Category — Oil

And Obama did not stand up to the automobile companies. He was silent like Job.

Mr. Obama was elected partly with the enthusiastic support of the unions, who liked his talk of protecting jobs by renegotiating trade agreements.

We are paying for our own demise. It is not unlike in totalitarian countries where families are assessed the cost of the child’s execution. Our crime? Not buying big, gas guzzling cars, and moving towards mass transit wherever it was available.

Now we pay the price.

Healthcare Economist makes a great point that the time to raise the gas tax is right now, as soon as the new Congress is sworn in and Obama takes the reigns.

1. When gas prices were over $4 per gallon, raising the gas tax was politically infeasible. Now, however, with the price of gas under $2.50 in San Diego, a gas tax increase of 50 cents per gallon would still keep gas prices under $3 (which doesn’t sound too bad anymore).
2. Furthermore, the government is looking for new revenue sources to plug its huge deficit and the gas tax is one solution.
3. Finally, since the elections have just taken place, politicians have some measure of job security at least for a few years. With this added job security, Congressmen and Congresswomen can increase the gas tax without having to worry about pandering to voters.

Less traffic, less pollution, and more money for debt or tax relief. An increase in the gas tax is a win-win proposition.

Tax relief? That’s a really silly idea — we have a deficit that is killing us, and are waging some very expensive wars with no end or purpose in sight But that just goes to show you — even some on the fiscal-Right are on board for addressing our energy needs, and expanding mass transit dramatically.

And now is a great time to do this. Right, Ron?

Hat tip: Chanoch

Perhaps the collapse of the American automobile industry is an opportunity to move past the myth that all Americans must have their cars. In fact, this was a great nation before we all had cars. So too, we can be a great nation when not everyone has cars. Perhaps families can have one car. Perhaps some, like myself, can find they live meaningful and productive lives with no car at all.

For many, it is unimaginable that the U.S. would cease to be a car-producing nation. Well, we would probably be a lot better off if we weren’t one. It would be easier to focus on expanding alternatives to driving, and there would be less stubborn resistance to enacting legislation over foreign manufacturing protests, as oppose to domestic ones, and their vociferous claims that any and every new improvement will “hurt the economy”

The auto industry is responsible for a lot of our environmental problems, and for the intensity of our oil addiction.

There should be no bailout. Let these pushers go down.

Maryland, outside of the few DC metro lines, is impossible to get around without a car, and the commute is often unbearable. Bal-Wash is a parking lot during the extended rush hours.

Ken Ulman, of the Baltimore Regional Transportation Board, wants to change that. He wants to help.

“Some people feel we can build our way out of this by building more roads, but that’s a shortsighted focus,” Ulman said.

Instead, he wants to designate “$340 million in future state transportation funding for mass transit projects.”

But as the Baltimore Sun reports, some Maryland Republicans have a better idea. Just build more roads. Because that is working so well.

But last week, officials who represent Howard’s rural areas decried the change, saying it was unfair for their constituents to pay gasoline taxes to fund mass transit that they rarely use.

“It sounds like some Marylanders are going to get a free ride at the expense of others,” fumed Del. Warren E. Miller, a western county Republican who says gasoline tax money ought to go exclusively to highways. Transit should be funded separately, he said.

Miller, Del. Gail H. Bates and Sen. Allan H. Kittleman, all Republicans, said that despite high gas prices and growing demand for bus and train service and parking, transit passengers should pay more through higher fares, which cover less than half the cost of the service.

“Oh, come on. We’re going to be putting in more mass transit that doesn’t even begin to pay for itself?” Bates asked. “I think we’re slighting my taxpayers.”

In fact, it is the people who drive who would be getting the free ride if they don’t put in tax dollars. Mass transit is unique in that it benefits even those who don’t partake in it, because they enjoy less traffic and less pollution.

And that’s just some of the local benefits.

Ken Ulman is taking a risk to help people even though the benefits may not be felt fully for decades. And unfortunately, that makes him unique for an elected public official, as there is pressure to prefer enacting policies and programs whose benefits manifest earlier, as they translate into re-election easier. Instead, Ulman has placed the long-term needs of the constituency he serves above his own short-term ones.

And that kind of makes him a hero. And one day, I wouldn’t be surprised if some public works or building is named after him.

While CNN continues to scratch its head and declines to even mention mass transit as a possibility for alleviation of the cost of oil spike afflicting this nation, others are noticing the solution, and the problem.

Let us be clear. People are increasingly using mass transit, when it is an option.

When it is an option.

ABC News reports,

Only about 5 percent of the American public uses public transportation to commute regularly. In part, that’s because only about 20 percent have easy access to trains, subways, and buses. Most of those people are located in the densely populated Northeast and in other urban areas. There, the infrastructure exists, but the ability to expand to cope with increases is somewhat limited.

And even when it is an option, you still have to get to the metro. And that is no easy feat.

The Baltimore Sun reports,

But even after a recent addition of 428 spaces, parking at Halethorpe station is at capacity by the time Conners’ train rumbles in, and commuters’ parked cars snake down Southwestern Boulevard. One recent morning, the former Sun editor couldn’t find a clearly legal space within a half-mile. She took her chances and found a $27 ticket on her windshield that evening.

How many people are discouraged from using mass transit because of experiences like this?

In a state with widely dispersed development, Kay said, public transit will never be a “door-to-door experience.”

Well, it needs to be, and that takes a rush-hour bus/van system that feeds into the metro system of each city.

But even as more and more Americans are turning to mass transit, regional systems are not only unable to grow accordingly, some are actually cutting service because of lack of necessary funds.

Almost 40 percent say they were forced to delay or cancel planned service increases, and the same portion had to transfer funds from their capital budgets to their operating expenses. Almost 20 percent even had to cut service, despite the increase in demand.

The Cleveland area is an example. Last year, the transit agency spent $12 million on fuel. This year, it’s expecting fuel to cost as much as $20 million. At the beginning of the year, it cut bus service lines by 5 percent.

Why is this happening?

The Washington Post today explained the economic reasons for the budget crunch of mass transit systems in its editorial “Screeching to a Halt.”

The rush to mass transit is accentuating what has been plain for years — that America’s investment in its public transportation infrastructure is glaringly, perilously inadequate. The gasoline tax, which provides the main source of transportation and transit revenue, has not been increased since 1993. As a funding source it is being dangerously eroded by inflation and Americans’ decreased driving mileage.

The good news is that both parties are to blame, so at least we have that ever elusive bi-partisan initiative when it comes to doing bubkes.

Washington’s inattention to public transportation is bipartisan and longstanding. Congress and the Bush administration have done little to fix it. In the omnibus transportation bill signed in 2005 (covering the period from 2003 to 2008), annual funding for mass transit is targeted at around $10 billion, of which about $7 billion goes to capital infrastructure projects. Add that to state and local funding, and the nation’s total capital spending on transit amounts to roughly $13 billion annually. But even by the administration’s conservative estimates, the minimum need is closer to $20 billion. And the American Public Transportation Association reckons $45 billion to $60 billion annually would be optimal to replace and modernize aging buses, facilities, subways and rail systems. That’s quite a gap.

And the nation is led by a president who is concurrently an oil company mogul.

Meanwhile, the administration has slashed spending on new mass transit projects while toughening approval criteria and insisting that states and localities pony up greater shares of such projects, often up to half.

The Washington Post does not mince words.

Last year, a bipartisan commission recommended sharply higher levels of funding for transportation of all kinds, including mass transit. The panel’s recommendations included raising the gas tax. Although Transportation Secretary Mary Peters was on the commission, she declined to endorse its findings. Her head-in-the-sand posture neatly captured the administration’s abdication of responsibility.

And by the way, inflationary pressures due to the skyrocketing cost of oil are affecting corporate profits and producing inflationary pressures far outside the cost of transport itself. True, it hasn’t translated into a dramatic rise in the cost of durable goods…but just give it time.

We’re in for a rough ride.

At times, when calling for a massive expansion and utilization of mass transit, I have seen preference for hybrids instead of rail and buses. Even friends who themselves would prefer to see the same thing have treated my insistence like that of a flower child who demands peace and an end to all international conflicts. Americans like their cars. End of story. Solutions, albeit only partial ones, must be emphasized. Mass transit expansion on a significant level simply wasn’t a possibility for most of the U.S. In many dark moments, I secretly suspected they were right. Until last night, that is.

The NY Times reports,

With the price of gas approaching $4 a gallon, more commuters are abandoning their cars and taking the train or bus instead.

Mass transit systems around the country are seeing standing-room-only crowds on bus lines where seats were once easy to come by. Parking lots at many bus and light rail stations are suddenly overflowing, with commuters in some towns risking a ticket or tow by parking on nearby grassy areas and in vacant lots.

“In almost every transit system I talk to, we’re seeing very high rates of growth the last few months,” said William W. Millar, president of the American Public Transportation Association.

“It’s very clear that a significant portion of the increase in transit use is directly caused by people who are looking for alternatives to paying $3.50 a gallon for gas.”

And there are some very interesting surprises.

…the biggest surges — of 10 to 15 percent or more over last year — are occurring in many metropolitan areas in the South and West where the driving culture is strongest and bus and rail lines are more limited.

What does this, along with other encouraging factors, mean?

The Energy Department recently predicted that Americans would consume slightly less gasoline this year than last — for the first yearly decline since 1991.

In fact, growth is so strong, we now have a problem.

But meeting the greater demand for mass transit is proving difficult. The cost of fuel and power for public transportation is about three times that of four years ago, and the slowing economy means local sales tax receipts are down, so there is less money available for transit services. Higher steel prices are making planned expansions more expensive.

Typically, mass transit systems rely on fares to cover about a third of their costs, so they depend on sales taxes and other government funding. Few states use gas tax revenue for mass transit.

I personally would level a national gas tax that would be divided between each state and national mass transit projects. This is an emergency situation. It cannot wait. We must act now.

And we have reason to believe the public will support such a measure.

The South Florida Regional Transportation Authority, which operates a commuter rail system from Miami to Fort Lauderdale and West Palm Beach, posted a rise of more than 20 percent in rider numbers this March and April as monthly ridership climbed to 350,000.

“Nobody believed that people would actually give up their cars to ride public transportation,” said Joseph J. Giulietti, executive director of the authority. “But in the last year, and last several months in particular, we have seen exactly that.”

We live in a time that is Whiggish in its consumerism. Everything is better and better, products increasingly efficient, etc.

But when we run out of cheap oil, this may reverse itself to some degree, despite our technological know-how. We may know how to bake the best cake in the world…but you can only do so much with substitutes if you don’t have flour.

I am, to be clear, an abolitionist on the residential automobile. The kind of society we need to create is a radical, almost incomprehensible reversal of Jeffersonian America.

Long-term, there is no other way, and long-term is a lot shorter-term than we would like to think.

Never the less, there are some obvious shorter-term alleviations that we should be able to force Congress to pass right now. In an email, Set America Free writes,

The way to break OPEC’s stronghold over our economy argues Robert Zubrin is for Congress to pass a law requiring that all new cars sold in the U.S. be “flex-fueled,” capable of running on any combination of gasoline or alcohol fuels: Such cars already exist – two dozen different models of flex-fuel vehicles (FFVs) are being produced by Detroit’s Big Three this year – and they only cost about $100 more than identical models that can run on gasoline only. But this constitutes only about 3 percent of the new-car market. Within three years of such an Open Fuel Standard, there would be 50 million cars on American roads capable of running on alcohol fuels. Under those conditions, fuel pumps dispensing alcohol would be everywhere – creating, for the first time, an effectively open market in vehicle fuels, and competition for OPEC oil.

I am a public transit fanatic, particularly on rail, and I like the (newly revamped and expanded) site Jspot generally, and enjoy Rabbi Jill Jacobs’ posts specifically.

Which is why it is so bizarre that Rabbi Jacobs can be so wrong about something we both agree on passionately.

Rabbi Jacobs writes in “Subway rage, “

“I’m a huge fan of all subways, but particularly of the New York subway system;”

Me too! Here, I expect Rabbi Jacobs to launch into the brilliance of our express trains (we invented them!) and how other Americans need to learn to live without a car like we do.

Instead, Rabbi Jacobs writes,

unlike many other places, where it’s easy to avoid encountering anyone of a different race, ethnicity, or socio-economic class, the city forces people of all walks of life into close contact with one another through the shared experience of the subway commute.

With all due respect, Rabbi Jacobs, who cares? We have an emergency situation where we are running out of cheap oil, we are destroying the earth, and you are focusing on the cheap thrills of diversity?

“A public space is defined as a place that’s open to all people–you can’t lock out the homeless, the smelly”

It is, in fact, the homeless who represent exactly what Jeffersonian America is afraid of. The most responsible thing NYC could do for the good of the country is rid our subway of the homeless. I would call in the goons tomorrow for that reason alone. And you could figure out what to do with them instead of abusing our subway system which is for commuters.

There are sites and groups that only champion social justice and rarely tackle economic justice. To be fair, this is not true of Jspot, and it is not true of Rabbi Jacobs. However, I feel this post represents which is given greater weight, and why this is misguided.

Eli Valley teamed up with the incorrigible Daniel “let’s privatize social security” Koffler this weekend. I guess I can appreciate that these two sissies don’t feel safe taking me on singlehandedly and I do recognize that it probably is more of a fair fight if it is both of them against me at once rather than one at a time. Still, I have to say that Valley’s accusations were bizarre.

Valley wrote,

Kelsey, what’s amazing — and, to be honest, somewhat worrisome, and, if people were actually listening here, tragic — about your monomaniacal obsession with mass transit is your perplexing inability to connect the dots. I’m gonna write this as clearly as I can, so clearly that even an overeager hipster with his nose stuck in his “Common Yiddish Phrases” Dictionary (bought used, of course, at The Strand, for 59 cents, after a long ride on the 1 Train from the Upper West Side) can understand:[...]

You are working for the Saudi Royal Family. This is actually a more logical explanation than #1, as I don’t think you’re dumb, just sometimes an imbecile, and that’s okay, it’s part of what gives you your “charm,” the same way, for instance, that a small child, after wetting his or her pants, will have that reddish flush on their face betraying confusion, embarrassment, and a barely discernible trace of rage. That’s you, and that’s why you blog, and again, that’s okay.

I’m just saying there has to be some logical explanation for why, over and over again, you exhort us to public transit while lashing out at people — myself in the past, Koffler here — for mentioning that the influence of money in our politics is one of the reasons we’re so screwed up. And it’s why there will never be the kind of mass transit in this country you keep getting your throat so sore over.

So here’s a question for you to answer, hopefully with greater alacrity than the Clintons disclosing what oil-drenched hands have been dropping millions into their bank accounts:

Are you working for the Saudi Royal Family?

Because I know you can’t be making enough at your own “Jewish” “hipster” magazine.

So just tell us — in round terms, I’m not looking for a full IRS filing here — how much are they paying you for these constant defenses? $350,000 a quarter? Is it just the Saudis, or the UAE too? Dubai? And do they pay you extra for the posts where you stand on your tricycle shouting about mass transit, knowing full well it’s a red herring given our addiction to oil reinforced by their infusion of cash throughout our political system?

Do they buy you bagels and rugelach too? They’re nothing if not shrewd, and I know they’d want you to continue feeling like an LES Jewish hipster even while shilling for Big Oil.

Look inside your heart and give us the honest figure, Kelsey. I’ll give you till tomorrow night to sort through your stubs, invoices, receipts and knishes.