked the news, I saw that global leaders had agreed to postpone trying to come to an agreement in Copenhagen ...

No doubt, there will be many NGOs at Copenhagen. And no doubt there will be many protesters in the streets demanding action. I don't know what the laws are like in Copenhagen -- if they have anything equivalent to our First Amendment that affords us the right to protest -- nay, that demands of us that we exercise the right to protest. Or what their laws are on communicating with other people are or what ...

You all know who Elliot Madison is, right? He was the social worker/anarchist/tweeter at the G-20 protests in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania recently whose Manhattan home was raided by the Joint Terrorism Task Force because he had been tweeting the location and activities of the police to people at the protests in Pittsburgh. Many people are arrested for this 'crime', Goodman noted -- in Iran, that is.

"People need to be free to dissent, " she said. "That is what makes this country strong." And yet, Madison's legal battles are just beginning ...

Goodman moved on to the topic of American military culture and the very high suicide rate within the ranks of enlisted men and women. Unfortunately, the families of enlistees who commit suicide induced by post-traumatic stress disorder do not receive condolence letters from the Defense Department -- and certainly not from the president. But the policy not to send letters of condolence is not the primary problem -- it is the very high rate of suicide within the ranks of the military. When the parents of one such suicide victim, Chance Keesling, went to Dover Air Force base to retrieve the body of their son, the master sergeant who greeted them told them to speak out, that he was receiving suicide bodies almost daily. They have, but the solution to the epidemic of suicides, Goodman knows, is to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan.

"The immediate withdrawal from the wars that Obama inherited is the only way to stop the bleeding," she said.

Starhawk

Later in the day, I walked in as spiritual teacher Starhawk was delivering the tail end of her talk:

-- No to coal
-- No to oil
-- No to nuclear ("It's not a solution," she explained. "It's a way for some people to get rich.")
-- No to 'gimmicks' (I'll admit, I did not catch the exact word she said, but again, I think I caught the drift. 'Gimmicks' -- like cap 'n trade?)

-- Yes to renewables
-- Yes to conservation (in other words, not using energy. And I happen to think that at a minimum, 95 percent of our future energy sources are going to come from this -- not using it in the first place!)
-- Yes to energy efficiency
(She did not mention the energy dividend -- the sense that people feel like they have extra energy to expend elsewhere when the save other energy through efficiency. That is NOT what people should do with their dividends -- and it's why we need to tax all energy use.)

-- Take the coal and oil executives and retrain them to do useful jobs
-- Localize production
-- Build soil (CO2 comes from the destruction of soil, she said.)
-- Listen to the voices of indigenous people
-- Save water
-- Educate and train

And most of all:

-- Build community ...

(She most have read The Transition Handbook, by Rob Hopkins.)

Bernadine Dohrn and Bill Ayers

In my own mind, I mostly think of Dohrn and Ayers as two members of the radical, 1960s organization, the Weather Underground, whose goal was the violent overthrow of the U.S. government. Ayers now admits coming a long way from the dogma of the Weather Underground. He is currently a professor at the University of Illinois in Chicago, but he remains a constant student of the daily political scene, noting that President Barack Obama is a "pragmatic, middle of the road, compromising politician."

"That means he'll respond to us if we're serious about ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, creating a just health care system, and addressing climate change ... ," Ayers said.

Ayers also observed that Obama started out as a community organizer. "Our task," he continued, "Is to build a very large, powerful social movement" -- just as Obama did in order to get elected in the first place -- that can demand American demilitarization, true health care reform, and meaningful steps to address climate change.

His wife, Dohrn, noted that the Uribe administration of Colombia had just signed a new military accord with the Obama administration, giving US troops access to seven air force bases in Colombia for the next ten years. I guess if you are a part of the American military culture -- and you've just been kicked out of the country next door (Ecuador) -- you are of course going to be on the make for new hunting grounds. And if you're a new American president and you do not want to rock the boat, you say fine, let's sign ...

But the expense of maintaining foreign military bases -- recent headlines have been announcing that it costs $1 million annually for every US soldier on the ground in Afghanistan (68,000, with a potential increase of 40 to 50,000 in the works), and that does not include the costs of them coming home with injuries or PTSD -- is invisible to many Americans, according to Dohrn.

"Our job as activists is to make that military budget visible." She suggested that a constant ticker tape should be going across the top or bottom of newscasts to get the word out.

"Our challenge for the whole century," she added, "is to figure out how we in the U.S. can learn to live in harmony with the rest of the planet. The U.S. is not going to economically dominate the rest if the world throughout the century. That's a fact."


After a stint in the Peace Corps in the 1960s, John Perkins started a career with corporations whose goal was to create economic empires in which wealth and power would be concentrated in the hands of a few multi-national corporations and their accomplices within governments.

He became, in his words, an 'economic hit man.' As an economic hit man, he represented corporations that sought entry into developing countries with resources they coveted. He would convince the rulers of those nations to sign on to loans to build infrastructure provided by the corporations he represented. The infrastructure -- bridges, highways, or privatized water systems -- would benefit a few of the wealthy people in those nations and the foreign corporations, but not the vast majority of the citizens. In fact, the citizens would be strapped with debt to pay off the costs of financing the projects. In order to pay off the debt, the governments would be coerced into selling their coveted natural resources cheaply to the corporations.

And when that coercion didn't work?? Why then the jackals would be sent in to assassinate the leaders, and when the jackals failed, then the military would be sent in. Which is exactly why the U.S. is in Afghanistan and Iraq, he said.

These tools of power -- first the hit man, then the jackals, and lastly the military -- are being used to create a global empire, said Perkins, one that is run by unelected rulers who are not accountable -- except in the market -- to those over whom they rule (citizens of client countries and customers who purchase their products).

He is now on a campaign to break down what he calls this "mutant, predatory form of capitalism."

"This world has been stolen by a few very powerful and rich people. And we need to take it back," he said.

Perkins has abandoned his career as a hit man and become involved with the Pachamama Alliance, and organization that seeks to combine economic sustainability with indigenous know-how.

Rod Laughridge, producer and host of the San Francisco public access television show, "The Voice." Or he was until public access got defunded ...

Earth Justice, a law firm that fights for biological diversity and habitat protection and all that other good stuff -- because the Earth needs a good lawyer, they say.

Better World Club, An Alternative to the AAA

Don't tell anyone, but even I get in cars once-in-a-while. Sometimes I even drive them, but you really can't tell anyone that. I even owned a car once, and I think I belonged to AAA. All that is long in my past, but for those of you who insist that at the very least your heart will stop beating and at the worst, you will no longer be sexually appealing to the opposite sex (or the same sex, as the case may be) if you do not have four wheels to your name (and I do not mean two bicycles), then you might want to consider joining the Better World Club instead of AAA. BW is a 24/7 roadside assistance service for people with broken down cars -- or smashed up bicycles!!! Imagine that! Roadside assistance for your bicycle flat or worse!

Working for a Better World ...


Better World disparages the environmental record of AAA -- in particular its refusal to support the Pavley bill in 2002, the first-in-the-nation law cutting tailpipe exhausts linked to global warming (it got caught up in battles at the federal level over the right of the EPA to regulate CO2 and the Bush administration's lingering refusal to acknowledge the science out there and admit that global warming was -- and is -- linked to human activity). BW also allocates one percent of its revenue to environmental cleanup and advocacy.

Peace!
... and fresh vegetables ...

One of my favorite parts of the festival. For $5, you can get three tokens that can be used in exchange for samples of the wine ...


The Merchandise, Global Exchange booth

Green Dentristy?
These women are associated with the Green Dentistry practice on Post Street in San Francisco. According to a brochure, the walls in their practice are made from "recycled sheetrock and acoustic insulation that was made from recycled denim jeans." Instead of x-rays, they use digital imaging technology to capture images of teeth, and they use bio-compatible fillings for cavities.

I had no idea ...

Kijiji Grows, Urban Garden Systems


Kijiji

Kijiji

Our Mission ...

"Kijiji grows is a collaboration of farmers, artists, engineers, builders and educators who advocate for aquaponic gardening. Our mission is to bring aquaponics to the San Francisco Bay area and change lives through urban sustainable growing systems in schools, homes and businesses."


Joni Eisen, at it again ...

Joni volunteers for Clean Money Campaign, and at the moment, this group is concentrating on getting the California Fair Elections Act passed next year. It will be on the June 8, 2010 ballot. This is a public financing measure for candidates who agree to abide by some requirements on reporting and on who can contribute to their campaigns (like, no lobbyists, their clients, or anybody else. Yup, anybody else -- no private contributions at all).

Park Merced?

How did these folks get in here? Park Merced is strangely suburban development in San Francisco's southwest sector. I've never found it to be particularly compelling, but preservationists are apparently up in arms over plans that the owners and managers have for "major redevelopment, which would involve demolishing the garden apartments in favor of higher density replacements, and reconfiguring the streets."

And its opposed by ordinary renters like myself because, right now, Park Merced rents are regulated according to our local rent control ordinances, and rent control provides our only abundant source of affordable housing in San Francisco. But when you demolish a rent-controlled unit or 50, by law whatever is built to replace that unit (or 50) will not be rent-controlled. The powers that be in San Francisco have been trying to drive out middle and low-income people for decades and decades. In response, members of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors passed rent control in 1979. Since then, the powers that be have done everything that they can to chip away at rent control -- and force people to move into the less expensive but habitat-destroying suburbs of the Central Valley and elsewhere.

So what's green about these exhibitors?

Well, according to their advertising the renovated complex (without rent control or with less of it) is going to be a green utopia!


Hippie dudes with a sustainable printing operation.



The human figures in this photograph are converging on a photograph of the art that was exhibited behind the speakers podium.

Miniature sculptures made from waste paper.

Artist Ari Derfel saved his trash for an entire year and then turned it into this mural.

Up close, you can identify the bottle caps, scraps of paper, buttons, and so on. From a distance its a human figure emerging from a froth of garbage.

The Plastic Bag Monster, of course ...

Vegan delicacies ...

Dan Porras, founder of Planetwize; Music, Media and Products That Create Change ...

Porras has been a musician all his life, but he got a masters degree in Ecological Economics at the London School of Economics. He is now working at what he calls "the intersection of sustainability, technology, and music." He works with musicians -- including Balkan Beat Box, Thievery Corporation, and Brazilian Girls -- to align their music with causes that they care about. A certain percentage of the profits from the sales of the CD that he was hawking at the festival, for example, will go to Solar Aid, a British organization dedicated to bringing clean, renewable energy to the poorest people on the planet. In the past, Planetwize has also partnered with Farm Aid, Global Exchange, Oxfam America, Next Aid, and Rainforest Action Network, among other organizations.

I didn't buy much, but I did stop here to get some organic cotton napkins for family members.

And I bought a notebook from Kevin Davis, pictured here, because he said he remembered me from last year. And because he said he would plant a tree in collaboration with the Arbor Day Foundation for every notebook that he sold. Here, he's holding up a box of colored pencils. I bought boxes of these for my nieces and nephews last year. The pencils are not made from wood -- they are made from tightly rolled newspaper. His company is called O'Bon, and if I remember correctly, the business is a family enterprise.

The Final Word???

Individuals and groups that did not have booths inside hung around outside. Among them were Stephen Wilson and a group of 9/11 conspiracy theorists. Wilson told me that he is a commercial real estate consultant with three science degrees -- to lend his belief that 9/11 was an inside job some credibility.

"How can we create a green world and stop global warming if the people aren't even in control of their own government and are being lied to by their own government?" he asked.

"First you need the truth. Then you can identify effective solutions to the problem."

I personally don't think we have the whole truth about September 11, 2001. But I'm not waiting for the entire truth to be revealed to me before I start changing my own lifestyle to reduce my carbon footprint.

Thursday, September 24, 2009

Peak Oil and the ARRP

Mini Peak Oil Library

On Thursday, Sept. 24, 2009, the New York Times published a story about new global oil finds, with the title: Oil Industry Sets a Brisk Pace of New Discoveries. That would make September 24 seem an inauspicious day for members of San Francisco's Peak Oil Preparedness Task Force to present their final report to members of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors Government Audit and Oversight Committee.

In fact, the total number of barrels estimated to have been found equals only about 10 billion (globally people consume about 84 million per day, around 22 million in the U.S. alone). And that 10 billion, said task force chair Jeanne Rosenmeier, pales in comparison to past discoveries; discoveries of new oil fields peaked in 1962, and oil analysts acknowledge that in order to extract the oil found recently in the Gulf of Mexico, the price of a barrel of oil would have to be $60 or more -- on September 25, 2009, according to MSNBC, the price of a barrel of oil was $66 on the New York Mercantile Exchange -- as new discoveries are no longer the "light sweet crude" that has been so easy or inexpensive to extract for decades.

Peak Oil is defined as the point at which demand and supply meet, the amount of oil extracted from the surface of the Earth begins an inexorable path downward, and the price of a barrel of oil (and therefore a gallon of gasoline) begins an inexorable path upward. It is anyone's guess when that moment will arrive globally (it arrived in the United States in 1970). Predictions range from 2010 to 2013 to a plateau starting around 2020. But no serious analysts are doubting that it is on the near horizon or that humanity needs to make preparations to transition from ways of life now dependent on oil -- which has been inexpensive to extract from the surface of the Earth since 1859, when oil was first tapped on industrial levels, up until now - to ways of life independent of cheap energy.

A few years ago, an energy analyst with the United States Department of Energy, Robert Hirsch, produced a report famous in peak oil circles, The Peaking of World Oil Production: Impacts, Mitigations, and Risk Managment. Still, few elected officials or bureaucrats are talking about the inevitable arrival of expensive oil (and natural gas), and what it means for the survival of our species let alone the western lifestyle. Thanks, then, to San Francisco Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi who sponsored the creation of San Francisco's task force.

As the task force report explains, the arrival of peak oil (and natural gas) means much more than just more expensive gasoline, as so much of the 20th century's "green revolution" and the vast increases in food production have been based on fertilizers made from natural gas, and soils tilled with gasoline-run tractors and gasoline-run harvesters. This realization -- and the fact that this fossil fuel-based "green revolution" is in large part responsible for the exponential increase in the human population -- should stir fear in the hearts of all able-minded adults. What's to happen when one of the most basic necessities of humankind -- food -- becomes prohibitively expensive for the 6.4 to 7 billion people currently on the planet because of the increasing cost of oil?

New England's Lowell Mills, Birthplace of the American Industrial Revolution

There's no doubt in my own mind that the arrival of peak oil will mean, at the very least, the end of the Industrial Revolution based on fossil fuels (let's hope we do not step up our coal mining) and very likely the end of the Industrial Revolution period ("renewable" sources of energy such as wind, solar, and geothermal now provide Americans with less than one percent of all our energy needs), and that we're going to have to figure out how to go back to more local and regional production models for everything from food to clothing.

TIGER: Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery

In the meantime, I'd like to see local officials beginning a conversation with state and national officials -- and getting some of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act money (H.R. 1, the stimulus package passed by Congress, and signed by President Obama, in early 2009) dedicated to preparations for peak oil and not just thrown willy nilly at "shovel ready projects" -- as appears to have happened along Geary Boulevard in San Francisco where, a few years from now, this artery is scheduled to be transformed by Bus Rapid Transit anyway.

And on an individual level, I'm rededicating myself to gardening, as the report recommends that San Francisco step up its local food production.

Sunday, September 20, 2009

San Francisco Peak Oil Preparedness Task Force to Present Report

Whether San Franciscans like it or not, the days of "happy motoring" -- as author James Howard Kunstler puts it -- are likely over. That's because since extraction of petroleum from the Earth's surface started on an industrial level in 1859, humanity has used up about half of the world's oil reserves, and because it is unlikely that there will be a technological fix to replace the energy that we have gotten from oil. Since that is the likely case, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors convened a citizen body to study how best the city and county should prepare for life after oil (and natural gas as well). Members of the Peak Oil Preparedness Task Force will present their recommendations to the Government Audit and Oversight Committee of the Board of Supervisors on Thursday, September 24, 2009 (details below). Members of the public are invited to attend and testify.

Where & When: Task Force Members will present their findings to members of the Board of Supervisors’ Government Oversight and Audit Committee in the Legislative Chamber – Second Floor of City Hall at 1:00 PM on Thursday, September 24.

Who: Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi, who sponsored the resolution to create the Task Force; Task Force Members and supporters; Supervisors Eric Mar and Sophie Maxwell.

What: The San Francisco Peak Oil Preparedness Task Force, a citizen advisory body formed by the Board of Supervisors in 2007, will deliver its final report to city leaders. The 125-page report analyzes the City’s vulnerabilities to shortages of petroleum and natural gas and warns about the dire consequences of inaction.

Peak Oil is the point in time at which maximum global production of petroleum is reached, after which point production begins an inexorable decline, regardless of demand or price. With most of the planet's easily extractable (and therefore cheap) petroleum already used, geologists and oil industry insiders caution that reserves of petroleum and natural gas will soon begin that decline, if they haven’t already.

The Task Force presentation will be followed by ample time for public comment. Come and be part of this historic occasion. San Francisco is the largest city in the country to formally consider the consequences of Peak Oil. The report's 91 recommendations need to be prioritized and implementation begun. Our actions are being watched from around the country and as far away as Germany.

Saturday, September 19, 2009

PARK(ing) Day in San Francisco; September 18, 2009

A map of pre-registered PARK(ing) Day locations in San Francisco.

Friday, September 18 -- PARK(ing) Day -- was unusually hot in San Francisco. I headed out on my bicycle at about 11 a.m. to meet friends who had secured a parking spot on Valencia Street in San Francisco's Mission District. Along the way, I encountered ...

... a spot taken over by the Mission Greenbelt Project, and ...

... another occupied by the Free Design Clinic (thank you Sarah A.!), and ...

... the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition which had set up two sets of bicycle parking racks on 18th Street near the Bi-Rite and Dolores Park, and ...

... Dan Nguyen-Tan on the Funcycle (of course!) ...


... and an artist outside his shop/studio.

I figured not many people would be documenting PARK(ing) Day in North Beach, so I decided to go there and do that myself, pushing my bicycle up through the Grant Avenue Gate to Chinatown first ...

... and then on to North Beach. On Grant Avenue in North Beach, north of the intersection of Columbus and Broadway, I discovered that many shop owners had decided to participate in the event, including the owners of this wonderful haberdashery/custom clothing store, Al's Attire.

In front of Al's Attire. One of the owners, the man in the blue shirt to the left, told me the turf had come from somewhere down the Peninsula. He had been watering it.

This is Amy Nanola, in front of her store, Lola of North Beach.

The owners of The Enchanted House also participated, but they were reluctant to participate in a photo shoot.

Many of the trees for PARK(ing) Day had come from Friends of the Urban Forest.

Croquet ...




Up at the end of Grant Avenue, I encountered Man-About-Town Bob Planthold lounging in front of Macchiarini Creative Design & Metalworks Gallery ...

And Robin Levitt -- the two of us had actually sort of been shadowing each other throughout the day ...

Back at Al's Attire, the owners agreed to pose ...


When I returned to Valencia Street, I discovered this moving PARK(ing) Day installation in front of the collectively owned and operated Modern Times Bookstore ...

Back at the spot where friends had decided to park, Thomas and Adam took lawn chairs into the Valencia Street median and relaxed for a spell.

Others jumped rope and hula-hooped.

The San Francisco Bicycle Coalition actually set up two spots: one on 18th Street and another on Valencia in front of Four Barrel Coffee Co. On Valencia Street, the coalition must have taken over at least five spots.

And how many parked bicycles can fit into one car parking spot? Lots, I think.

So many other local businesses participated in this wonderful day -- including Green Wall Roof and Flora Frame, but I didn't always get photographs (or I got lousy ones!).

Thursday, September 17, 2009

The Center for Public Integrity on the Renewal of the 2005 Omnibus Transportation Bill

The Center For Public Integrity

More Projects

Support the Center

The Transportation Lobby

A Lobbying Free-for-All

Thousands of Special Interests Vie for Influence on New Transportation Bill

By Matthew Lewis | September 17, 2009, 5:00 am | ShareThis | Print This

Speaking from a lofty perch not unlike the one he occupies as ranking Republican on the House Transportation Committee, Florida Representative John Mica looked out upon a sea of familiar faces last month at a suburban Dallas hotel. Mica was addressing the 12th Annual Transportation and Infrastructure Summit.

The conference drew more than 1,100 participants, including many veterans of transportation lobbying wars past and present. Among them: the CEOs of three of America’s freight railroad giants, directors of some of the West’s largest transit agencies, and representatives from engineering giants like Kansas City-based HNTB.

“I’ve had a chance to hear from some of you,” Mica told the luncheon crowd of transportation pros as they picked at a dessert of tiramisu, “but not all of you. … I need your ideas.”

“We don’t know if we can succeed,” he went on. “We know we can’t succeed without you getting involved.”

And with that the legislator pointed a finger back at the transportation lobby — a lobby that spent at least $45 million in Washington in the first half of this year, mostly to “help” Congress craft a new transportation bill. That lobby is composed of almost 1,800 entities of all stripes, and they are employing at least 2,100 lobbyists with intimate knowledge of transportation politics to make their cases.

Over the past two decades, this is the way federal transportation policy has largely been made in America — by a quasi-private club of interest groups and local governments carving out something for everyone, creating a nationwide patchwork of funded bypasses, interchanges, bridges, and rail lines with no overarching philosophy behind it. “Applying patches to our surface transportation system is no longer acceptable,” Congress was told in January 2008 by a bipartisan commission lawmakers themselves had created. That commission described Washington’s present policy as “pursuing no discernible national interests other than … political imperatives.”

Now, as this year’s version of the transportation debate reaches a crescendo, all of those interests are back at the table, some of them waxing eloquently about the need for reform. And some emboldened outsiders are trying to change the game, struggling to change the debate so that this year’s bill will really be different.

But don’t bet on it.

Crafting a New Bill as the Clock Ticks

imageU.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, foreground, applauds the billions spent on transportation projects through the stimulus bill, but critics say the lack of a long-term transportation bill could undermine those investments.For all the players in the transportation debate, the future should be, well, now. Or in a couple weeks, to be more specific. For when the current transportation law either expires on October 1 or gets briefly extended by Congress, everyone involved will begin to feel the pinch. The federal transportation system is essentially both broke and broken, out of money and in desperate need of coherent national vision. Both Congress and the transportation lobby knew crunch time was coming, and now it’s here.

By law and tradition, every few years — but rarely on schedule — Congress passes and the president signs a transportation bill that authorizes hundreds of billions in spending. That money either gets funneled back to state transportation departments and metro areas; gets earmarked for specific priority projects around the nation, or is handed over to the U.S. Department of Transportation. Individual projects, from bridge replacements and highway construction to bike lanes and bus purchases, get funded through this bill. The issue doesn’t get the attention of, say, health care, but it pretty much affects every American who leaves the house and goes anywhere. Most directly, however, it affects the public institutions that manage the nation’s transportation network, the private firms that build it, their unions, and the real estate development, manufacturing, retail, and freight-hauling industries that alter their behavior based on the network.

And therein lies the rub, in terms of crafting policy. These groups, not surprisingly, are the ones spending money to shape a new bill in their favor. And much of the lobbying power is set up to favor the way things have always been done. That usually means roads over other types of transportation. And it usually means a bit more money for everyone. But more importantly, it means picking winner projects here, there, and everywhere rather than setting over-arching goals and demanding efficient outcomes. The roster of special interests paying lobbyists in 2009 to influence either the law itself or the annual appropriations decisions that are made based on the bill’s framework is indeed formidable. Among them:

  • More than 475 U.S. cities and 160 counties in 44 states, the vast majority of which are seeking funds for specific projects that will be chosen by Congress;
  • More than 55 local development authorities nationwide;
  • At least 65 private real estate development companies;
  • At least 95 transit agencies, 25 metro and regional planning organizations, a dozen individual states, and the national lobbying associations for all three groups;
  • More than 75 road and auto organizations, from highway builders and car manufacturers to interstate coalitions and trucking interests;
  • At least 65 construction and engineering groups, from cement and steel makers to domestic and foreign-owned builders;
  • More than 45 rail organizations, 50 shipping companies and ports, and 45 additional transportation-centric outfits, from bicycle coalitions to research groups;
  • More than 140 universities seeking funds for local projects or campus research centers.

Based on disclosure data, the Center estimates that lobbying expenditures on the new surface transportation measure and associated appropriations bills exceeded $45 million for the first half of 2009 — a spending pace on a par with lobbying over climate change. Hundreds of public and private groups spent more than $19 million on lobbying teams focused solely on surface transportation, but that drastically understates the total amounts being spent by local governments, businesses, and other interest groups around the nation. Most transportation lobbyists also work on other issues for their clients, and are not required to report how much they are spending on each specific issue. But even if just 10 percent of their time was spent on transportation in the first half of 2009, that would add more than $26 million to the total spent on transportation lobbying, pushing the total past $45 million.

Traditionally, when transportation bills were debated, all these interests got along pretty well. A pair of political scientists who examined the aftermath of a similar transportation lobbying effort a decade ago found both public and private interests “were able to downplay disagreements” over which projects received more money and who spent the dollars “because everyone’s financial needs were satisfied by the monetary size” of the bill. Back then it was $218 billion. Then it reached $286 billion in 2005. The magic number being talked about now? $500 billion.

Desperate Search for New Money

Today, however, a special urgency will make a kick-the-can approach tougher than before, because the pot of money that funds these bills has run dry. And that has the lawmakers and the lobbyists in a panic, say longtime observers. Transportation bills are largely paid for through the highway trust fund, a decades-old revenue raiser that relies predominantly on the federal gas tax. Congress has left that tax rate untouched since 1993. So when the trust fund reached empty, it forced the government to transfer $8 billion from the Treasury last September just to keep the current spending stream going. It needed another $7 billion this July. The funding crisis has forced the transportation lobby to take a long look in the mirror. “The minute the spigot gets turned off you’ve got a lot of problems,” said former Transportation Department official Stephen Van Beek, who now directs the Eno Transportation Foundation, a nonprofit transportation research group.

imageRep. James Oberstar’s proposed six-year, $500 billion Surface Transportation Authorization Act would spend $50 billion on a national high-speed rail system, similar to those in Europe. (Image courtesy of Sebastian Terfloth/Published under Creative Commons)Yet the House Transportation Committee, led by powerful chairman James Oberstar, a Minnesota Democrat, proposes spending $500 billion on a brand new, six-year bill. Everybody from progressives to builders supports the higher number, given the need for new roads, new bridges, new rail lines, and new jobs. But the Senate and the Obama Administration are balking, cowed by the imperative of finding new revenue — which would likely mean more taxes. Even maintaining current spending levels through 2018 would require $100 billion more than the trust fund can take in, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Finding new money would require picking from a host of politically risky options. In the short term though, the conversation usually circles back to raising the price at the pump. “We should have indexed [the gas tax for inflation] a long time ago,” Oberstar said at a hearing in July. But doing that in the midst of a severe recession seems more than a bit unlikely.

Special Interests, Not National Interests

For the moment, everyone’s talking a good game about new ways of doing business. “The good news is that the financial part of the system is so broken that marginal change probably isn’t going to get the job done,” said Van Beek.

Beneath that consensus, however, lies trouble. Once hard decisions are made about which projects are funded, and which aren’t, and which funding mechanisms make sense, and which don’t, things are likely to get ugly. The reason: transportation policy and transportation bills provide depressingly stark proof that all politics is local. Each city, state, and more specifically, congressional district, has its own battles to fight.

“The system we have now is not one of national needs,” said Roy Kienitz, undersecretary for policy at the U.S. Department of Transportation, “but one that responds to local and regional decree.”

There are a couple of key issues here, say experts. The vast majority of federal transportation dollars get divided among states and localities to spend as they see fit. Congress has created dozens of programs through which those dollars flow from Washington. But there’s no overarching national strategy. And few goals. Beyond that, though, a portion of the pot is doled out project-by-project in Washington. So lots of groups end up hiring lobbyists to bypass local and state decision-makers and get projects funded federally. “High-priority projects,” the most visible of earmarks, accounted for $13.5 billion in the last bill, almost five percent. But that doesn’t include earmarking within the bill’s other narrow programs.

“The decision making process for transportation is like a piece of Swiss cheese,” said Anne Canby, director of the Surface Transportation Policy Partnership, a reform-minded advocacy group. “If you don’t get what you want, you go some place else.”

“All it is about is how much money everybody gets,” Canby said.

The $286 billion transportation bill passed in 2005 authorized 6,371 high-priority projects — nearly quadrupling the number contained in the previous measure. The so-called “Bridge to Nowhere,” a project linking Ketchikan, Alaska, to nearby Gravina Island, was one of these high-priority items included in 2005, for $223 million. Another Alaskan bridge, the Knik Arm, received four earmarks of its own totaling more than $229 million.

That process has become a runaway train of expectations and perceived entitlements, experts say, as lobbyists go hat in hand to individual members of Congress, assuming that the member will have little or no trouble delivering on the desired project. “The expectations are so high, that an individual member can deliver these projects,” said one Democratic Senate staffer familiar with transportation policy.

Congress doesn’t seem in any hurry to give up its prerogatives, however. Rather than pick no projects, they propose to simply pick them better. Critics argue the process needs to be depoliticized entirely. “Instead of going through the earmark process,” former Republican Senator Slade Gorton wrote last month in an op-ed, “projects should be funded based on merit … as components of a larger program of metropolitan investment.”

Lobbyists and their Ties to Lawmakers

Until that actually happens, though — and many wonder if it ever will — hundreds of individual actors will continue their pursuit for dollars by hiring many of Gorton’s lobbying peers, including members of the firm, K&L Gates, that now employs him.

The current battle over a new transportation bill has attracted dozens of lobbyists who have been through these fights before — often on the other side of the table.

Like Sante Esposito, a former counsel to the House Transportation Committee for 18 years, including 11 as chief Democratic counsel. Esposito’s current employer, the lobbying firm Federal Advocates, describes him in its literature as “central to the development of the current Highway Trust Fund program structure.” His daughter, Jennifer Esposito, now serves as majority staff director on the panel’s railroads subcommittee. “After leaving the Hill,” Esposito’s lobby bio continues, he “secured over $850 million for clients in [the 2005 transportation bill].” Earmarks his California clients received included $100 million for the Gerald Desmond Bridge in Long Beach. Esposito’s clients in the current fight include five California cities, an engineering firm, and the American Association of Railroads.

Broadly speaking, the transportation lobby can be divided into two categories. Some are focused on a specific area of the country or type of project. The Delaware River Port Authority, for instance, contracts with a former member of the House Transportation Committee, Democrat Robert Borski of Pennsylvania. Similarly, a pair of central Florida counties looking for road improvements hired former congressman L.A. “Skip” Bafalis, a Florida Republican. Bafalis’ 20 clients include three local governments within Mica’s congressional district.

Others with Hill experience on previous transportation bills focus on broader issues for big national clients. Like Kathy Ruffalo-Farnsworth, a former Democratic staffer with the Senate Environment and Public Works committee. She represents both the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials and the American Public Transportation Association, among others. Ruffalo-Farnsworth also served on a congressionally-chartered commission charged with recommending new policy and financing solutions.

Jack Schenendorf, former Republican chief of staff of the Transportation Committee, also lobbies for the state highway officials, as well as the Associated General Contractors of America, and others. He, too, served on a congressionally-chartered policy commission — a different one than Ruffalo-Farnsworth.

Among the other lobbyists working to influence the shape of the new bill are:

  • At least two dozen individuals with experience as either House Transportation Committee staff or as personal staff to Transportation Committee members;
  • More than a dozen individuals with experience on one of the three Senate committees working on transportation policy or as personal staff to committee members;
  • At least three dozen former House and Senate staffers with experience working on appropriations committees or as aides for members who served on those committees;
  • Former presidential appointees to various positions in the Department of Transportation, including former Secretary James Burnley;
  • At least 20 former members of Congress, including one-time House Transportation Committee members Borski, William Lipinski, and Bill Brewster.

A Bias Toward Roads

Perhaps it’s no surprise that a transportation system created in the interstate highway era would tilt toward new road capacity. Few deny it works that way. The traditional breakdown in recent bills gives about 80 percent to highways and 20 percent to mass transit. What the transportation lobby argues over is how much highway expansion should continue to accelerate, as opposed to alternatives, especially in an era of concerns over energy efficiency. Activist groups tend to focus on reducing carbon use by expanding mass transit and improving the public’s access to existing roads. The trucking industry, for one, counters that gas tax fees already subsidize other travel modes too much by using money collected on roads for projects like rail lines and bike paths.

But some of those arguing historically have more clout than others. For instance, the leading voice in Washington for “aggressively” growing investment, the American Road and Transportation Builders Association, enjoys a 107-year history and has long been part of the transportation revolving door.

The Builders Association’s current in-house lobbyists include former staff from both chambers of Congress as well as a former White House liaison to the Transportation Department. The group spent more than $210,000 in the first half of this year on federal lobbying, but that number understates its impact. For instance, three association members alone — Oldcastle Materials, Vulcan Materials, and HNTB — have spent $720,000 of their own money on lobbying in 2009. Among them the three companies contracted more than a half-dozen former congressional aides to argue their cases.

In addition to leading its own grassroots member campaign and consulting other groups like the American Highway Users Alliance, the Builders Association also co-chairs the powerful Transportation Construction Coalition. “There’s not a lot of other industry coalitions I know of where you’ve got industry and labor arm-in-arm,” says Builders Association public affairs director Jeff Solsby. The coalition’s 27 members include at least 16 organizations lobbying independently on transportation this year. Together they have spent more than $2.7 million and employed at least 50 lobbyists.

The Builders Association is also one of 11 groups on the management committee of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce-led Americans for Transportation Mobility, a group that also includes the American Public Transportation Association, as well as nine Transportation Construction Coalition members. “The road builders a long time ago made a great alliance with the Chamber,” said Martin Whitmer, a founding partner of his own lobbying firm, with a long transportation background. The U.S. Chamber spent a total of $17.4 million lobbying in the first half of 2009, with some fraction of that focused on transportation issues.

Many groups within these coalitions also provide substantial campaign cash to members of Congress both through individual donations and political action committees. The Builders Association political action committee, which every congressional cycle raises thousands from top executives at member companies, including DAB Constructors, Caterpillar, and Aldridge Electric, spent $482,364 on federal candidates since 2005 according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The PAC has tended to give more to whichever party is in power, and in the last cycle gave at least $5,000 each to the top two members of both the House Transportation and Senate Environment and Public Works Committees, including $6,000 to Oberstar’s leadership PAC.

Other PACs within the construction coalition tend to cancel each other out, with many private groups swaying heavily toward Republicans and labor giving predominately to Democrats. The Associated General Contractors of America, also co-chair of the construction coalition, has given more than $1.9 million through its PAC to federal candidates since 2005. Nearly 80 percent went to Republicans, including Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe. But Democrats Oberstar and Senate Finance chair Max Baucus of Montana also received at least $9,000 during the 2008 cycle. Individual companies like engineering firms HNTB and URS also give substantial amounts on their own. The two companies’ PACs and employees provided $42,450 to Oberstar and his leadership committee during his 2008 campaign.

The Operating Engineers union, also part of the coalition, gave more money to candidates than any other building union since 2005. Of more than $6.3 million its PAC spent on Congress since 2005, more than 80 percent went to Democrats, including $30,000 to Oregon’s Peter DeFazio, the chairman of the House Transportation Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.

The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials represents another entrenched interest long focused on roads. The association pays only a few experienced out-of-house lobbyists like Ruffalo-Farnsworth and Schenendorf, but the self-described “voice of transportation” plays a significant role in calling for spending increases.

These groups don’t work against funding for mass transit or alternative transportation projects like bicycle lanes; rather they push a ‘more money for everyone’ philosophy. Both the Builders Association and state transportation departments explicitly call for increases in mass transit spending. At the end of the day, though, their main priority is to get Congress to send more money their way.

A New Group of Players

The road lobby has not gone unchallenged, however. Rail advocates have their own coalitions — most recently OneRail, which includes six organizations with an impressive array of 55 lobbyists on the payroll. And recently, several activist groups have also increased their influence — focusing on fixing America’s infrastructure first before adding capacity, reducing transportation’s impact on the climate, and improving the public’s access to travel options. Leading the charge is Transportation for America, or T4America, the self-described “outsider public-interest coalition.” T4America represents more than 90 national and 225 state and local groups, and traces its lineage to groups that won reforms in the 1991 bill. T4America’s national grassroots campaign and Washington presence is “not to be underestimated” says one lobbyist who does not see eye-to-eye with the group.

In addition to its own lobbyists, T4America’s members include 21 organizations paying 45 lobbyists, including the National Association of Realtors and AARP, which together have spent $18.9 million lobbying Congress this year on everything from health care reform to homeowner tax credits. T4America also works closely with groups like the Urban Land Institute, Smart Growth America, and Building America’s Future. The Rockefeller Foundation funds some of these groups’ operations, and has also provided support to the Center for Public Integrity for this story and others in a series on the transport lobby. Most of the foundation’s advocacy grantees work to influence policy either through the grassroots or at the Washington level through studies and public forums. However, a handful of the grantees also spend tens of thousands lobbying for transportation policy to do things like serve low-income communities better or provide more public transportation.

imageRep. James Oberstar (D-Minn.)

imageRep. John Mica (R-Fla.)
Groups such as private railroad giants and the National Association of Realtors, which sometimes share goals with T4America members, give candidates millions of dollars per year through their political action committees. But the organizations more focused on policy reforms and increased public transit usage tend to give less, with the exception of a pair of unions within T4America’s coalition, the Transport Workers Union and the Amalgamated Transit Union. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the two labor groups lavished more than $3.5 million on federal candidates since 2005, overwhelmingly on Democrats. While the Transport Workers Union tends to give more to incoming members of Congress, the Amalgamated Transit Union gave more to key leaders like DeFazio, House Appropriations Chairman Dave Obey of Wisconsin, and House speaker Nancy Pelosi of California. The PAC for law and lobby firm Holland & Knight, also a part of T4America, spent $17,000 on House Transportation leaders Oberstar and Mica during the same period.

Many of these groups — along with, environmentalists awakened by the climate fight — are having an impact, observers say. The groups are also unified by support of a proposed National Transportation Objectives Act introduced by Democratic House members in June, as well as an outline by senior Democrats on the Senate Commerce Committee called the Federal Surface Transportation Policy and Planning Act. Both measures set specific benchmarks for federal transportation policy: reducing the number of vehicle miles traveled, increasing freight rail capacity, and bringing transportation-related CO2 emissions down by 40 percent over the next two decades.

What Happens Next

For the time being, most of the transportation lobby is expressing cautious support for Oberstar’s six-year, $500 billion Surface Transportation Authorization Act, which was marked up by the Highways and Transit Subcommittee but has yet to come to a full committee vote. That bill — considered drastic reform by many — promises to consolidate or terminate more than 75 programs, create a national strategic plan, and make state and local governments plan for “specific goals.” The bill also moves toward a national freight plan, and creates a $50 billion funding stream for high speed rail, while promising policy beyond just more roads. It is clear that a host of disparate lobbying groups have had input, although no one has yet decided how to pay for it all. That call is up to the House Ways and Means Committee, which has yet to commit to any specific solution.

Meanwhile, the Senate and the White House have other plans. The reluctance to engage in a debate that likely ends in new taxes prompted Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood to suggest an 18-month extension of present law, just one day before Oberstar publicly released his bill on June 18. Mica called the extension proposal a “betrayal,” and Oberstar has continued to push his bill. But the Senate followed the administration’s advice, passing portions of an extension out of three separate committees. To keep the trust fund solvent until 2011, Senate Democrats suggest reimbursing it $26.8 billion. But that would come from the general treasury, meaning Congress either needs to find an offset or chalk it up to the national debt.

House leaders proposed some nontraditional ways to collect more money, such as a tax on oil speculators, a national sales tax, or the use of more tolling and private partnerships. A “miles traveled” tax, which levies specific charges on drivers based in part on the number of miles they drive, has gained the support of Congress’ two national policy commissions, but that option would require years to implement and would likely be a tough sell to the public.

That leaves the gas tax. All the big players in the transportation lobby accept the idea of an increase and are offering Congress their support. This includes the truckers, road builders, and even the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. But even Oberstar said during congressional testimony that the gas tax will not be raised during a recession, and no one in Congress is stepping up to argue the case.

Until the funding question is solved, it’s not clear a bill can move forward. And even if and when it does, there’s still plenty of policy to argue about: Roads. Transit. Bridges. Funding formulas. State allocations. Projects of national significance. Earmarks. Growth policies.

“I think people agree on the problems,” said Jeffrey Boothe, a mass transit lobbyist with Holland & Knight. “But where there’s not agreement is the level of priorities. We haven’t really had those conversations.”

Now might be a good time to start. The law governing America’s transportation system expires on October 1.

Matthew Lewis is a staff writer at the Center for Public Integrity in Washington, D.C. Staff writer Aaron Mehta and computer-assisted reporting specialist M.B. Pell also contributed to this report.

Twitter Feed

  • More analysis from Yonah on high speed rail $. There's no "objective, repeatable" standard established yet, he says http://bit.ly/GyuMB Sep. 17, 2009, 11:18 am
  • Might not make it to this Cato briefing at noon today on customer-driven transpo, but eager to catch up: http://bit.ly/JIWii Sep. 17, 2009, 9:31 am
  • The rest of this week's #transpo report is live on the Center's site. Check out Erik Lincoln's fantastic map: http://bit.ly/1f0XR Sep. 17, 2009, 7:51 am
  • Just talked with Ray Dunaway of WTIC in Connecticut about #transpo in both DC and CT. Might go online later: http://bit.ly/15qMrx Sep. 17, 2009, 7:49 am
  • The sheer number of interests and ways each can get a piece of the #transpo bill make it difficult for Congress to manage them all Sep. 16, 2009, 12:35 pm
  • $1.5 billion in stimulus funds for #transpo available thru TIGER Discretionary Grant Program. App deadline was yesterday http://bit.ly/tKMub Sep. 16, 2009, 12:29 pm
  • About 140+ universities are seeking funds for various projects in the upcoming #transpo bill Sep. 16, 2009, 12:17 pm
  • We need your help though: find out the projects that are being lobbied for in your area, & we'll add each project in on our map #transpo Sep. 16, 2009, 12:16 pm
  • On the upcoming map, users will be able to search by firm, or by type of client that hired the lobbyists nationwide #transpo Sep. 16, 2009, 12:13 pm
  • Tomorrow, our #transpo site will unveil an interactive map that lets you find exactly who's lobbying in your area Sep. 16, 2009, 12:11 pm
Follow lewiscpi on Twitter
Stay Connected

Subscribe to our e-mail newsletter and get the latest from our in-depth investigations, articles, interviews, blogs, videos, and more.

Support the Center

Your support will help us bring you more investigations, articles, interviews and news related materials relevant to U.S. politics and politics abroad.

Donate

About the Center

The Center for Public Integrity is dedicated to producing original, responsible investigative journalism on issues of public concern in the USA and around the world.

More about the Center

International Consortium of Investigative Journalists

The Center’s International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) is a collaboration of some of the world’s leading investigative reporters. ICIJ extends globally the Center’s style of watchdog journalism, working with 100 reporters in 50 countries to produce long-term, transnational projects.

ICIJ website

Monday, September 7, 2009

Evaluating Obama and Transportation Policy So Far


This piece recently appeared in the Prague-based publication, Carbusters. The editor there gave me permission to reprint it here.

As the most powerful person in the world, President Barack Hussein Obama has an unenviable task – saving humanity from its inclination to environmental self-destruction by transforming the way Americans travel. Obama’s Secretary of Transportation, Ray LaHood, does a good job of talking the talk about bicycling and walking as parts of this transformation. But have Obama and Congress started to walk the walk and really begun to change American transporation?

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

Obama signed into law the $787 billion stimulus bill early in his administration, $48.2 billion of which will go towards transportation. Most of that – $27.5 billion – is dedicated to highways and bridges. The rest gets distributed to various mass transit systems, with almost $10 billion for state and local public transportation – but only capital projects. To put this in context, San Francisco’s Municipal Transportation Agency alone has an annual operating budget of $700 million to $800 million, is expected to have operating expenses of $1 billion in five years, and was so strapped for funds this year that it cut bus service and raised fares.

(Here is a story on SamTrans, the public transportation system in San Mateo County, and the way that agency used its share of stimulus funds.)

Buried in the ARRA is the $1 billion Cash for Clunkers program in which car owners with vehicles that get 18 mpg or fewer can exchange their gas guzzlers for $4,500 towards the purchase of a new vehicle that gets at least 22 mpg. Some environmentalists, however, see this program as a handout to Detroit and auto dealerships, but not a serious way to tackle foreign oil dependence, global climate change, or any one of the other dire problems associated with car dependence.

(September 7, 2009: Congress increased the amount of stimulus money dedicated to Cash for Clunkers by $2 billion this past summer -- for a grand total of $3 billion. Many people saw this program as primarily a way to move merchandise, and one muckraker seriously criticized the program for adding to the nation's solid and toxic waste dilemmas.)

CAFÉ (Corporate Average Fuel Economy)

In mid-May, the Obama administration announced new automobile fuel economy standards calling for improvements of 5 percent a year – standards that will require that cars achieve 39 mpg and light trucks 30 mpg by 2016, 40 percent more efficient than cars are now. The new CAFÉ standards underscore the irrelevancy of the Cash for Clunkers program, but have their own weaknesses: sport utility vehicles, or SUVs, those humongous gas guzzlers long the favorites of families, have always been classified as ‘light trucks’. These new mandates also leave the American fleet at 2 mpg lower than the European fleet.

California Waiver

In June, the Obama administration reversed Bush administration policy by granting waivers long sought by California and 13 other states to set auto emission standards higher than national ones. Those emission standards will be higher for about two years – when the new national CAFÉ standards start to kick in.

The American Clean Energy and Security Act

This bill, which passed the House of Representatives in June, addresses greenhouse gas emissions from mobile sources, but it overrides the United States Clean Air Act by permitting the construction of new coal-fired power plants for up to a decade with no additional emission reduction requirements.

And as to those mobile sources that are to be regulated? According to Auto Glass and Insurance Industry News, if the bill passes, the US Secretary of Energy would have to create a large-scale plug-in program and assist car manufacturers financially in their transition to producing electric vehicles.

The US Senate will take up review of this bill in September. The Center for Biological Diversity has come out in strong opposition to the bill. Here the Center for Public Integrity breaks down the dollar dance of industry and lawmakers now going on in Washington, DC over this bill.

The Surface Transportation Bill

The House of Representatives is now working on a half trillion-dollar reauthorization of the 2005 transportation act. Currently the bill seeks to set aside nearly $100 billion for public transit. However, in June the Obama administration announced its wish for an 18-month postponement. Jim Oberstar, D-Minnesota, chairman of the House transportation committee and an avid bicyclist, does not want to postpone the bill, but Jeff Mapes, staff writer for The Oregonian, and author of the just-published book, Pedaling Revolution: How Cyclists Are Changing American Cities, surmises that Congress will have to raise taxes in order to pay for this bill and that perhaps the Obama administration just is not ready for it.

“I do think Obama is interested in change,” says Mapes. “But it’s politically difficult to do … . One can argue that the 18-month delay will give his transportation department time to craft a plan.”

GM and Chrysler

Obama appointed a ‘car czar’ to tackle the collapse of two of the Big Three car companies – GM and Chrysler. Under this czar, Steven Rattner, American taxpayers have become majority owners of General Motors and are likely to end up contributing $50 billion for its transformation into a leaner manufacturer of smaller, more fuel efficient cars with fewer dealerships. Meantime, Chrysler got $6.6 billion from the federal government to finance its exit from bankruptcy and its sale to Fiat. Many more billions in taxpayer dollars are likely to be funneled to suppliers and the GMAC, GM’s former finance arm. In addition, now that Americans are majority owners of GM, congressman and women are making efforts to keep dealerships in their own districts open. (Rattner has announced his resignation.)

GM and Chrysler “were both clearly failing enterprises and the bailouts were done just to … prevent massive numbers of unemployed [from hitting] the claims lines all at once,” says James Howard Kunstler, author of The Geography of Nowhere and other books about transportation. “I doubt that they will survive in any recognizable form … Personally, I think the whole Happy Motoring paradigm is in its death throes (though most Americans don't realize it),” he adds.

Does Obama realize it? That is hard to say. If he does, politically he may not be in a position to say so -- and he certainly has not been heard calling for gasoline taxes along the lines of what Europeans pay.

There was no room in the Carbusters edition for a section on ...

Rail???

This topic deserves some deep research, but for now I'll say this: Obama seems to be bumping up the funding for passenger rail a wee bit, and he has ambitious plans for high-speed rail. Some critics say it's really more important to just fix up the system we now have -- improve and expand the tracks (and perhaps get Amtrak onto separate tracks too so that it is not constantly playing second fiddle to freight trains up at the pass just west of Denver ...). And if you look at the maps for projected high-speed rail lines, there are strange disconnects all over the nation -- HSR from San Antonio to Austin and Dallas-Fort Worth with no connections to Houston; HSR all around Chicago and through the Midwest, with no connections to New York or Washington, DC. There could be some logic to this, but it's beyond me.

Here's a high-speed rail plan that makes sense: Los Angeles to San Jose, San Francisco, and Sacramento.

Saturday, August 22, 2009

You Call This Bicycle Parking????


Here we are in Safeway Heights at the Safeway on Market and Church Streets. There's one little bicycle parking rack that is UTTERLY inadequate. As you can see, the wheel of my bicycle (in the background) and of someone else's bicycle (in the foreground) are crushed right up against a concrete barrier.


Someone else did not even bother draping his/her bicycle over the wavy rack and just locked his/her bicycle up parallel to the rack instead.


And it's not as though there was not room for the bicycle rack. This one could have been set back about a foot or so, and there still would have been plenty of room for pedestrians and people with carts and wheelchairs. When I was leaving, a fourth bicyclist approached and parked his bicycle parallel to the first parallel bicycle -- but on the other side of the rack.

Thursday, August 6, 2009

Camping on the Verge of Peak Oil

I recently went camping with the chair of the San Francisco Peak Oil Preparedness Task Force. Here is my Facebook Diary of that experience:

Yosemite Without the People

Monday, July 27, 2009

Say what???


I was running around on my bicycle doing errands today when I encountered a caravan of cars in the bus stop on California Street at Presidio, right in front of the Jewish Community Center. The cars were preventing buses from pulling up to the curb and blocking the curb ramp -- you can see the textured yellow curb ramp surface and the hand of one person who was forced to walk around the back of the vehicle in the rear.

I stepped out into the road and took pictures of the queue ...

And then stepped into the bus stop itself, forcing the oncoming cars into the proper lane so that the Number 4 Sutter could actually pull up into the bus stop ...

And pick up and discharge passengers ...

The Number 1 California, some of the Number 1 express buses, and the Number 2 Clement, all use this stop as well as the Number 4. And apparently Loomis armored trucks also use it.

Friday, July 24, 2009

What's Wrong With This Picture?


What's wrong with this picture?
Taken on Friday, July 24, at about 5:30 pm, at the intersection of New Montgomery and Market streets in San Francisco.

Thursday, July 23, 2009

Parking in the Red Zone


People frequently pull into the red zone on Geary Boulevard at 19th Avenue, park, and run into the Starbucks/Wells Fargo to get a Mocha Grande (or whatever those things are) and/or complete a bank transaction.


But parking in red zones at the intersection of streets is illegal -- and with good reason. Cars backing out of this particular red zone back right into oncoming north bound cars on 19th Avenue that are making right turns onto Geary and into the path of crossing pedestrians.

The woman who had parked this SUV in this red zone was none too happy when she noticed me taking pictures. I explained to her the dangers posed to pedestrians by cars parked in red zones at intersections and expressed my desire for a bulb out at this particular intersection. She, in turn, groused about the insufficient parking in the neighborhood. I told her I hoped that people would start walking or riding their bicycles more. She said she biked when she could but that she ferried around five people -- the oldest of whom was 82 and the youngest of whom was five.

And she's got a point except for two matters: one, in this particular instance she was the only passenger of her vehicle; and, two, what are she and people like her going to do when our way of life, dependent as it now is on vehicles to ferry us around, is no longer financially or environmentally sustainable?

Oh yeah, I forgot, cars will be the affordable housing of the future ...

Tuesday, July 14, 2009

Bus Stops Are for ...

Texting?
Talking on cell phones?
Queuing up to cross the Bay Bridge? (Notice bus creeping up in back.)
This woman harangued me for taking pictures of the cars in the bus stop. Imagine that!
One thing bus stops certainly are NOT for is buses pulling up to the curb to pick up passengers.

I'm taking a free painting course at the Academy of Art on Federal Street in San Francisco on Tuesday afternoons. I take the T-line from my work to the ball park and then walk up Second Street to the class. And I invariably leave early (because of my work schedule) which gets me out at the so-called 'bus stop' -- at the intersection of Second and Bryant streets in the city's District 6 -- during rush hour. There were two of us waiting the first time I went out, and both of us had to inch through on-coming traffic to get to the Number 10 Townsend Bus to go to the Transbay Terminal and make our connections.

The second time I had to do this, I figured I could walk. But I didn't. Instead I got my camera out and took pictures of cars lining up in the bus stop -- and then stepped right into the bus stop and took more. (Someone called out to me from his car, "Everyone does this.")

The bus driver, who saw me clicking away as I made my way into on-coming traffic to clamber onto his bus, chewed me out when I got on the bus, but later I told him I intended to say something to the District Six supervisor, and the bus driver and I had a quite nice conversation.

And I will say something (though Proposition A, which got passed by the voters in 2007, takes district supervisors out of the loop when it comes to traffic, transit, and parking decisions) because there is a potential lawsuit against the city in the mess at this particular bus stop. And if there is no potential lawsuit against the city at this bus stop, there is certainly something else: a gold mine for the cash-strapped SF MTA.

Let the ticketing begin!

Wednesday, July 1, 2009

About Those Curb Ramps ...

I recently wrote a story for SF Streetsblog about some sloppy curb ramp construction on Park Presidio in San Francisco. Someone later posted a comment asking if the curb ramps had ever been repaired, and the contractor himself posted a comment on the Streetsblog story saying his company would be doing the work within the next few days -- and it did, as you can see by the above photograph and two below.


But then I stumbled across this curb-ramp obstruction scene on Tuesday afternoon in downtown San Francisco:

The woman driving this sports car had pulled up in front of the curb ramp off of New Montgomery and just sort of sat there ...

And then she got on her cell phone and started chatting. In the meantime, pedestrians were walking around her car.

Tuesday, June 16, 2009

Richmond District Sidewalks Are For ...

That's a good question. I always thought they were for walking, but when I left for work at about 6 am this morning, I discovered otherwise ...


And bicycle parking is for ... ???? This is what I discovered outside the US Post Office on Geary at 21st Avenue when I returned at about 3:30 pm. The bicyclist came up behind me just as I was getting my camera out. Perfect timing ...

Sunday, June 14, 2009

Bicycle Parking in San Francisco's Richmond District?



The Richmond District Branch Library reopened recently, after being closed for a year or more for renovations. And it is a shining example of the blessings of civic bonds in all respects except for at least one ... bicycle parking.

Above, I have parked my bicycle parallel to the new bicycle rack that otherwise is not very functional.



Books ...

Note that in this photograph, before I have locked up my own bike, two other bicyclists have locked their bicycles up at either end of the rack. A third person has locked his bike up on the handrail near the door to the library. Later, two additional bicyclists came, and leaned their bicycles against a tree. One person stayed outside while the other went inside.



Here's bicycle parking in front of the Richmond District YMCA on 18th Avenue. Same problem: bicyclists don't like the bike rack, so they lock their bicycles 1) on the SFMTA bike rack; 2) at the ends of the YMCA bike rack; or 3) to the tree. Unlucky stragglers have to lift their front wheels over the rack to lock their bikes up.


Tree hugging ...