|
Post by James Fujita on Jun 22, 2007 10:57:17 GMT -8
well, Mr. Roadtrainer, you have certainly set an ingenious trap for me with your little insults. does a bill inevitably end up more moderate than when it started by the time it reaches the president's desk? of course, that is the nature of our political system- compromise. however, I will say this: the Republican Party was in charge of Congress from 1994 through 2006. It is the majority party which sets the agenda and the Democrats have been on the defensive for at least a decade. During all that time, federal transit spending has been, for all practical intents and purposes, stagnant. But I digress. You wanted to know what Democrats have done for for transit? I'll give you several examples: - Mayor Tom Bradley. Served as mayor from 1973- 1993. significant backer of the Wilshire Subway, aka the Red Line. - County Supervisor Baxter Ward. Served from 1974-1980. made several failed attempts at getting a mass transit system started in Los Angeles, and was a backer of Proposition A in 1980, which finally got the ball rolling. "Nobody else is going to pay for mass transit. If we wait for the Federal Government, it will be two centuries before the job gets done." -Ward, quoted by Time Magazine, 1976 - County Supervisor Kenneth Hahn. served on the board from 1952- 1992. was the primary backer of what would become the Metro Blue Line. without these three, Los Angeles wouldn't have a Metro Rail. I would add Antonio Villaraigosa, Democrat, for his Tom Bradley-esque vision of a "subway to the sea," but we'll see what becomes of that. yes, there have been Democratic villains and Republican heroes on rail, but you didn't ask for those
|
|
|
Post by roadtrainer on Jun 22, 2007 18:06:40 GMT -8
8-)Mr.Fajita: I don't write to insult you, as a mater of fact I address you as "Mister" because it is a thing you do when you address someone and as it is recognized as a matter of respect in many countries. I will address you on issues where I feel I need to and I have noticed that you do Hammer Republicans alot and I can see it. Maybe you need to go back and look at some of your opinions and see what I'm talking about. It is good that in America that we have many opinions and are free to express them. When people or political parties don't want to hear an opinion other than their own, then we as a nation are in alot of trouble. A case in point is a Mr. Ruben Castillo,, A former Whittier Transit bus operator from Cuba. Before he was allowed to leave Cuba he spent 4 years in jail because he publicly criticized Fidel Castro! Now not to offend you or any other but this web site allows opinions other than you and me. So Peace out Brother! Have a great week, month ,and a life !! Sincerely The Road trainer
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Jun 22, 2007 19:03:23 GMT -8
Roadtrainer- I do believe you missed my point. It wasn't the "Mister" part that I took offense at, and it certainly wasn't a personal insult. But, I forgive you. If it sounds like I'm "hammering" anyone, it's only because I do hold strong opinions on a wide range of subjects and if telling the truth is hammering, then I guess I am guilty. But I do agree that no one should be accused of treason just for criticizing any nation's leaders
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Jun 22, 2007 21:14:32 GMT -8
One nice thing about transportation is that, by and large, it's nonpartisan. I can tell you that politics changes a lot of things, but in general The Transit Coalition will pursue a nonpartisan course. Right now, the most organized, pro-transit/activist regions are the conservative, relatively Republican SGV and the liberal, relatively Democratic Westside.
As much as I think there has been an unfortunate red/blue state spending issue on homeland security and transportation, it is my hope that a new direction to the FTA with a new Administration of either party will help things out.
|
|
|
Post by roadtrainer on Jun 23, 2007 6:17:10 GMT -8
Roadtrainer- I do believe you missed my point. It wasn't the "Mister" part that I took offense at, and it certainly wasn't a personal insult. But, I forgive you. Mr. Fujita: ;D Lets meet at the next TTC dinner and I'll buy you a coffee and we'll shake hands. Sincererly The Roadtrainer
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Jun 23, 2007 8:24:54 GMT -8
heh. regrettably, my schedule is such that I have only been able to attend maybe one or two transit coalition events in the whole time that I have been a transit fan (which has been as long as I can remember). at the moment, my situation is such that attending a TTC meeting would require grabbing an Amtrak bus. anyhoo, this has been a fascinating discussion, and I hope that we can wrap it up soon, because I think that too much politics is bad for transportation policy. I started this thread because I had read about a candidate who had done something quite remarkable, which is hold a press conference regarding light rail. I posted an article in the spirit of "hey, get a load of this" and not really "you should vote for this dude," although admittedly, I wouldn't complain if people did. I think it is important that we pay attention to what candidates and elected officials say regarding transit, and as much as I hate single-issue politics, there is something to be said for supporting the people who support your causes. this discussion bought up some really important points, and I really liked Ken's idea of presenting transit as an investment. (I liked it because he addresses the question of how do you deal with the person who might support rail but won't support higher taxes) I think my earlier hypothesis is still valid, and I had an interesting thought this morning: the political/economic spectrum runs the gambit from total anarchy, where the government controls and pays for nothing (from police services to transit to education), to total control, where the government would control everything including what you eat for breakfast. obviously, most of us play around in the middle ground, although some of us are obviously further to the left or right than others taking this thought a step further, I think we will find that, as transit fans, we may need to shift our focus somewhat depending upon who it is we are trying to convince of the necessity of transit: some will be swayed by environmental arguments, while others may need more of a "traffic is way over congested, we need to invest in alternatives" argument. still others might need the "property values will go up if this light rail line is built" explanation. it is important to keep that in mind. unfortunately, some people may be totally beyond hope, but if everybody was on the same side, we wouldn't be here discussing these things and trying to rally around this issue!
|
|
|
Post by movedeast on Jun 23, 2007 20:28:32 GMT -8
Nice to think about. Now that I've lived in NYC for three months (after 21 years in LA) I've realized its not who is in the White House Californians need to be concerned about. The catalyst is the LOCAL commitment. Feds dole out funds to those with a comprehensive plan. I am amazed at the grand projects here getting funding left and right.
You guys deserve a lot of credit for keeping LA's forward momentum going with a half committed and distracted government team and a bickering populace. There's a lot of work to do! Keep it up transit coalition.
|
|