Investor’s Business Daily | July 21, 2008
Unwilling to allow any expansion of drilling in American territory, Democrats are instead focused on changing American lifestyles. It’s consistent with the goals of the party that wants to run everyone’s lives.
Sponsored in the House by Oregon Rep. Earl Blumenauer and co-sponsored by four other Democrats and one Republican,Connecticut’s Chris Shays, the Transportation and Housing Options for Gas Price Relief Act of 2008 is, like much of the nonsense dreamed up in Washington, misnamed.
It should be called the Central Planning and Potomac Manipulation Act of 2008.
Rather than dealing with the supply side by increasing domestic production of carbon-based fuels, the political left wants to use taxpayers’ money to meddle with the demand side.
But the public isn’t clamoring for a carbon-free, “sustainable” future. Voters want policymakers to solve today’s energy problems now through sensible market solutions.
Should this Gas Relief Act become law, it would authorize the federal apparatus to expand public transportation; provide incentives for workers to use mass transit, bicycles, carpools or their feet to get to their jobs; work locally to create walkable and “bikeable” communities; educate Americans so they can make the “right” transportation and housing choices; and establish “location efficient mortgages” to make it more affordable to own homes near public transit.
With the advent of $4 gasoline, Democrats began sensing an opportunity to drive the country closer to their vision of utopia.
. . . more
“Sponsored in the House by Oregon Rep. Earl Blumenauer . . . ”
“Of course, this spartan existence would be for the masses only.”
Apparently the author knows nothing about Earl Blumenauer. From the Wall Street Journal:
[Blumenauer’s] congressional office is one of the few — if not the only one — that didn’t even apply for a parking permit. On occasion, Mr. Blumenauer has cycled to the White House. On Mr. Blumenauer’s first visit, the Secret Service, more accustomed to limousines, was flummoxed at the sight of his bike. “I leaned it up against the portico,” Mr. Blumenauer says.
Mr. Blumenauer has been a pedal pusher since his days on the Portland City Council, when he pressed for more bike lanes and set an example by riding around in his suit and a big bow tie. When Mr. Blumenauer arrived in Washington in 1996, he didn’t bring a car.
In his more than 10 years in Congress, Mr. Blumenauer says he has saved tens of thousands of dollars by not driving, money that helped pay for the townhouse he bought. And when he cycles across town to an event, he often gets there faster than his friends in Congress do.
So much for “Do as They Say . . .”
It’s also interesting to see what the article complains about:
Should this Gas Relief Act become law, it would authorize the federal apparatus to expand public transportation; provide incentives for workers to use mass transit, bicycles, carpools or their feet to get to their jobs; work locally to create walkable and “bikeable” communities; educate Americans so they can make the “right” transportation and housing choices; and establish “location efficient mortgages” to make it more affordable to own homes near public transit.
Oh no! Public transportation! Carpools! Bikes! The horror! The horror!
Here’s a picture of the Pearl District in Portland, Oregon. It’s the kind of place described above — many people living near where they work, lots of public transportation, bike paths, and so on. What is not shown in the picture are the three very nice public parks all located less than five minutes away by foot. I know, because this is where I work.
http://www.cooltownstudios.com/images/portland-pearldistrict.jpgHere’s a picture of one of the parks:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/56/179333398_a5bdeb1610.jpg?v=0Look at those poor devils, suffering under liberal “global asceticism”!
I personally live about 15 miles away. I take a commuter train and a bus to get there. Total commute time is slightly less than one hour. If I drive it takes 45 minutes. But time driving is basically wasted. So instead of wasting an hour and a half per day, I get to read two hours per day. The cost of public transportation is about what I would spend on gas, except I’m not putting 600 miles on my car every month, and I’m not paying for parking.
This is not exactly what I would call a “spartan existence.” I’m crying all the way to the bank. And when it’s time for lunch, there’s only maybe 20 restaurants within easy walking distance to choose from.
Jim,
You came up with how many examples? ONE????
Liberal thinking for the elitist is well demonstrated by San Francisco, the most liberal city with the fastest decreasing minority population. Why? Because it’s too expensive!!!! Libs are all in favor of helping the poor, minorities, etc., as long as they don’t live next door.
Barbra Streisand lives in a fortress. Al Gore doesn’t ride a bike to work. Speaking of Al Gore, would he mind if his daughter married a black man?
Who can afford those carbon footprint things? Only the wealthy! So we peons must sacrifice our luxuries while the ‘Snob Hill’ libs enjoy the finer things in life. Do I detect a return to feudalism? They already have the poor as slaves to the welfare system.
It is easy to see the hypocrisy of liberalism
David S writes: “You came up with how many examples? ONE????”
The one example I provided happened to be the sponsor of the legislation in question, and thus, in my view, very relevant, especially given the title of the article.
Within any political orientation you will always find individuals who fail to live up to their stated ideas. That doesn’t mean that the ideas can be dismissed out of hand. (E.g., the war in Iraq was either a good or bad idea, standing or falling on its own merits (or the lack thereof), regardless of how many neoconservative war advocates managed to avoid uniformed service themselves.)
I gave the example of the Pearl District in Portland because I have first-hand knowledge of it. I’m there five days a week. So I am speaking from personal observation, not quoting from some “liberal” report.
David S: “Liberal thinking for the elitist is well demonstrated by San Francisco, the most liberal city with the fastest decreasing minority population. Why? Because it’s too expensive!!!!”
If it’s expensive, that’s because it’s a place where people want to live. Supply and demand. The same situation exists in the Pearl District in Portland. It is a very desirable place to live, which means that it would be unaffordable for many people. I work for a public agency that finances construction of affordable housing through tax credits, favorable interest rates, and other programs. So even in the Pearl District you can see disabled, elderly, and low income residents who do in fact live there because of these programs, largely self-financing. The existence of many public transportation options makes it possible for these people to get around, go to doctor appointments, to stores, to church, to visit family members, and in general, to have good quality lives, in the same area in which BMWs and Jags and not uncommon.
Ten years ago the Pearl District was largely filled with run-down warehouses. The revitalization of that area led to a real economic revival through thousands of construction jobs, restaurants, shops, and other businesses. It has been good for business owners, real estate developers, construction companies and their employees, and employees of the many business located there. It has also been good for the people who live there. It’s not a perfect situation, but overall, it’s pretty nice — even if it might offend some of the folks at the Investor’s Business Daily.
Because of the construction of bicycling network, around 6 percent of Portland residents now regularly commute by bike, and that is only increasing. When you see the bikes that a lot of them are riding, you know that these are people who could commute by car if they wanted to, but bicycling has become more convenient, in addition to being a healthier way to spend time. When you see a guy commuting to work on a Lemond Versailles, you know that this is not someone who is being denied “luxuries.”
While there are liberal politicians, actors, and celebrities who really do little of what they preach when it comes to the environment it doesn’t mean that things like greater public transport, higher mileage cars, and finding ways to change our culture of gluttonous energy consumption are bad ideas.
I can think of a number of reasons including good stewardship of the earth, sharing resources with the poor, leaving a legacy for the future, avoiding war, and living without excess for the sake of spiritual growth where environmentalism in a broad sense resonates with the Orthodox Faith.
We’re not here, of course, to create a secular utopia through politics but there certainly is a moral aspect to what we drive, how we consume, and to what extent we use what for we Orthodox is the gift of creation. And this might have a bearing on public policy.
Fr. John,
I wholeheartedly agree with you on “stewardship of the earth”, helping the poor, avoiding war, and especially living without excess. Our nation has become one of over-indulging, self-centered individuals. The liberal ‘elites’, along with the conservative ‘elites’ are the main culprits.
Their hypocrisy invalidates their positions as spokesmen for the issues they “stand for.”
As an Orthodox Christian, I strive to free myself from these “worldy” things and be a “good steward” of the earth. I pray that my example would motivate others.
Jim,
You wrote that minorities cannot live in San Francisco because it’s “too expensive.” That is exactly my point. Why don’t the libs build more subsidized housing in their “ritzy” neighborhoods? Here in California, they force cities to place public housing in nice middle class neighborhoods. God forbid they do it in the “high rent” districts! They allow illegal aliens to live 4 or 5 families in a single family home in middle class neighborhoods, but not in their eltist communities!
I’m all for the change to alternative fuels, environmentally safe energies, etc. But let’s “ween” everyone slowly. Drill for oil, but move towards the alternative fuels. I also protest that the “Governator”, Algore, or any other wealthy hippocrite can buy carbon footprint or whatever it’s called, and still have the luxury to use environmentally harmful vehicles, products etc. because he’s wealthy and I’m not.
David S writes: “Why don’t the libs build more subsidized housing in their “ritzy” neighborhoods?”
My point was that in the Pearl District that’s exactly what happened. Out of around 3,500 housing units 30 percent were set aside for affordable housing. That which you wish has already happened here. It wasn’t a thing of dropping cheap-looking low-income apartment buildings into an existing middle-class neighborhood, but of designing affordable housing into the new development project. It is literally impossible to distinguish affordable housing units from anything else. In fact, i recently discovered that the apartment building next door to where I work is devoted to affordable housing. It’s as “ritzy” as any other place in the area.
David S: “They allow illegal aliens to live 4 or 5 families in a single family home in middle class neighborhoods, but not in their eltist communities!”
Who exactly are “they?” What is an “elitist” community?
I love the way people use the term “elitist” here. I suppose I’m considered a liberal elitist too. My father had to drop out of high school when he was 15 years old to support the family. His father, a corrections officer, was shot and killed during a prison break. My father spent the next 50 years working as a cook and bartender. I started working when I was 11 years old, harvesting fruit in the summer next to Mexican migrant workers. By the time I was 16 I worked 70 hours a week during the summer in a fruit cannery. I eventually attended a private university, paying for my own education by working as a blast freezer operator in a cannery in the summer and working other evening jobs during the school year. Welcome to the life of the “liberal elite.”
David S: “. . . he’s wealthy and I’m not.”
Yeah, there’s a lot of that going around. As my Mexican migrant coworkers used to say to me when I complained about the heat and the backbreaking work, “bienvenidos a la vida” — welcome to life.
Jim,
Oh please! I never called you an “elitist”! When I say “elitist” I refer to those who look down upon us from their Hollywood mansions, political offices, university professorships, etc. and try to tell us how we should live, while they do what they please. Example: We should use wind power, which I agree, but the Kennedys refuse to let them build windmills off the coast of Martha’s Vineyard because it will ruin the scenery. Or Bobby Kennedy Jr. and Al Gore using private jets. The list goes on.
I can tell you of my father whose mother was Mexican and of all the racism she and my father’s family experienced. How he was one of ten children raised in a two bedroom house, whose parents drank excessively. How he started working for a man insheet metal shop at 13 years old and became foreman of the shop at 17. How 20 tears later the man cut my fathers wages in half and removed his benefits, “because”, his boss confessed to a neighboring business owner, “he knew more about my business than me.” My father didn’t sit around feeling sorry for himself or beg for government handouts either. A high school drop-out, he began looking for a job for the first time in his life at 38 years old. He never taught us to depend on the government. If you want I’ll bore to tears with how my mom’s family suffered in the Great Depression, being an “Okie” and all that. Or how my uncle slowly died from Agent Orange, years after Vietnam. I am not degrading your experiences, I am merely pointing to the fact that my family, being from poor to lower middle class does not welcome government meddling in our lives. We would rather earn our own. You know, “Live and let live.”
You’re also taking my words out of context. Of course when I said, “because they’re wealthy and I’m not”, refers to the “elitist” conveniently figuring ways for the masses to “do their fair share” for the environment, while they are above it. I do not sit around and complain about a lack of wealth. None of that is permanent anyway. But as an American, I can stand up and say we are a constitutional republic, not a socialist state.
Working alongside your Mexican co-workers, guess you never observed their devout religious beliefs. Did you ever notice they don’t live to work? They work to live.