Living Car Free - US congressmen send anti-bike proposal to president

Read alot of thoughts on a completely car-free community in the US. Not if these two people have anything to say about it.

Ohio seems to be a really unfriendly place for riders.

check out sections 12 and 14 (http://republicanwhip.house.gov/newsroom/6.4.09%20Budget%20Savings%20Proposal.pdf)

These are some of the programs they want to cut:

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/te/ which would include cutting funding to this program, http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bikeped/ntpp.htm

Both of these programs of course need to be stopped before they are proven to be successful.

And of course this has to go, to hell with the children, they don't pay taxes. (http://www.saferoutestoschools.org/index.shtml)

You mind cutting/pasting the text?

CONSOLIDATING PROGRAMS, TERMINATING LOW PRIORITY PROGRAMS,
AND REFOCUSING FEDERAL PROGRAMS ON CORE FEDERAL PRIORITIES:
1. Consolidate Federal Arts Programs
2. Refocus the National Science Foundation on Hard Sciences
3. Refocus the National Park Service on Administering Federal Parks
4. Refocus Federal Land and Water Conservation Funding On Federal Projects
5. Refocus National Archives Activities on Preserving Federal Records
6. Terminate HUD Program for Doctoral Dissertations
7. Terminate Funding for Unnecessary International Organizations
8. Terminate Funding for the National Drug Intelligence Center
9. Terminate Funding for the State Justice Institute
10. Consolidate and Reduce Funding for Federal Advisory Committees
11. Suspend Federal Land Purchases
12. Terminate Safe Routes to Schools Program
13. Terminate New Federal Truck Parking Facilities Program That Competes with Private Truck
Stops
14. Terminate Federal Transportation Funding for “Non-motorized” Transportation Projects
15. Eliminate Federal Transportation Funding for Landscaping, Museums, and Other
Transportation “Enhancements”
16. Eliminate Unnecessary Federal Offices Such as the Treasurer of the
United States
17. Terminating Duplicative Education Programs
18. Terminating Ineffective Federal Education Programs
19. Terminate Non-Federal Priorities and Single Recipient Programs
20. Terminate Funding for the DOD Innovative Readiness Training Program

Yeah, Ohio is VERY unfriendly to bikes. There is rarely space for us to share the road, they do not make any attempt to educate drivers about the rights of bicyclists, and the police tend to get more annoyed than friendly when you are riding by them. :/

+1 on Ohio being bicycle unfriendly, which is ironic because back in the old balloon tires days almost every American bike but Schwinns were manufactured there; Shelby, Colson, the Cleveland Welding Company, Huffy/Dayton, etc.

Boehner isn't exactly the type of guy to go against the lobbyist or the political status quo, so I'm not surprised to see his name below the list. And Cleveland built the worst bike path in the world, but don't worry, it only cost one million (pre-bailout) dollars:

http://blog.cleveland.com/architecture/2009/01/_one_of_the_saddest.html

I used to live in Ohio, and bikes or no bikes I'm glad to be out of there.

Yeah, Ohio is kinda self-defeating. I live in a place where a lot of people end up, and the folks from Ohio have much more of a "refugee" vibe than most. The only other folks who come close are the Okies.

Seem like boondoggles to me. The only way to increase bicycle ridership is my locating people, work, and shopping closer to each other. That would involve changing zoning laws, which is too painful for most communities.

Separated bike paths make things worse by attracting muggers, tourist welcome centers ect are imo a waste of money also, and a scam to turn private sector jobs into public sector jobs.

Ah, good ol' Sen. ***** & Rep. Canned-horr...love these reps from the new 3rd party, the G-NO-P.

Hope their sphincters fall out....(my favorite absurd curse)

Ah, good ol' Sen. ***** & Rep. Canned-horr...love these reps from the new 3rd party, the G-NO-P.

Hope their sphincters fall out....(my favorite absurd curse)

Thank God these guys aren't running the show. They won't have any such problem with their sphincters, since their sphincters seem to be supported by their heads.

Thank God these guys aren't running the show. They won't have any such problem with their sphincters, since their sphincters seem to be supported by their heads.


Now that's funny........"Would someone please call a proctologist...I have a head ache"!

Ah, good ol' Sen. ***** & Rep. Canned-horr...love these reps from the new 3rd party, the G-NO-P.

Hope their sphincters fall out....(my favorite absurd curse)

It's Rep. *****. Thank goodness. Not Sen. *****..../..... We do have a sound GOPer to fight off *****'s anti bike obsession.. That being....Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.. He's reportedly Bike friendly.. Want to fight off *****. Contact LaHood and tell him of your opposition and offense taken by *****'s attack on cyclists.. I will.

Ehh...

It depends on where you go in Ohio. They recently passed a new round of state bicycle law, part of which is the idea that state law trumps local. So our bike laws are at least much more universal across the state now, with many cities-including Columbus-working to make changes to reflect new state law.

Columbus tends to have a pretty good bike culture overall. Depending on where you are in the city, you can get around pretty easily by bike. At least until you hit the suburban sprawl. Our city leadership released our bicentennial bikeways plan last year, calling for an increase in the number of bike path miles, on road improvements, complete streets and the like. Part of that plan was to redo the laws, which I believe no includes a provision for developers working on new builds to include some sort of bike access if their project lines up with any part of the bikeway plan (so if a developer is building adjacent to an MUP or a future MUP, they need to have access for residents built).

Read alot of thoughts on a completely car-free community in the US. Not if these two people have anything to say about it.

Ohio seems to be a really unfriendly place for riders.

check out sections 12 and 14 (http://republicanwhip.house.gov/newsroom/6.4.09%20Budget%20Savings%20Proposal.pdf)

These are some of the programs they want to cut:

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/te/ which would include cutting funding to this program, http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bikeped/ntpp.htm

Both of these programs of course need to be stopped before they are proven to be successful.

And of course this has to go, to hell with the children, they don't pay taxes. (http://www.saferoutestoschools.org/index.shtml)

Here is the reason behind this brainless bill....brainless people. In fact two of the most brainless now in congress......Republican Leader John Boehner & Republican Whip Eric Cantor. These guys are the leaders of the new Republican party of NO! :rolleyes::roflmao2::roflmao2:

Welcome to America, where if you're not rich then you don't count and the Govt wants to take away your hobby.

Like Hot Rods? The Govt either bans them or restricts the stuff you can put on them to the point you can't afford it.

Like motorcycles, they try and kill the off-road bike or take away our riding areas, and for the street they want to smog them or restrict the speed.

Like shooting? They want to take away our guns and ammo.

Skate boards? Hey, they're unsafe.

Wanna ride in the back of a pick up? If it wasn't for the back of pick ups I never would have been able to go anywhere as a kid! But today, at least in my state you can't ride in them!

Geez, if Senator Feinstein has her way you won't even be able to go RV'ing, horseback riding or hiking in some areas, if I remember correctly, and of course this is all on the taxpayers dollar!:eek:

How many other things does the Govt try and regulate us about? I'm sure I've just touched the surface!

How about fishing? Gotta have a license, and the restrictions on boats is pretty strict if I remember correctly, and then there's those "Bad" jet ski's.

So why not pick on bicycles? Just because some AH politician was held up for 30 seconds while on his way to meet his "Girlfriend" he doesn't like us, so he'll try and ban us!

Man, seems like we can't do anything anymore without the freagin govt sticking it's big nose in it!!:mad:

All that terminating...Maybe Arnold should move to Ohio after California becomes a wasteland...

All that terminating...Maybe Arnold should move to Ohio after California becomes a wasteland...

AFTER it becomes a wasteland? I thought it was already there. :D

I live in Cincinnati and this week alone I've been run off the road twice and told to get on the sidewalk once. I grabbed a copy of the Ohio Motor Vehicle handbook that people who drive are required to read and pass a test on. In this book, it clearly states that bicyclists have the same rights as a car. I cannot wait to point this out to the next jackass that tries to kill me. >_>

Like Hot Rods? The Govt either bans them or restricts the stuff you can put on them to the point you can't afford it.

Like motorcycles, they try and kill the off-road bike or take away our riding areas, and for the street they want to smog them or restrict the speed.

While I do disagree with some provisions of CARB I don't disagree with limiting air pollution. Is there some reason you feel like you should have the right to pollute the air I breath? Should I be allowed to burn as many tires as I want in the street outside your house in the name of freedom? The people are sovereign, if they want clean air then that is their right.

While I do disagree with some provisions of CARB I don't disagree with limiting air pollution. Is there some reason you feel like you should have the right to pollute the air I breath? Should I be allowed to burn as many tires as I want in the street outside your house in the name of freedom? The people are sovereign, if they want clean air then that is their right.

A: if you know what you are doing you can make a hot rod that runs VERY clean.
B:Most hot rods are only driven on the weekends and sit at car shows most of the time, so not a lot of pollution.
C: I guess the millions of cars driven, probably yours too, don't polute the air we breathe? Where do you wind yours up?
D: I guess the only way you drive is immature where you burn tires like a little kid? Or do you mean setting them on fire like a pyro?
E:Yes, the people are sovereign, so why does the govt want to take away our freedoms, but not those of the rich and famous? Guess maybe you're one of those rich folks that doesn't care about the rest of the people!:notamused:

Time to get a clue!

All this cutting in education and social programs save 375 billion dollars. We can save 860 billion dollars but cutting the Bush tax cuts today. Incredible.

http://www.epi.org/economic_snapshots/entry/webfeatures_snapshots_20051026/

A: if you know what you are doing you can make a hot rod that runs VERY clean.
B:Most hot rods are only driven on the weekends and sit at car shows most of the time, so not a lot of pollution.
C: I guess the millions of cars driven, probably yours too, don't polute the air we breathe? Where do you wind yours up?
D: I guess the only way you drive is immature where you burn tires like a little kid? Or do you mean setting them on fire like a pyro?
E:Yes, the people are sovereign, so why does the govt want to take away our freedoms, but not those of the rich and famous? Guess maybe you're one of those rich folks that doesn't care about the rest of the people!:notamused:

Time to get a clue!

This is the car-free forum, why would you assume that he drives a car? There are literally billions of things that I could go do for fun on any given day and only about .5% of them have anything to do with polluting the air with a car, jet ski, motor cycle, hot rod, or shooting a lethal firearm. Since when are the only things that are "fun" to do so destructive to the planet and to society? Read a book or something, go camping, drink a coffee and have a conversation with your friends, listen to music, jeez.

Weren't there a couple of guys named Wright who had a bike shop in Ohio?

This is the car-free forum, why would you assume that he drives a car? There are literally billions of things that I could go do for fun on any given day and only about .5% of them have anything to do with polluting the air with a car, jet ski, motor cycle, hot rod, or shooting a lethal firearm. Since when are the only things that are "fun" to do so destructive to the planet and to society? Read a book or something, go camping, drink a coffee and have a conversation with your friends, listen to music, jeez.

I wouldn't say this is a car free forum, this is a forum about bicycles, and this thread is about a politician who is trying to restrict bicycles. My comments are that the govt seems to want to restrict anything that we try to want to do for a hobby and then I made some examples, not all inclusive. I also pointed out that if you are a member of a group that has a lot of money and political clout, AKA rich folks, then the govt seems to leave them alone.

If you feel that boating, jet-ski's, motorcycles, only provide air pollution, then tell your club and rides to never use SAG veh's, etc, and let someone get injured or something. Same thing with ambulances, police cars, other emergency veh's, etc. So we do use vehicles or how do most of us get to work, to the bike shop, and how does our bikes and equipment get to this country and out to the shops? I myself have to take water and other equipment to a ride spot that's over 22 miles from my house. Can't do that without my vehicle.

As for "LETHAL" firearms, I didn't know putting holes in paper was LETHAL! and destructive to the planet (lead is usually dug out of the mounds and disposed of properly, and the new backstops use old tire rubber to stop the bullets before they hit the barrier, then the lead is just swept up), plus not all bullets are lead anymore. If you don't like hunting, that's your right (I don't like hunting), but we don't have a right to stop somebody else from hunting because we don't like it, just like it's wrong to restrict bicycling just because somebody doesn't like it for some reason.

There are lots of things that are fun, and unfortunately some, if not all, do some damage to the planet. After all, we ride on miles and miles of asphalt. Do you not think that has changed the landscape and done damage? Mountain bikers make trails that may stay for years (Just ask the Sierra Club, that's what they complain about!). I guess we could gamble. Lots of fun, not polluting, just supports organized crime and takes away your hard earned money.

I guess the bike shops don't make any pollution either when they are putting together carbon fiber frames with all the solvents, etc? How about the welding of aluminum? Rubber tires? Lycra? Seems like there's a lot of things even in cycling that cause pollution. So maybe if you read a book or something you can read up on these activities and see what is going on. Listen to music? Guess no pollution from plastic CD's, cassettes, records, and the players. Books, I guess they don't use trees to make the paper and all the chemicals to produce them. Same with camping, the govt wants to close down 100's of thousands of acres to human use on our dime to protect it. No RV's, horses, MTB's, anything, which also pollute.

As for the idiot politicians that want to restrict bicycling, think about this. A politician get ticked off because he has to slow for a rider, then he has to wait in line at his favorite coffee stop because a bunch of us are in line ahead of him, then there's the tight shorts and shirts we wear that his Wife and Daughter just LOVE to look at. So what's he do? He points out that bike lanes cost money and we are in a budget crisis, and that to make more money for the govt and support domestic bicycling he recommends a tariff on all imported bicycling products: bikes, frames, wheels, seats, clothing. What do you think would happen to cycling? It would become prohibitively expensive, wouldn't it. Think this could never happen? It was tried, and maybe completed (I don't remember for sure) by Harley Davidson! They had a tariff placed on all Harley type bikes brought into the US, and now your average Harley costs $20K to start with. A motorcycle that costs as much as a car (and my parents first house!)

So, no matter what we do there is some pollution caused either directly or indirectly. The point here is our rights to go out and have a fun time keeps getting restricted over and over by folks who just don't like us! I don't care for country music, nor opera, but I respect your right to like it. If you don't like Blues and rock & roll, that's your right, but you have no right to make it so that I can't listen to it. Why should it be any different with most other things? If something causes pollution, then you try and fix it, you don't legislate it out of existence!

Welcome to America, where if you're not rich then you don't count and the Govt wants to take away your hobby.

Like Hot Rods? The Govt either bans them or restricts the stuff you can put on them to the point you can't afford it.

Like motorcycles, they try and kill the off-road bike or take away our riding areas, and for the street they want to smog them or restrict the speed.

Like shooting? They want to take away our guns and ammo.

Skate boards? Hey, they're unsafe.

Wanna ride in the back of a pick up? If it wasn't for the back of pick ups I never would have been able to go anywhere as a kid! But today, at least in my state you can't ride in them!

I hope you're joking, but in case you aren't, here's a dose of the reality of public opinion:

Hot rods = race cars. Can't race on the street.

Motorcycles - no reason for bikes that reach 100 mph in five seconds. No reason to be riding that fast in the US anyway. "Un-smogged", they're also far dirtier than the SUVs that everyone loves to hate.

Shooting - weapons that are designed to intimidate and kill. The Chinese didn't invent firearms just to shoot holes in paper.

Skateboards - do a great job at grinding handrails, curbs, sculptures, etc. Also draw the wrath of parents who'll blame anybody but their own kids when they get themselves hurt.

Complain all you want, but the reality is that you can't live in a bubble universe of your own rules, and public perception creates public laws.

I hope you're joking, but in case you aren't, here's a dose of the reality of public opinion:

Hot rods = race cars. Can't race on the street.

Motorcycles - no reason for bikes that reach 100 mph in five seconds. No reason to be riding that fast in the US anyway. "Un-smogged", they're also far dirtier than the SUVs that everyone loves to hate.

Shooting - weapons that are designed to intimidate and kill. The Chinese didn't invent firearms just to shoot holes in paper.

Skateboards - do a great job at grinding handrails, curbs, sculptures, etc. Also draw the wrath of parents who'll blame anybody but their own kids when they get themselves hurt.

Complain all you want, but the reality is that you can't live in a bubble universe of your own rules, and public perception creates public laws.

Nope, not joking, and not looking at the world through your narrow-sighted prejudicial eyes either!

You only point out the bad things. I'm sure tons of folks, both pro and anti bicycle, could do the same thing about us bicyclists! Don't you?

Hot Rods don't equal race cars. You have to be kidding! I don't think that's public opinion either, that's the opinion of the lay person. Hot Rods are high performance vehicles for the most part, but today are mostly show cars driven by old farts for fun. They remember back when it was when they were kids. It's called NOSTALGIA!! Race cars are race cars, and since the govt restricted what you can and can't do to cars, the cost of parts has gone through the roof. So the poor kid who used to go to the junk yard and pick up a car, rebuild it and learn a trade (and how to make the engines, etc, more efficient, later to become automotive engineers, and maybe stay away from gangs) now joins gangs so they can steal cars and sell the parts so they can get money to buy the expensive high performance parts for their illegal street races. That's far different from Hot Rods!

I don't believe the Chinese invented firearms, they invented gun powder. Guns were made to shoot a projectile, as were bows and arrows, sling, the arm & spear, etc. As with any tool or instrument, it can be used or misused. Cars weren't invented to kill, but they kill more than any gun on a daily basis and when you're on a 6" shoulder and a SUV gives you no room, not THAT'S intimidating! If it's used properly, a gun is a gun, and in many, many sporting activities they are not used to kill. Try looking up shooting sports and see that hunting is only a part of shooting. The majority are probably used to shoot clay targets, paper targets, or steel targets! Used improperly, then it's intimidating!

Motorcycles, no reason for it to go to 100 in 5 seconds? Same for cars. Probably no need to have a highly polluting carbon fiber frame that only weighs 14 lbs so you can go faster either, but we have them. And motorcycles are also utilized as on-track race vehicles. May not be a need, but maybe a want? As for pollution controls, it's one thing to sanely regulate the emissions of a motorcycle, it's another to smog it to death only because you want to restrict and regulate it to death. Makes more pollution than a SUV? That's ridiculous! How can a smaller engine with less weight and pollution control devices make more pollution than a huge SUV! You keep misreading things. Scary! Just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean everybody else doesn't. Again, I don't like Country music, doesn't mean that nobody else should be able to like it.

Skateboards. As I said earlier, you only bring up the bad part. Not everybody scrapes and destroys anymore than we hog the lanes and hold up traffic every time we ride. You have to point out both sides not just the prejudicial side. But it's fun, non-polluting and basically free-except that the govt wants to regulate that too. Do regulation sanely if it's needed. What have the kids got to do when everything they want to do, and can afford, is taken away? Join gangs?

[/quote]"Complain all you want, but the reality is that you can't live in a bubble universe of your own rules, and public perception creates public laws.[/quote]
EXACTLY! You can't live in your bubble where you say all cars, motorcycles, skateboards, guns, etc are bad. THAT IS PREJUDICE! You have to realize that others have rights too, and banning everything you don't like is wrong. Things may need to be adjusted to make it work, but not banned! AND BACK TO THE ORIGINAL POST-we're discussing the restrictions on the activity we LOVE---BICYCLES! and the previous are just examples of what the govt has been doing to other groups!!!

Nope, not joking, and not looking at the world through your narrow-sighted prejudicial eyes either!

On the contrary -- I'm still aware of the narrow-sighted, prejudiced eyes of public opinion. I'm not telling them what they should think, I'm reminding you what they already think.

I wish I had the money and time to race cars. If I modify one, it's to make it go faster and turn harder, not to gather dust all winter in my garage. I used to ride with my best friend to the motorcycle shop and drool over the latest Ninjas; I even had a poster on my bedroom door of Santa Claus riding one with a bagful of presents. I'm a pretty darn good shot with both a rifle and pistol, at least against stationary paper targets at 500 yards or less. I never could figure out how to ollie, but I wish I could -- and I wish I had the luxury of being able to take time off to recover from the injuries I'd incur upon myself.

Why am I bothering to justify my statements to you anyway?

About this misinformation --


As for pollution controls, it's one thing to sanely regulate the emissions of a motorcycle, it's another to smog it to death only because you want to restrict and regulate it to death. Makes more pollution than a SUV? That's ridiculous! How can a smaller engine with less weight and pollution control devices make more pollution than a huge SUV!

http://www.yorkblog.com/greenmesh/2007/11/paperbased_motorcycle_catalyti.html


And, while many motorcycles actually met the 2003 California motorcycle emission standard, the California hydrocarbon standard at the time was about 20 times the 2003 federal passenger car limit.

Don't bother asking about scooters and mopeds.

Another paper, this one from the EPA back in 2003:
http://www.epa.gov/OMS/regs/roadbike/420f03045.pdf


Are motorcycles a less-polluting alternative to cars
and SUVs?

In fact, motorcycles produce more harmful emissions per mile than a car,
or even a large SUV. The current federal motorcycle standard for hydro-
carbon emissions is about 90 times the hydrocarbon standard for today’s
passenger cars. Although many of today’s motorcycles will actually meet
the current California standards, the California hydrocarbon standard is
still 18 to 24 times the current federal passenger car limit, depending on
the displacement of the motorcycle engine.

Beginning in 2004, all passenger cars, light trucks, and SUVs will be
required to meet even more stringent standards. When these standards
become effective, new SUVs will be meeting hydrocarbon standards
about 95 percent cleaner than today’s typical motorcycle.

On the contrary -- I'm still aware of the narrow-sighted, prejudiced eyes of public opinion. I'm not telling them what they should think, I'm reminding you what they already think.

I wish I had the money and time to race cars. If I modify one, it's to make it go faster and turn harder, not to gather dust all winter in my garage. I used to ride with my best friend to the motorcycle shop and drool over the latest Ninjas; I even had a poster on my bedroom door of Santa Claus riding one with a bagful of presents. I'm a pretty darn good shot with both a rifle and pistol, at least against stationary paper targets at 500 yards or less. I never could figure out how to ollie, but I wish I could -- and I wish I had the luxury of being able to take time off to recover from the injuries I'd incur upon myself.

Why am I bothering to justify my statements to you anyway?

Yes, but not everybody thinks like that, just the ones who want to regulate them to death because they don't like them, and now it appears they are looking, again, at bicycles. If you like motorcycles, cars, etc, then you should have seen what is being done to those industries, and what they may be trying to do to bicycles.

You're trying to justify your statement because you realize it doesn't make sense and that it's missing too many elements.

About this misinformation --



http://www.yorkblog.com/greenmesh/2007/11/paperbased_motorcycle_catalyti.html



Don't bother asking about scooters and mopeds.

Another paper, this one from the EPA back in 2003:
http://www.epa.gov/OMS/regs/roadbike/420f03045.pdf

WOW! You're quoting stuff that's 5-6 years old and not valid anymore. Being you're in Wash DC you must be one of them politico's that brings up old, no longer relevant info to justify your rants.

You're trying to justify your statement because you realize it doesn't make sense and that it's missing too many elements.

No, it's because you seem to have forgotten how people different from you view these things.

I thought motorbikes and mopeds were more environmentally friendly, but as I started thinking about them more and seeing the clouds of exhaust from some scooters around here, I began to wonder whether it was a valid assumption. It didn't take long to see how wrong it was -- and a "5-year-old paper" is effectively as current as we've got, even though cleaner regs are in place now. Besides, the current California 2008 requirement of 0.8 g/km is still a lot higher than what's required of SUVs. "Cleaner than heinous" is still not "clean". And besides, complaining that it'll kill the motorcycle industry is pointless -- the auto industry was predicting gloom and doom in the early 1970s when emissions regulations first took hold, but they've survived just fine.

I've considered owning a firearm, but it wouldn't be for shooting inanimate objects, it would be for killing people. Shooting paper targets and clays is just practice for shooting live targets. But where I live, if I call the cops, there's a SWAT team outside the building in about three minutes. If things got worse than they could handle, I'd want a LOT of ammo and at least an M-16 -- and I think that's a little silly for defending a small condo.

Really, you're taking complaints that aren't justified and trying to apply them to bikes. Stop wasting your time with them.

So the relevant parts of the OP were that the GOP has proposed cutting these programs that affect carfree people and cyclists:

12. terminate the Safe Routes to Schools program.
14. Terminate funding for "non-motorized" transportation.


In other words:

continue supporting the automobile and continue our dependence on foreign energy.
Maintain streets as they are--fast and convenient for motorists, but death traps for pedestrians and cyclists.
Throw away the opportunity to stimulate the economy with "clean transport" jobs.
Keep things happy for the big oil companies that have these politicians in their hip pockets.

So the relevant parts of the OP were that the GOP has proposed cutting these programs that affect carfree people and cyclists:

12. terminate the Safe Routes to Schools program.
14. Terminate funding for "non-motorized" transportation.

In other words, continue supporting the automobile and continue our dependence on foreign energy. Throw away the opportunity to stimulate the economy with "clean transport" jobs. Keep things happy for the big oil companies that have these politicians in their hip pockets.

Right -- and if these lines are caught, I can't imagine that this thing would actually pass. It's like the much-publicized photo of Pres. Obama riding with his kids never existed.

Besides, this isn't even legislation, and it hasn't passed through a Congressional vote, either. It's just a list of recommendations -- and if I've learned anything about how government actually works, it's that such lists are never fully adhered to.

Right -- and if these lines are caught, I can't imagine that this thing would actually pass. It's like the much-publicized photo of Pres. Obama riding with his kids never existed.

Besides, this isn't even legislation, and it hasn't passed through a Congressional vote, either. It's just a list of recommendations -- and if I've learned anything about how government actually works, it's that such lists are never fully adhered to.

And it's a list of recommmendations proposed by a party that currently has almost zero political power.

And it's a list of recommmendations proposed by a party that currently has almost zero political power.

Yup. While we're at it, and in case it's gotten lost in the usual BF bickering, here's the specifics in the paper:

Safe Routes To Schools:

Terminate Safe Routes To Schools Program

Created only in 2005, the Federal “Safe Routes to Schools Program” finances what have
traditionally been viewed as local responsibilities, namely financing sidewalks and bike paths,
crossing guards and other infrastructure and non-infrastructure projects to assist children who
walk or bike to school. Returning these responsibilities to state and local officials would save
taxpayers $183 million a year or $915 million over five years.

That's typical GOP thinking, but exchanging one federal program for local programs really wouldn't be any cheaper to us -- it's still our taxes that would pay for them. Many programs end up sounding like political resumé-builders anyway (DC's SmartBike program is like that, IMO), and I've got an unfortunate suspicion that this Safe Routes program was another one.


Terminate Federal Transportation Funding For “Non-Motorized” Transportation Projects

The Federal government is currently spending $25 million a year to fund four Non-motorized
Transportation Pilot programs. This program is designed to fund a network of “non-motorized
transportation infrastructure facilities” to encourage residents to walk or bike rather than using a
car. Refocusing Federal resources on transportation projects with a federal nexus would save
taxpayers $125 million over five years.

Again, that's a GOP-style "leave local projects to local governments" recommendation. The question then becomes whether cycling infrastructure needs financial and material support such as that given to the national interstate system.

Weren't there a couple of guys named Wright who had a bike shop in Ohio?
Yes, but they came to North Carolina and they're still coming.:p