DeMint/Coburn Amendment to Strip Bicycle Funds
Senators Jim DeMint and Tom Coburn have proposed an amendment to the stimulus bill that would specifically block funds to be used for bicycle infrastructure.
DeMint’s E-mail →
Coburn’s E-mail →
More @ Streetsblog →
More @ BikePortland →
10 Responses to “DeMint/Coburn Amendment to Strip Bicycle Funds”
Unbelievable. Literally minutes ago I watched two commuters get plowed off the road by a careless driver. How much could the “bicycle infrastructure” portion of the stimulus package amount to anyway? I’m guessing a billion dollars on the very high end. It seems like there may be a hidden agenda here.
Both DeMint and Coburn are openly pro-highway/automobile and anti-bike/walk/transit. Neither have a clue that the bicycle can be used for transportation.
See here and here.
Senator Tom Coburn said that “we should not be spending money on bicycle paths for our own leisure, comfort, and exercise when we have bridges that are falling down…”
OKAY HOW ABOUT FOR TRANSPORTATION!!!
Rep. Earl Blumenauer’s excellent response:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-earl-blumenauer/no-seriously-republicans_b_164822.html
Guess I must run counter to the crowd here. I have great respect for Coburn, as he’s been someone who has the courage of his convictions….and among those is a desire to get our government to STOP overspending itself into oblivion. He is a full-time obstetrician who also manages to be a U.S. Senator full-time (try THAT on for size, folks!). He ran for the House and won and promised ‘term limits’ for himself to the country. He kept that promise (two terms only) and returned to private practice (Ted Kennedy should give that a try!). People encouraged him to run for the Senate because of his record of cutting government overspending wherever he could find it, and it was working. He was almost a lone wolf in crying FOUL to the people in Washington who were stuffing pork into just about every bill being considered. In too many instances, “bike infrastructure” bills are ill-conceived, poorly drafted, and will be money wasters. Coburn is not a slash and burn guy; he’s a surgeon, for goodness sake. He evaluates carefully and cuts what is blatently wasteful. The Blumenauer bill to support bikers who ride their bikes to work with Fed subsidies (like public transit subsidies) IMHO is wasteful simply because there’s NO way to enforce fraud and abuse. Anyone can get a beater bike for $10 at a yard sale, park it at their office, and then collect several $ hundred a year free money for “riding their bike to work” when the dang bike is probably sitting in their office garage with two flat tires! And the American taxpayer will pay for it, because of no enforcement or fraud punishment provisions in the bill. As a taxpayer, I don’t like people in Congress playing it fast and loose with MY money this way. And they’re doing it ALL OVER THE PLACE. Wake up, people !! Do you REALIZE that your government is about to give away another $1.4 TRILLION of YOUR hard-earned money to a LOT of people, with no mechanism for an audit trail to see how it was SPENT, and no provisions for accountability and prosecution for those who abscond with it for their own personal gain ??!! It’s time we took our government BACK and made it responsible to US for a change. And if that means I have to keep riding my bike on the roads for awhile, that’s okay with me. Let’s use the traffic laws on the books and punish the hell out of people who drive drunk, or who are talking on their cell phones with one hand while drinking their lattes with the other and steering with their left knee!! And it’s time to replace these idiots in Congress who are spending YOUR allowance and charging YOU interest for doing so! Now YOUR great-grandchildren will be paying back this debt!!
G. Steele
Yeah, Geoff, I’m guessing you would run counter to the crowd on a site dedicated to the use of a bicycle as transportation. BTW, you’ve got it backwards, bicycle infrastructure (not the bike commuter bill) would be a gift to our future generations as it pushes 100% sustainable. It would be more highways that would be paying for our own leisure at the cost of future generations.
Hi Geoff,
I think most people agree, some sort of stimulus package is going to eventually pass and the money is going to be spent. Assuming that, then the question becomes HOW it’s spent; whether you prefer to see more of it spent on highways or on bicycling infrastructure and public transit. I guess you know where I stand on that question…
Alan
I come to the road debate with a unique perspective. My dad owned a construction company in MO that built roads and bridges.
He was always amused when someone would ask, “What are you going to do when all the roads are built?”
“Fix ‘em,” was his answer. “The only problem is that every politician wants to be photographed cutting the ribbon that opens a new road, but nobody holds ceremonies for patching potholes.”
Living down here in Florida, I’m tired of seeing the Interstate slow to a crawl with the never-ending construction projects to add lanes. I don’t have any problem with fixing what we’ve got, but I’d trade the money spent to build that extra lane of Interstate for improved bike / ped facilities.
I’m not going to get into the bike lane good/bad argument. I’d be just as happy if the existing roads were widened enough to allow cars to pass me. Stripes would be a bonus.
I was concerned when the city decided to take a four-lane major north-south street two blocks from me down to two lanes. The way they’ve done it under the old mayor, who was a big fan of “traffic calming” was to take a road that was wide enough to be bikeable and narrow it down, add all kinds of traffic furniture and brick dodads (that heave up). That leaves you with a lane that’s too narrow for a car to pass if there’s oncoming traffic or a bleeping island in the median.
I was pleasantly surprised to see that they took the four lanes down to two lanes, with an alternating left turn lane in the middle and striped bike lanes on each side. Share the Road signs are posted every block or two.
What used to be a high-speed street that was uncomfortable to ride is now starting to attract bike traffic.
Geoff,
The “Bicycle Commuter Act” already passed in October of 2008. It was part of the first stimulus package, and not part of the bill currently being debated. Also, it’s not a subsidy. You don’t get money for riding your bike to work. You get a reduction in taxable income. It’s the same scheme as with public transit and parking, except the reward is much less. Bicycle commuters get $20/month; public transit users get $115/month; drivers get $220 for parking. In reality, there is room for abuse in all three as expenses can be claimed without receipts.
As for bicycle infrastructure and the current stimulus bill, you’re right. Bicycle infrastructure projects can be poorly conceived. So can highway projects, building renovations, bridge upgrades, etc. However, what you’re doing, automatically equating bike projects with waste is unfair.
It’s great political theater, for politicians to go on TV and make some snide remarks about bike paths or lanes as examples of government run amok. But, in reality, each project, bike or otherwise, should be judged on its individual merits.
Like other projects, bike infrastructure can be well designed and executed, create jobs, be useful for real transport (not just leisure), and improve quality of life for cyclists and those around them. (“Those around” enjoying less road congestion and better air quality.)
I think we’re basically “on the same team.” I don’t like wasteful spending either. But, I don’t automatically equate bike projects as wasteful.
I live in New York City. Like most New Yorkers, I don’t own a car as driving and parking here are quite expensive. Like others, I could and would commute and run errands almost exclusively by bicycle if only NYC had better bike infrastructure. Three miles to work on a separated bike lane: sign me up. Three miles to work with six lanes of avenue traffic: no thanks.
Compared to a highway expansion project, a well-executed curb and some parking changes to create separated bike lanes are rather cheap, and can make a difference. It’s money well spent, not wasted.
I teach a High School Art/Sculpture class “BIKE SCULPTURE.” This class has been in popular demand for the entire eight years it’s been in the curriculum. I am supported by the school, district, city and Sheriffs offices in bike donations and tools. My students contribute to the community in many ways. We have made trash cans, bike racks, signage, and participated in the Tour De Tucson, which brings-in several million dollars each year. Do we recycle, yes. Do we think ouy-side-the-box, yes. Do we want to make our community more bike accessable, friendly, and artistically beautiful, yes. Do we learn and practice important mechanical and artistic skills, yes. Do we receive recognition and awards from our community, yes. Do we take anything away from traffic problems, polution, and road rage, we hope so.