BIKE: (It appears that indeed some will) Vote NO for Commuter Rail]

[Patrick Goetz]

Joe Moore wrote:
>
> Several of the people I asked, stated that it wouldn't pass because this
> is "Texas"  and part of our chosen "life style" to be spread out and
> have independence in transportation (large SUVs)
>

Of course no one can predict the future, but I strongly suspect these
folks will be forced to change their tune in the next 5-10 years.  And I
do mean forced. Read Michael Ventura's unbelievably excellent analysis in
this week's Chronicle of the large number of Americans who still want to
believe in the simple black & white world promised them in the 1950's and
who are consequently actively hostile to the intrusion of facts and
reality confronting their world view.
http://www.austinchronicle.com/issues/dispatch/2004-10-15/cols_ventura.html

These were the backbone of Reagan's "conservative revolution" and the vast
majority of Bush supporters.  These are the same people who don't believe
in evolution or global warming, who refuse to accept that humans can be
cloned or that homosexuality is something other than an immoral life
choice, and who believe that the United States is the moral center of the
universe and can do no wrong.  They firmly believe that any oil shortage
can be solved by just digging more oil wells; i.e. the current high prices
are the fault of environmentalists standing in the way of "progress".
Heck, if you don't believe in science, why not believe that oil is an
infinite resource?

Not being able to afford to buy gas for that large SUV one day could very
well the be the catalyst which results in the epiphany of reality for
them.  Of course if they have their way in November, it might be too late
by then.  Either way, we live in interesting times.

Recreational biking events are typically big draws for conservative
voters, so it doesn't surprise me that there were a lot of folks there who
are against the very idea of a rail system.  Last night I was at a
"progressive" party packed to the gills with rabidly pro-rail, pro-smart
growth liberals.  Not a single person I talked to said they were voting
for the commuter rail proposal, and several said they were voting against
it because it didn't make any sense to them.  I told them that one reason
to vote for it was simply to send the message that Austin does support
rail, and that we could replace it with a better proposal once it passed
and long before the incompetents at Cap Metro had a chance to waste any
money.  They were unswayed by this argument, preferring instead to see the
proposal fail and using this as a excuse to do "some housecleaning" at the
friendly neighborhood transit authority while counting on a grass-roots,
citizen's initiative to finally come up with a solution that doesn't
consist of toll roads and commuter rails which do nothing for most
Austinites.   Unfortunatley, I found it hard to disagree with them for
long, although I do finally understand the thinking that went into Mike
Krusee's commuter rail vision.  Some good stuff there; problem is it
doesn't help Austin proper much and is more of a good thing to help the
suburbs survive the coming oil crunch, if indeed there is one.  The people
who believe Jesus is peeing oil just beneath the earth's crust just so
that they can continue to drive an Expedition could after all be right,
who am I to say otherwise?


Recently on this list I've been talking about the need for a "Metro"
system above all else.  To define it again, a Metro system, the
transportation backbone of almost every major city in the world, has these
properties:

   1. Fully grade-separated
   2. Fast and relatively frequent service across
      the entire metropolitan area
   3. High passenger capacity
   4. Stops at or near major and core urban destinations

It only occured to me yesterday that the name Capital "Metro" is extremely
ironic, given that in its entire multi-decade existence, Cap Metro has
never even once come close to proposing the deployment of a Metro system
for Austin.  Cities from "old, bankrupt" Europe to "primitive, 3rd world"
Asia are busy expanding and enhancing their Metro systems.  The Metro in
Prague was completely flooded and largely wrecked after the devastating
floods they had in 2002.  They got right to work rebuilding it; never mind
that this is in a former soviet block country where there are still lots
of boarded up buildings and considerable poverty, and never mind that
everyone there is still sufficiently enamored of western values to want to
own and drive a private motor car if at all possible.  The "powers that
be" in Prague understood that a functional Metro was the cornerstone of
their transportation system and critical to future economic growth. If
such a system is simply "too expensive" as the ROAD warriors, LRT and
commuter rail bobbleheads never cease to enjoy telling us, then why are
all these cities building, maintaining, and expanding them?  Might it be
that they know something we don't?  This and this alone should be
sufficient cause to question whether or not Capital Metro -- as currently
constituted -- has the IQ, gumption, and guts to steer us towards a 21st
century transportation system.  A revolt against the status quo, perhaps,
is in order.

I'm still voting for ASG, as promised, for the reasons outlined
previously, and despite the fact that I don't think the Red Line is a good
idea, but the ear to the ground reports presented today do not bode well
for ASG supporters.