BIKE: BicycleAustin endorsements

[Patrick Goetz]

Michael Bluejay wrote:
> Re: Patrick's long rant about BicycleAustin's City Council endorsements
> 

I don't have time to fully rebut this, but I will correct a few glaring 
errors.  For those who don't care to sift through minutia, all you have 
to do is ask yourself one question:  did the Bicycle Austin endorsements 
help or hurt the cause of bicycle advocacy as far as relations with city 
council goes?  Did these endorsements make bicyclists look like a bunch 
of out-of-touch thimblebrains, or savvy political operatives?

And Fred Meredith's me-too pile-on is hardly worthy of a response. 
Fred's philosophy of bicycling basically boils down to this:  bicycle 
helmets GOOD, bike lanes BAD.  If you already agree with this, then 
there is nothing to talk about.  If you don't agree with this, say for 
logical, empirical, rational, or statistical reasons, then there's still 
no point in talking about it, as Fred is not going to understand or 
accept arguments based on these dangerously radical principles.


> 
> I stand by my decision to not endorse Leffingwell.  His campaign 
> provided zero information to me about his transportation positions.  His 
> website contains little more than the typical vague "transportation is 
> important" rhetoric that all politicians espouse, e.g.:
> 

I think the general idea is if you don't understand how this games 
works, don't endorse.  OF COURSE Lee Leffingwell isn't going to do 
anything but blab vague generalities on his web page -- have you 
bothered to look at any other candidates web pages?  Right or wrong, 
politicians are almost always completely vague in these contexts.  They 
all hire political consultants who tell them to say as little as 
possible unless asked in order to minimize the number of people voting 
against them.  The empirical evidence strongly suggests that those who 
don't do this get annhilated in elections.  Empirical evidence, one of 
those dangerously radical notions some of us hate to acknowledge.

This is why the only way to get any clear information is to attend a 
candidates' forum and ask questions.  At the DANA forum, Lee Leffingwell 
was the ****ONLY**** candidate who had an answer to my question "If 
elected, what are you going to do to keep CAMPO from continuing to screw 
Austin"?  Not only did he have an answer, but he had a GOOD answer, 
complete with a plan for how to give the urban core a bigger voice.  The 
other candidates had NOTHING to say on the matter, meaning they were 
completely CLUELESS.  If you think that allowing suburban interests to 
continue to control the CAMPO process is a good thing for Austin 
bicyclists, then Fred has some Hays County cops he wants you to meet to 
have a good time with.


> 
> Again, maybe Adams really would push for more roads, as Patrick asserts, 
> except Adams told me the exact opposite, saying he would oppose the 
> CAMPO bonds.

No, this is not what I said.  I said Adams would oppose spending money 
on bicycle facilities, reasoning that this money should be spent on 
expanding free roads instead.  Opposing the CAMPO bonds is not the same 
as opposing roadway construction.  Keep in mind that some people are not 
terribly bright and don't necessarily see the connection.


> 
> I also stand my decision to endorse Jennifer Gale (who garnered nearly 
> 10% of the vote by the way, a respectable showing in a several-person 
> race in which she had no budget).   Gale is admittedly a bit eccentric
> but her positions on bike/ped issues are stronger than anyone's, and I'd 
> rather have someone on the council who's a bit eccentric but has a 
> strong stand on the issues than someone who's completely straight-laced 
> and will continue to drive this city towards mediocrity or worse.
> 

Yes, absolutely.  Nutty leaders have a long historical record of doing 
great things for their constituencies.  I guess you didn't read her 
response to the helmet law question, though, since she clearly appears 
to support it, and would in fact expand it at least to 21 and under and 
anyone "who [doesn't] have insurance in case of death or dismemberment 
and brain damage as in the Shiavo case".  That's a deal killer, in my book.


> Incidentally, I first endorsed Jennifer Gale in 2001 for the Mayor's
> race.  The endorsement is still listed on BicycleAustin.  Nobody has 
> complained about that, until now.
> 
> As for people not getting to vote on the endorsements, excuse me, when 
> does any publication go to its readers for that?  Editors always choose 
> endorsements themselves.

I guess the problem is this: 
http://www.austinchronicle.com/issues/dispatch/2005-05-06/pols_naked2.html

Read this and tell me that it doesn't sound like an endorsement by 
*Austin* *Bicyclists* for anyone who's not on this list, i.e 99.95% of 
all Austinites.  Can't say I blame Bluejay for this, though, since I 
doubt he would send them inaccurate information (e..g no endorsements 
for Jennifer Gale).  Most likely the Adams campaign called it in and the 
Chronicle staff was too stoned that day to bother with anything 
approaching fact checking, in this case typing www.bicycleaustin.info 
into their browser.