Ken Orski on the administration’s re-elect me-centered transportation proposal

I’m supposed to give a talk over in the Bedrosian Center on transportation and the Road to the White House. What the sam hill am I supposed to say at this point? The Senate, the House, and the White House have all put together fantasy proposals that are all about election-year posturing and symbolic politics—-because they all know what we should, by now, know: there ain’t nothing getting passed this year.


Ken Orski is more mature about this nonsense than I am over at the Infra Blog. He writes:

The President’s FY 2013 budget submission offered the Administration a rare opportunity to rise above partisanship and influence the ongoing transportation reauthorization debate in a positive way.

But, alas, it didn’t turn out that way.

Go read Mr. Oski’s piece because he, unlike me, is capable of talking about it without a) ranting and b) running to the liquor cabinet to see if there’s any Grey Goose to put in my orange juice (locally grown, organic, fresh-squeezed.)

I quit.

One thought on “Ken Orski on the administration’s re-elect me-centered transportation proposal

  1. gee, lisa, as a land-use person, i have this prollem permanently. at least you’ve got legislation and budgets to talk about. i’d have to talk about how the republicans, the inheritors of theodore roosevelt, are making utter fools of themselves about one of his largest legacies, the federal public lands. two weeks ago mrom mused in public that he doesn’t know why we have them, and rpaul advocated selling them all off to private interests. it’s hard to know which position is more demagogic. mrom went to college in utah, a big public-lands state, and ran the 2002 utah winter olympics, which largely took place on public lands. (plus the idea of mrom musing about anything in public sounds phony right there.) rpaul must know or know of homesteader families and their descendants who could briefly fill him in on the folly of selling off 1.2 million square miles *in the middle of a housing recession.* all in all, by comparison you’ve got it easy

Comments are closed.