Will: Government Shouldn’t Interfere — Except To Benefit Big Highways

Conservative columnist George Will’s angry screed
against the Obama administration’s transportation policy is worth
digging into this morning — not just to bring one’s blood to a healthy
boil, but also to provide a window on the lack of coherent opposition
to expanding transit options and diminishing auto dependence.

MUG_GeorgeWill_thumb7.jpgGeorge Will (Photo by newsweek.com)

Will
writes of his horror at discovering that Transportation Secretary Ray
LaHood, a fellow Republican, is committed to giving Americans the
choice of commuting by bike or train:

[LaHood]
knows what plays in Peoria, and not just figuratively: He is from
there. Peoria is a meatloaf, macaroni-and-cheese, down-to-earth place,
home of Caterpillar, the maker of earthmoving machines for building
roads, runways, dams and things.

LaHood, however, has been transformed. He says he has
joined a "transformational" administration: "I think we can change
people’s behavior." Government "promoted driving" by
building the Interstate Highway System—"you talk about changing
behavior." He says, "People are getting out of their cars, they are
biking to work." High-speed intercity rail, such as the proposed bullet
train connecting Los Angeles and San Francisco, is "the wave of the
future." And then, predictably, comes the P word: Look, he says, at
Portland, Ore.

Will
depicts LaHood as a traitor for daring to believe that "0.01 percent of
Americans will ever regularly bike to to work" (actually, George, the real percentage
of bike commuters is more than 100 times that) and that inter-city rail
is possible for cities more than 300 miles apart (er, the Midwest Regional Rail Initiative has mapped out a 10-state rail network with a 400-mile reach).

The
saddest aspect of Will’s critique, however, isn’t his lashing out at
LaHood. He willfully ignores the fact that the highway industry
benefits from unprecedented government intervention and an uneven
playing field that discourages transit projects while subsidizing
roads.

The Witherspoon Institute explored this theme last month in an essay that asked conservatives to re-think their longtime resistance to transit. Even the right-leaning Free Congress Foundation has done the legwork to
show that transit powerfully expands individual freedom — a central
tenet of the brand of conservatism that Will espouses. One wonders why he can recognize
government intervention on behalf of domestic automakers but ignore the
same gesture when it’s made on behalf of the road lobby.

It seems that Will would rather complain about Lyndon Johnson’s 45-year-old Great Society,
which brought us Medicare and Medicaid, than consider an America where
technology can be harnessed to improve both our health and our
planet’s. But there’s an upside: If Will’s arguments are a preview of
future congressional opposition to expanding transit, high-speed rail
is headed for victory.

  • Erik

    George is also a big baseball fan. When was the last new ballpark in the majors (or the minors for that matter) built without a huge heap of public funding??

  • The saddest aspect of Will’s critique, however, isn’t his lashing out at LaHood. He willfully ignores the fact that the highway industry benefits from unprecedented government intervention and an uneven playing field that discourages transit projects while subsidizing roads.

    ————–

    The automobile-entitled never see their subsidies as a subsidy.

    Lots of folks on the right think of public transit as “socialism”, but when you point their own subsidies for their automobiles they stammer, “but, but, but…”

  • I started reading his op-ed piece, then I stopped when he started quoting numbers like the .01 percent thing. (Maybe he doesn’t understand that .01 means 1 %, not .01%?) He was clearly just making things up at that point, not checking his facts.

    Rebuking his commentary is a waste of time. The man clearly has no idea what he is talking about.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Obama Picks Republican Illinois Congressman to Lead USDOT

|
Photo: Wikipedia (Aaron Naperstek over at NYC Streetsblog carries the news that it’s official: Little known Congressman Ray LaHood will be the next Secretary of Transportation.  The post below lists some of the discussion surrounding LaHood from earlier today) The Hill is reporting that Illinois Representative Ray LaHood, described as a centrist Republican, is in […]

Portland Congressman to George Will: Let’s Debate

|
Will vs. Blumenauer: Battle of the bowties. Just when you thought George Will’s pouty, ill-informed tirade against new Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood was going to stand unchallenged, here comes Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR). Blumenauer, co-chief of the Congressional Bike Caucus and a Streetfilms favorite, released a statement this morning that dares the conservative pundit to […]

Fred Barnes: Americans Mainly Want to Stay in Their Cars

|
After yesterday’s electoral drubbing, the Obama administration will have to deal with a starkly different Congress when they make their expected push for a multi-year transportation bill early next year. We know that some influential House Republicans, like John Mica, don’t necessarily believe that bigger highways will solve America’s transportation problems. And we know that […]

Same.gov: A Transpo Secretary Who’s Hard to Believe In

|
On Monday, Obama announced his "green dream team." Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood wasn’t there. We’ve been calling around to Congressional staffers, advocates and insiders to get a better sense of what Obama’s appointment of Ray LaHood as transportation secretary means for those pushing for sustainable transport, smart growth, livable streets. While no one is giving […]