Dems Admit Highway Hostility

Democrats looking to the 2022 election must worry that some of their number are working so hard to alienate the vast majority of American voters. As noted in Politico, members of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, led by the Antiplanner’s own congressman, Peter DeFazio, are openly hostile to American’s favorite form of travel.

“You can’t pave over the whole country,” says DeFazio, whose INVEST Act, which recently passed the House, contains provisions that would severely restrict the ability of state to spend federal highway dollars on new highways. Yet highways occupy a vanishingly small share of the nation’s land area, and the idea that there is any danger to them paving over the whole country is just fear mongering.

Americans use highways for 87 percent of their personal travel while Amtrak and transit, which DeFazio and friends favor, provide just 1 percent of passenger-miles. There are good reasons for this: motor vehicles and highways are cheap, convenient, and fast relative to the Democrats’ alternatives. So it’s not surprising that 92 percent of American households own at least one car, 96 percent of American workers live in a household with at least one car, and at least a third of the 4 percent of American workers who live in households without cars nonetheless get to work by automobile.

The automobile has made Americans the most mobile people on earth. In 2019, the average American traveled 16,000 miles by automobile, which is at least 50 percent more than the total per capita travel of the people of any other country. Other countries that have spent heavily on high-speed rail, urban transit, and other modes have travel haven’t come close to duplicating the mobility we have.

Take away our cars and we are not only less mobile, we will have lower incomes, much higher transportation costs, higher costs for housing and other consumer goods, and be less resilient in the event of natural or unnatural disasters. In other words, Democrats are threatening one of the very foundations of our economy.
Shatavari, else known as asparagus cheap levitra no prescription racemosus is a safe way to improve the flexibility of joints. Copulation is not a burden – It is necessary to memorize that the dilemma with Premature Ejaculation is more about managing the duration. viagra prescription buy Ginseng is another exotic remedy to treat erectile dysfunction troubles. online purchase viagra free prescription for levitra Most people may develop retrogressive change to various degrees with their ages increasing.
They tell themselves that cars and highways represent “a 1950s approach” and transit and Amtrak are the “future.” But they are wrong: transit and Amtrak are the nineteenth-century approach, while the future will always be about personal transportation.

How can members of a political party be so openly hostile to something that is used and, in many cases, loved by so many Americans? A sociologist I once knew named John Finley Scott observed that people who learned to drive when they were 16 (and still considered themselves immortal) implicitly consider driving to be a symbol of freedom, while people who didn’t bother to learn to drive until they were in their late 20s or so (by which time they have experienced a few indications of mortality) considered driving to be a scary, threatening experience. (Scott also happened to be a cycling enthusiast and is considered to be the developer of the first mountain bike.)

In today’s heavily sorted world, transportation is one of the factors leading to the bifurcation of American politics. Those who consider cars to be devil machines move to inner cities where they can rely more on transit or cycling and vote solidly Democrat. Those who consider cars to be symbols of freedom move to auto-friendly suburbs or rural areas, but are not so solidly Republican and can be swayed to the Democrat side when confronted with conservative candidates who alienate them based on issues such as abortion, gay rights, or immigration.

As a result, urban Democrats can be openly hostile to automobiles and even those who (like DeFazio) represent suburban and rural areas can feel safe so long as their Republican opponents act kooky. To win, Republicans need to point out that it is the Democrats who are kooks. With the help of the Politico article, they will be able to do so.

Tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

About The Antiplanner

The Antiplanner is a forester and economist with more than fifty years of experience critiquing government land-use and transportation plans.

10 Responses to Dems Admit Highway Hostility

  1. Henry Porter says:

    American Automobile Association (AAA), with its 60 million members, and American Trucking Association (ATA), with its 37,000 members, could be loud and effective advocates for drivers but they appear to be silent while Democrats openly plot to reduce America’s mobility. They ought to be handing out yellow vests to their members! (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_vests_protests)

    Instead, they leave the heavy lifting to the American Road & Transportation Builders Association (ARTBA), which can be easily painted as a self interested group of contractors at the receiving end of the money flow.

  2. rovingbroker says:

    Today’s Wall Street Journal reports …

    After more than a year working from home during a pandemic, many Americans are rethinking whether they want to return to commuting—or even live near their office at all. Smaller and more rural housing markets are emerging as the hottest new places to live and own.

    Billings, Coeur D’Alene, Fort Wayne, Rapid City, Raleigh, Portland – South Portland, Waco, Johnson City, Bangor and Huntsville are the top ten.

    They also report that, “During the pandemic, home buyers in high-cost markets have been willing to trade longer commutes for lower prices.”

    This is part of a pattern unrecognized by urban planners — people no longer need to live near where they work, rather they work near where they want to live.

  3. paul says:

    I agree completely with the Antiplanner that money should be spent on the most productive form of transport such as cars and roads, and that Democrats should determine policy based on good sense and data. However, to get my vote the Republicans must stop being anti-science and embrace a sensible cost effective policy on climate change mitigation, encourage covid vaccination and mask wearing and social distancing. I agree with the Antiplanner that Trump was “crazy” and will not vote for Trump and any Republicans who support or are endorsed by him. It is time for the Republicans to start using critical thinking and reasoning. It is also time for the Democrats to start embracing more critical thinking and evidence based reasoning, but at present they acknowledge science and evidence to a greater degree than Republicans. For all his faults, at least Biden is not “crazy.”

    • Sandy Teal says:

      Seriously, who do you think is actually making the decisions of The Executive Branch? You do know Joe Biden’s work schedule each day, right?

      I hope it is just Jill Biden, but I am afraid there are others that have no oversight and no accountability.

  4. CapitalistRoader says:

    Paul, I had to look up the Antiplanner’s description of Trump as crazy. You’re right, he did call him crazy:

    I’ve supported President Trump’s transportation policies, but Trump himself seems to me to be a crazy man. That doesn’t mean his policies are crazy; like any president’s, some are good and some not so good. But by middle-class standards, which means my standards, his behavior has been insane, and never more so than in the last few days.

    The difference is, Biden is an order of magnitude more corrupt and corruptible than Trump was. Trump’s lack of corruption resulted in relatively sane transportation policy. Biden’s transportation policies on the other hand are insane.

    It all comes down to money: It stands to reason that for-profit and non-profit corporations that will reward politicians who shovel the most taxpayer money their way. And the Democratic Party–specifically including Joe Biden–is the party of big money; has been for decades.

    Re: Science, I’ll remind you what this POTUS said about it: [emphasis mine]

    Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.

    In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.

    Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity

    The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded. Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.

  5. CapitalistRoader says:

    A very recent example of how politics corrupts science, critical thinking, and reasoning:

    A Canadian scientist and Harvard postdoctoral associate said colleagues might have feared vocalizing support for the Wuhan lab leak hypothesis out of concern that it would be viewed as showing support for potentially inflammatory views espoused by former President Trump.

    Alina Chan is one of 18 experts who signed a letter in May calling for a thorough exploration into the origins of the coronavirus pandemic. Although Chan voiced her support for an investigation into the possibility of a lab leak early in the pandemic, she told NBC that experts were careful not to lean too close to views linked to the former president.

    “At the time, it was scarier to be associated with Trump and to become a tool for racists, so people didn’t want to publicly call for an investigation into lab origins,” she said.

    Fear of link to Trump motivated expert skepticism of lab leak theory, scientist says

    And now, with Joe safely installed in office, science, critical thinking, and reasoning are safe again:

    Washington (CNN)Senior Biden administration officials overseeing an intelligence review into the origins of the coronavirus now believe the theory that the virus accidentally escaped from a lab in Wuhan is at least as credible as the possibility that it emerged naturally in the wild — a dramatic shift from a year ago, when Democrats publicly downplayed the so-called lab leak theory.

  6. metrosucks says:

    Defazio is a senile POS and an embarrassment to the region. So, perfect for Oregon progressives. I’m sure he knows the toy trains and transit are useless for their stated purposes, but the contributions from unions keep his lying lips moving:

    https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/peter-defazio/industries?cid=N00007781&cycle=2020

  7. Sandy Teal says:

    I was listening to NPR and they did an interview with an urban planner and how important his work was to society. The urban planner expert explained that most of what he worked on was undoing the damage done by prior urban planning efforts that did far more damage than help.

    Of course, the meaning of that is that MORE money is needed and MORE intervention is needed. After all, how can “capitalism” provide things people need like child care near transit centers and fresh produce in neighborhood stores? That only happens in the suburbs because of “profits”, and we don’t want those in the city.

    Eventually, the long interview revealed it was propaganda for the infrastructure bill and how child care and fresh produce in tiny bodegas is really the same as roads and bridges.

  8. LazyReader says:

    The automobile has made Americans the most mobile people on earth.”

    That’s not technically true. Auto-centric urban planning makes cars Necessary. The amount of miles you accumulate is not tell tale sign of economic superiority. Commutes as long as 50-100 miles just to go to work are Not Uncommon.

    People pay little attention to lowtech solutions to problems people spend fortunes and software trying to fix. One of the most low-tech innovations ever the humble bicycle and the capacity to walk. I’ve gotten an e-assist bike, I love it. Now and for little effort get’s me anywhere in a 5 mile radius. We noted the appeal of pedal power; with E-Assist, effort is slashed exponentially. Average bike is 4-5x faster than a pedestrian for roughly the same metabolic energy. At brisk speed of 13 mph, a bike will accomplish a fifth of a mile in one minute or a mile in five. Some whine about bike being unable to carry huge quantity of groceries, but that’s beside point, namely if you bike you can obtain your groceries daily. Need milk, get milk, need eggs, get eggs. At 3-4 dollars a gallon you no longer need a Gallon of gas to get a gallon of milk.

    During the 2008 gas fuel energy crisis, large SUV sales Collapsed, so did light trucks and that was gas at 3 a gallon. Europeans pay 4-10, Still mobile. Because they drive vehicles with over 40 mpg and many ride a menagerie micro cars, scooters, moped

Leave a Reply