Back in the Air Again

The Antiplanner is spending this week in Washington, DC. On Thursday, I’ll be joining the Reason Foundation’s Bob Poole in speaking about federal transportation funding. That will take place in “Congressional Meeting Room South” in the new Capitol Visitor Center from 1:30 to 3:00 pm.

On Friday, I’ll be speaking at the 5th annual Public-Private Partnership conference about the comparative environmental costs of various modes of transportation. That is taking place at the Ronald Reagan Building/International Trade Center, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, from about 10 to 11 am.
Just make sure you seek out a professionals opinion as soon as possible. buy generic cialis This expansion of the phallus is cheapest generic tadalafil new.castillodeprincesas.com what we know as erection. This chemical tadalafil buy in usa can be produced with a small magical effect of you touching, kissing or caressing. One discount cialis key factor in maintaining a growing protein on a part of one’s biological body is obvious: one must maintain a healthy diet.
If you are in DC, perhaps I will see you at one of these two events.

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.

9 Responses to Back in the Air Again

  1. Hugh Jardonn says:

    Since you’re busy gallivanting around the country, you probably have not seen the news that the Transportation Solutions Defense and Education Fund, known as TRANSDEF, and two former BART directors, Sherman Lewis and Roy Nakadegawa, filed suits against MTC and ACTIA for funding BART from Fremont to Warm Springs because the funding from Warm Springs to San Jose is not lined up yet.

    TRANSDEF’s explanation and court documents are here:
    transdef.org/BART/Warm_Springs.html

    VTA watch explains it here:
    vtawatch.blogspot.com/2009/03/lawsuit-against-bait-and-switch.html

    More here:
    transbayblog.com/2009/03/04/lawsuit-challenges-the-warm-springs-funding-swap/#more-3033

    and here:
    http://www.abetteroakland.com/roy-nakadegawa-my-hero/2009-03-06

    Lets hope that TRANSDEF is able to stop this insanity.

  2. the highwayman says:

    Commuter rail service needs to be expanded, not BART.

  3. the highwayman says:

    BTW, that thing on Reason(sic)TV where Rob Poole was doing that sales pitch for the American Trucking Assocation was really funny.

    The ATA are a bunch of clowns any ways, to them people shipping LTL is a bad thing!

  4. Scott says:

    High-guy said, “Commuter rail service needs to be expanded, not BART.”

    What commuter rail should be expanded? ACE, Caltrain, Capital Corridor?
    There is a proposed SMART Rail in Marin County.
    That’s about all there is for Commuter rail in the Bay Area.
    You are talking about that area, right? Otherwise your reference to BART is wrong. The BART-type rail has not been used in any other place. It is incompatible with a larger gauge.

    The VTA LRT is not, nor is any of Muni. Does AC Transit have any?

    Please back up your statement. For once, prove that you have discussion skills?

    Why should commuter rail be expanded?
    How many people live & work within a 1/4 mile of whatever route you are proposing. Can the riders pay for it?
    Car drivers can easily pay for roads.
    Another 50 cents on gas & highways could be all user funded.

  5. the highwayman says:

    Scott: Car drivers can easily pay for roads.

    That’s a straw man.

    The street in front of your house would still need to be there even if every one in your neighbor hood didn’t have a car.

  6. Scott says:

    That’s not a strawman.
    Please familiarize yourself with what that means.

    BTW, property taxes pay for neighborhood infrastructure.

    Damn are you lost.

  7. the highwayman says:

    That’s just my point, you pay for roads whether or not you drive.

  8. dave.s. says:

    Thanks for inviting me (I went to your talk at PPP). I had to talk my way in – the women at the front desk noted quite reasonably that I hadn’t paid my way in. I was interested in your response to the statement that Portland emissions had gone down – as a parent of young children, I do notice that a huge amount of my driving is because I am taking them somewhere, shopping for them, etc. So it makes intuitive sense that if Portland is solid DINKs these days, their driving would be less. Is there someplace to find actual numbers?
    You and the other panelist kind of talked past each other – had you and he encountered each other before?

  9. ws says:

    Portland is not solid DINKS. The 2000 census reveals that the under 18 population is @ 21.1%, just 3% under the state average. People under 5 years old is 6.1% with the state’s average @ 6.5%.

    http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/41/4159000.html

    Certainly I would not expect these numbers to be as high in the central city, but Portland is not a San Fran by any means.

Leave a Reply