|
Bleeding Heartland
It's what plants crave.
|
transportation policy
Wed Jan 20, 2010 at 06:06:44 AM CST
|
|
I'm tired of thinking about the Massachusetts Senate race. Here's some good news from last week that drew little media coverage.
It confirmed my view that Transportation Secetary Ray LaHood will turn out to be one of President Obama's outstanding appointments.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 636 words in story)
|
|
Mon Sep 21, 2009 at 19:41:16 PM CDT
|
The Dubuque mayor and city council decided in 2006 to make the community "a Sustainable City." Last week federal officials recognized the progress made toward that goal. From an Environmental Protection Agency press release on September 17:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa P. Jackson, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan and White House Director of Urban Affairs Adolfo Carrion kicked off their three-city Sustainable Communities Tour today. The officials, representing the administration's DOT-HUD-EPA Interagency Partnership for Sustainable Communities, announced proposals during stops in Chicago and Dubuque that will help communities to improve access to affordable housing, provide additional low-cost transportation options, and protect the local environment.
Also on September 17, the city of Dubuque and IBM
outlined their plans to partner in the development of new "smarter" technologies and implementation strategies to create an international model of sustainability for communities of 200,000 and under, where over 40 percent of the U.S. population resides. Dubuque, a city that is recognized as a national leader in sustainability with its forward-thinking public policy, together with IBM, will address the ever-increasing demands of cities to deliver vital services such as energy and water management, and transportation, all while reducing the community's impact on the environment.
More details about the recent events, along with some background, are after the jump.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 1490 words in story)
|
|
Tue Sep 15, 2009 at 14:46:18 PM CDT
|
|
I learned from 1000 Friends Of Iowa that the Iowa Department of Transportation and the Des Moines Area Metropolitan Planning Organization are seeking public input on two important issues.
The DOT is finalizing the Statewide Public Transportation Study and will make recommendations to the state legislature in December. Officials want to hear from Iowans about:
* Baseline level of service for public transportation in Iowa
* Gap analysis between baseline service and public transportation demands of Iowans.
* Transportation services needed to close these gaps.
* The additional cost of these services.
* Addressing Iowa's energy conservation goals.
* The range of possible funding concepts to address service needs.
* Draft findings of the study to date.
You can comment on any of these issues at public meetings in Centerville, Sioux City, Des Moines, Iowa City, Bettendorf, or Waterloo on September 15-17 (event details are after the jump). Alternatively, you can submit comments through an online survey at www.iRIDE21.com.
Anyone with an opinion on how to improve Iowa's passenger transportation should let the DOT know. You do not have to be an expert or policy wonk. Remember, public transit is not just for big city residents. An express bus or vanpool that takes people from a smaller town to work in a nearby larger city saves passengers money while reducing energy use and greenhouse gas emissions. Last year the weekly Cityview profiled Winterset resident Ann Pashek, who saves thousands of dollars a year through the Des Moines Area Transit Authority's Rideshare program.
Meanwhile, the Des Moines Area Metropolitan Planning Organization is hosting the last series of public input meetings on the Horizon Year 2035 Metropolitan Transportation Plan. They need to hear from central Iowa residents who are concerned about land use, air quality and global warming.
Although reducing vehicle miles driven is a critical element of any plan to address greenhouse gas emissions, the DMAMPO's plan for the next 25 years involves 341 projects that, if completed, would increase vehicle miles traveled in our region by 33 percent (by the DMAMPO's own calculations). 1000 Friends of Iowa adds:
The study also indicated that despite increases in [vehicle miles traveled], cleaner vehicles and fuels will result in continued reductions in vehicle pollutant emissions. Gasoline was used in their project model. However, when ethanol was used the increase in CO2 was 66% higher. DNR Air Quality Division has studies which conclude that emissions with ethanol are substantially higher. It seems this plan will not reduce VMTs or promote cleaner air.
The DMAMPO (Metropolitan Planning Organization) is hosting the final series of public input meetings to receive input and comments on the HY 2035 MTP final draft. You must tell the DMAMPO that Central Iowans want to concentrate more transportation dollars on alternatives which will promote the responsible use of our states resources, land water and air. This is the most important series of meetings, please mark your calendars, plan to attend and make your opinion count!
The DMAMPO meetings are on September 15 and 16 at the North Side Library in Des Moines. Event details are in the 1000 Friends of Iowa action alert, which I've posted after the jump. That also includes talking points as well as contact information for those who prefer to submit written comments to the DMAMPO. Anyone can send a comment; you do not have to have attended a public meeting.
On a related note, today is the last day to submit a comment urging the DNR to protect water quality in Iowa's cleanest lakes and streams. Please take a minute to send an e-mail to the right DNR officials.
So much policy that affects our lives is made below the radar. If I weren't involved with 1000 Friends of Iowa, I would never have heard of these discussions about transportation priorities. If I weren't involved with the Iowa Environmental Council and the Sierra Club's Iowa Chapter, I would not have heard of the debate over water quality rules either. I encourage you to join some non-profit organizations that are active on matters important to you. You will become much more informed than if you rely solely on the mainstream media.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 888 words in story)
|
|
Thu Sep 03, 2009 at 08:41:34 AM CDT
|
|
The U.S. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee has been keeping track of how states are spending the stimulus funds allocated for roads. On September 2 the committee released a report ranking the states according to how much of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funding for highways and bridges had been put to work as of July 31. This pdf file contains the state rankings.
Iowa ranked second overall, having put 75 percent of its stimulus road funds to work by the end of July. Join me after the jump for more details from the report and analysis.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 564 words in story)
|
|
Sun Jul 26, 2009 at 23:04:29 PM CDT
|
|
Governor Chet Culver rode a train from Iowa City to Chicago Sunday, promoting passenger rail links en route to the Midwest High Speed Rail Summit, which starts Monday.
After the jump I've posted some news relating to passenger rail in Iowa and nationwide, including a follow-up on Congressman Tom Latham's attempt to transfer funds from high-speed rail to the highway fund.
UPDATE: From the governor's office on July 27:
Governor Chet Culver and Governor Pat Quinn today signed a Memorandum of Understanding to coordinate efforts by Iowa and Illinois to establish passenger rail service from Chicago to Dubuque and from Chicago to the Quad Cities and Iowa City.
In addition, Governor Culver joined leaders from eight states who signed a Memorandum of Understanding in support of regional high-speed rail. That agreement includes, as a key goal, extending passenger service from Iowa City to Des Moines and on to Omaha. [...]
Following the signing of the eight-state high-speed rail agreement, Iowa and Illinois officials signed a separate agreement that spells out action to be taken by the transportation departments in both states.
Click here and scroll down to find links to the rail agreements signed in Chicago on July 27.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 745 words in story)
|
|
Tue Jun 30, 2009 at 02:00:00 AM CDT
|
June 29 was exactly 120 days since the federal government released highway funds to the states as part of the economic stimulus bill (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act). Smart Growth America marked the occasion by releasing a review on how wisely states are spending the transportation money.
The 120-day mark is significant because it is the point by which states and territories are required to have obligated 50 percent of the flexible money granted them for transportation projects by the federal government. The money is meant to stimulate the economy, but also - in the language of the Act - "to invest in transportation, environmental protection, and other infrastructure that will provide long-term economic benefits."
Iowa received about $358 million in federal highway stimulus funds, and I was pleased to read in Smart Growth America's report (pdf file) that our state's allocations compare favorably with those in most other states. Follow me after the jump for more details.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 708 words in story)
|
|
Thu Apr 23, 2009 at 07:02:39 AM CDT
|
I received an action alert from 1000 Friends of Iowa about six important public meetings next week:
The Iowa DOT is presenting Iowans with a golden opportunity to encourage sustainable transportation and land-use before April ends. Whether you feel we need more bike-to-work lanes, passenger rail options, or goals to address climate change - this is your chance to be heard. Six meetings are being held across the state to seek the public's input on transportation needs. [...] The Statewide Passenger Transportation Funding Study is seeking your input to identify gaps between current public transit, carpool/vanpool programs, intercity bus and rail services, and what you and your neighbors believe are transportation needs. Using the information from these meetings and through other sources, plans will be made to address Iowa's future transportation plans.
Event details for the meetings in Ames, Atlantic, Ottumwa, Mason City, Cedar Rapids and Cherokee are after the jump.
Please spread the word among Iowans who would like to see more investment in public transportation and alternatives to driving. You don't have to be an expert to speak or submit written comments at one of these meetings. Just say a few words about where Iowa's passenger transportation is lacking and why you'd like to see it improved.
Remember, public transit is not just for big city residents. An express bus or vanpool that takes people from a smaller town to work in a nearby larger city saves riders money while reducing oil usage and greenhouse gas emissions. Last year the weekly Cityview profiled Winterset resident Ann Pashek, who uses the Des Moines Area Transit Authority's Rideshare program. Taking the van to and from Pashek job in Des Moines saves her thousands of dollars a year, and she can use the commute to "complete work or pay bills that would normally detract from valuable family time."
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 121 words in story)
|
|
Fri Apr 17, 2009 at 12:58:17 PM CDT
|
|
I was expecting a showdown in the Iowa House this week over the tax reform package that Governor Chet Culver worked out with key Democratic legislators. Republican State Representative Chris Rants announced his intention to amend the tax bill so that marriage would be defined as between a man and a woman.
However, the tax bill never came up for a vote before legislators went home for the weekend. House Speaker Pat Murphy said on April 15 that he had only 50 votes in favor of the proposal:
According to Murphy, he had lined up 52 Democrats to vote for the bill, but two Democrats changed their minds after adjustments sought by the governor broadened the number of Iowans who would get a tax cut -- and amounted to a roughly $50 million reduction in the amount of income taxes collected.
"All we need is one person to change their mind," Murphy says. "...We're still optimistic we'll get it done before we adjourn."
Murphy is counting on Governor Chet Culver, a fellow Democrat, to help find the extra vote that will get the bill passed.
"We still believe that it is a middle class tax cut," Murphy says. "We still believe it simplifies the tax code and we are optimistic that we will pass it yet this year."
Murphy may be optimistic, but I'm feeling a sense of deja vu. Two months ago House Democrats were stuck at 50 votes for the "prevailing wage" bill heading into a weekend. The governor and legislative leaders failed to find the 51st vote to pass that measure.
If Murphy's assessment is correct, two Iowa House Democrats supported the original tax reform bill but not the deal worked out with the governor. Does anyone know who they are, and why they are refusing to get behind the revised tax bill? Do they disagree with changes to the bill, or are they spooked by pressure they are getting from anti-tax conservative activists? It would be a big mistake for the legislature to let this bill die now. Overhauling the tax system won't become politically easier during an election year.
In other economic policy news, Jason Hancock reports today that prospects look good for three bills which, combined, would approve $700 billion in bonding for infrastructure projects in Iowa. Click here for more details about the bills and what they would pay for. The main difference between this package of bills and Culver's bonding proposal is that the governor wanted $200 million from bonding to pay for roads and bridges. Legislators have specified that the bonds must be used to fund other kinds of infrastructure projects.
Many Iowa legislators wanted to pass a small gas tax increase this year and next to fund more road projects, but a veto threat from Culver killed that proposal. The federal stimulus package approved this year did include about $358 million in highway funds for Iowa (click that link for more details). I'm with legislators on this one. I'd rather see money raised through bonding used for other kinds of projects.
I am glad to see Democrats move ahead on the bonding bills despite a recent Des Moines Register poll. The poll indicated that just 24 percent supported "Governor Chet Culver's plan to borrow money to speed up public works projects," while 71 percent said the state should "pay for the projects as it has the money over time." That's a badly-worded poll question if I ever heard one. I'll bet that people who say we should only take on what we have cash for right now will change their mind once bonding money starts funding projects in their own cities and counties.
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 19:49:51 PM CDT
|
|
LATE UPDATE: This piece by BruceMcF is a must-read: How to build a national high-speed rail system.
President Barack Obama and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood released a
blueprint for a new national network of high-speed passenger rail lines Thursday, saying such an investment is necessary to reduce traffic congestion, cut dependence on foreign oil and improve the environment.
The president's plan identifies 10 potential high-speed intercity corridors for federal funding, including California, the Pacific Northwest, the Midwest, the Southeast, the Gulf Coast, Pennsylvania, Florida, New York and New England.
It also highlights potential improvements in the heavily traveled Northeast Corridor running from Washington to Boston, Massachusetts.
The economic stimulus package included about $8 billion for high-speed rail projects, and Obama is seeking an additional $1 billion each year for high-speed rail in the next five federal budgets.
After the jump I've got more details on how this funding could benefit Iowa.
|
|
There's More...
:: (5
Comments, 435 words in story)
|
|
Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 12:55:04 PM CDT
|
|
Following up on my post from Wednesday, here's another issue to bring up when you contact your state representatives and senators. (Hat tip to noneed4thneed.)
Iowa Global Warming is calling on supporters to advocate for at least $25 million in passenger rail funding as part of the huge infrastructure bonding package that is likely to pass. $25 million is less than 5 percent of the cost of the bonding bill.
I'm a fan of calling your elected officials rather than e-mailing this late in the session, because I am not convinced they get through all the messages in their in-boxes.
Iowa Senate switchboard: 515-281-3371
Iowa House switchboard: 515-281-3221
If you prefer to e-mail, Iowa Global Warming has made it really easy for you on this page. They also provide some talking points, such as
- The future of our state economy will be determined by the decisions we make now about infrastructure
- Reliable, efficient and economical rail service connecting Iowa to Chicago and other Midwest cities will ensure that Iowa can fully benefit from the regional economy
Iowa Global Warming has a sample letter ready for you to send, although it's better to put these things in your own words if you have time.
This thread is for discussing anything Iowa progressives should bring up with their representatives and senators before the end of session. Don't let anyone tell you elected officials don't pay attention to how many voters they hear from on an issue.
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
Thu Mar 19, 2009 at 08:10:08 AM CDT
|
|
A House Appropriations Subcommittee hearing featuring two low-profile cabinet members won't make a splash even on a slow-news day, and certainly not when a juicy story like the AIG outrage has so many angles to explore.
But take my word for it: big news came out of yesterday's Congressional testimony by Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Shaun Donovan and Department of Transportation (DOT) Secretary Ray LaHood. The cabinet secretaries announced
a new partnership to help American families gain better access to affordable housing, more transportation options, and lower transportation costs. The average working American family spends nearly 60 percent of its budget on housing and transportation costs, making these two areas the largest expenses for American families. Donovan and LaHood want to seek ways to cut these costs by focusing their efforts on creating affordable, sustainable communities.
I explain why this is important and welcome news after the jump.
|
|
There's More...
:: (1
Comments, 1035 words in story)
|
|
Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 14:52:10 PM CST
|
The White House released detailed information today on the $28 billion the stimulus bill directs toward highway construction. According to a press release (sorry, no link), the highway spending will "lead to 150,000 jobs saved or created by the end of 2010." An estimated 95,000 jobs would come from the "direct impact of building new roads and fixing old ones," while 55,000 jobs would come from "the economic activity generated when these new workers spend more than they would have otherwise."
It is also worth noting that jobs in highway construction tend to pay better than average. The typical, or median hourly wage for all jobs in the economy was $15.10 in 2007 according to the most recent data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. But for workers in the highway industry, the typical hourly wage was $18.31, a premium of over $3 per hour over the economy-wide median wage.
Looking more closely at different types of jobs within the industry helps to explain the difference. The median wage of blue collar, or production workers-folks who do jobs like welding and mixing-comes to about $16 per hour in highway construction compared to about $13.50 in the overall economy.
This page at Recovery.gov has a map you can use to see how much money in highway funds will go to individual states.
Iowa is slated to receive about $358 million, of which about $240 million can be used in any part of the state.
The remaining money is to be allocated as follows: $10.7 million for "mandatory transportation enhancements," $20.8 million for use in urban areas, $73.2 million for use in suburban areas and $13.4 million for use in rural areas. (By the way, "'enhancement' is a legally defined term for projects such as sidewalk repairs, bicycle paths, and beautification projects.")
Decisions within each state on where to spend the money need to be made quickly:
Parts of the allocation are set aside to make sure that urban, suburban, and rural areas alike all get a share. But since local leaders -- mayors and governors -- know their communities best, much of the money is left to states' discretion. And if states don't use it, they lose it. To make sure that funds go out quickly to give our economy the jolt it needs, states have 120 days to assign the funds to specific projects.
As a rule, federal highway funds tend to go toward new road construction, but it would be better to direct the stimulus funds primarily toward fixing the roads and bridges we have. Repairing crumbling roads and bridges improves safety, the quality of life and property values in existing neighborhoods. Building new roads stimulates sprawl without solving traffic congestion problems.
Sprawling development also increases "vehicle miles traveled" per capita and consequently greenhouse-gas emissions from cars and trucks.
Spending stimulus highway money on a "fix-it-first basis" would not only be wise, but also popular. As I mentioned in my previous post, a national survey by Hart Research Associates, released last week, found that "An overwhelming majority of Americans believe restoring existing roads and bridges and expanding transportation options should take precedence over building new roads [...]."
Here's hoping Iowa transportation officials will spend the stimulus money wisely.
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 08:00:36 AM CST
|
I didn't know about this event when I posted my weekly calendar, but I received an action alert from 1000 Friends of Iowa about an important meeting tonight in Des Moines. The full action alert is after the jump, including details on the place and time. Here is an excerpt:
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) & the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) have scheduled a Public Input Meeting to gather comments from citizens regarding the Des Moines Area Metropolitan Planning Organization's (DMAMPO) transportation planning process.
Every four years the FHWA & the FTA conduct a certification review of the DMAMPO. The review evaluates the effectiveness of the DMAMPO's transportation planning process, and ensures federal guidelines are being followed. Each MPO is required to solicit and utilize citizen input in local transportation decisions. If citizen input isn't resulting in changes that reflect the unique transportation needs of the community, the public participation process must be adjusted to make certain it does. [...]
The experience of 1000 Friends of Iowa is that the FHA pays attention to the comments of citizens. In the 2005 Transportation Planning Certification Review Summary Report under "Overview of Findings From the 2005 Certification Review", the FHWA & FTA noted that "The Year 2030 Long-Range Transportation Plan appears to be a collection of local transportation desires rather than a document offering a regional focus for the Des Moines metropolitan area's future transportation system. The Plan needs to provide a regional vision, rather than just serve as a compilation of local priorities."
(emphasis added) With federal stimulus dollars on the way and the state of Iowa potentially
issuing new bonds to pay for infrastructure, it is critical that we not blindly follow a bunch of local wish lists for new roads. We should fix what we have first.
Speaking of which, a new national survey by Hart Research Associates found that
An overwhelming majority of Americans believe restoring existing roads and bridges and expanding transportation options should take precedence over building new roads [...]
To accommodate future U.S. population growth, which is expected to increase by 100 million by 2050, Americans favor improving intercity rail and transit, walking and biking over building new highways. When asked what the federal government's top priority should be for 2009 transportation funding, half of all respondents recommended maintaining and repairing roads and bridges, while nearly one third said "expanding and improving bus, rail, and other public transportation." Only 16 percent said "expanding and improving roads, highways, freeways and bridges."
When asked about approaches to addressing traffic, 47 percent preferred improving public transportation, 25 percent chose building communities that encourage people not to drive, and 20 percent preferred building new roads. fifty-six percent of those surveyed believe the federal government is not devoting enough attention to trains and light rail systems, and three out of four favor improving intercity rail and transit.
Transportation for America, a new coalition of more than 225 organizations, has called on President Barack Obama and Congress to "launch a new federal transportation mission." The federal transportation program comes up for reauthorization in Congress later this year.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 315 words in story)
|
|
Wed Jan 28, 2009 at 18:31:08 PM CST
|
|
The House of Representatives passed an $819 billion economic stimulus bill today by a vote of 244-188. Here is the roll call. Iowa Democrats Bruce Braley (IA-01), Dave Loebsack (IA-02) and Leonard Boswell (IA-03) all voted with the majority. Republicans unanimously opposed the bill, including Tom Latham (IA-04) and Steve King (IA-05), and 11 "Blue Dog" Democrats also voted no.
All the news reports have emphasized that not a single Republican voted for this package, even though President Barack Obama tried hard (too hard if you ask me) to bring them on board.
It reminds me of 1993, when Congressional Republicans unanimously opposed President Bill Clinton's first budget. The GOP seems to be banking on running against Democrats' management of the economy in the midterm elections. For that reason, I think it's foolish for Democrats to try to cater to Republicans. Passing a stimulus bill that truly helps the economy should be paramount.
I'll update this post later with more details about what made it into the House bill and what got left behind. I'm pleased to note that an amendment significantly increasing mass transit funding passed. A Siegel tells you which Democrats deserve particular credit for this achievement. By the way, mass transit is not just for large cities.
UPDATE: Congressman Loebsack's office sent out a release with a long list of provisions in the stimulus bill. I've posted it after the jump, so click "there's more" if you want all the details.
The top point of the release is that Loebsack successfully pushed for school modernization funds to be included in the stimulus package.
At the very end of the press release, you'll see that the stimulus bill "Prevents [Illinois] Governor [Rod] Blagojevich from directing the use of funds provided in the package." I understand why people would worry about him administering any funds earmarked for Illinois, but I am with Adam B: this provision is tantamount to "bribing the jury" of Illinois senators who are considering impeachment charges against Blagojevich.
|
|
There's More...
:: (6
Comments, 7033 words in story)
|
|
Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 22:00:00 PM CST
|
|
Last year at this time I was scrambling to make as many phone calls and knock on as many doors as I could before the Iowa caucuses on January 3.
This week I had a little more time to reflect on the year that just ended.
After the jump I've linked to Bleeding Heartland highlights in 2008. Most of the links relate to Iowa politics, but some also covered issues or strategy of national importance.
I only linked to a few posts about the presidential race. I'll do a review of Bleeding Heartland's 2008 presidential election coverage later this month.
You can use the search engine on the left side of the screen to look for past Bleeding Heartland diaries about any person or issue.
|
|
There's More...
:: (6
Comments, 5859 words in story)
|
|
Fri Dec 26, 2008 at 01:00:00 AM CST
|
|
Many a bad bill has passed the U.S. House of Representatives with the votes of Republicans and Democratic "Blue Dogs." These representatives call themselves "moderates" or "centrists," and you often find them voting with corporate interests, against the majority of the House Democratic caucus, when the chips are down.
This Washington Post article about the upcoming debate over an economic stimulus bill cites Representative Baron Hill of Indiana as "incoming co-chairman of the Blue Dog Coalition, a caucus of 51 fiscally conservative House Democrats."
Hill wants the economic stimulus money to go toward road and bridge construction, whereas others would like to see more of the money spent on "green jobs" and infrastructure projects that are more environmentally friendly than building new roads. Progressives would like to spend the transportation money on fixing our existing roads and bridges while expanding public transit and rail.
Friends of the Earth has launched a campaign to "keep the economic stimulus clean":
Transportation in the U.S. is responsible for 30 percent of our global warming pollution and 70 percent of our oil consumption. We cannot solve the energy and climate challenge without making our transportation system far cleaner and more efficient.
President-elect Obama and the congressional leadership are moving quickly to pass an economic stimulus package that creates green jobs with a new, clean energy infrastructure. Public transportation, smart growth and green transportation alternatives are a crucial part of this effort.
Unfortunately, the road-building lobby is attempting to hijack this bill and divert billions of dollars to the construction of new, unnecessary roads, highways and bridges that would deepen our nation's dependence on oil and increase greenhouse gas emissions.
Click here for more details about the economic and environmental consequences of letting new road construction dominate the stimulus bill.
Getting back to the title of this diary, Matt Stoller read that Washington Post piece about debates over the stimulus and was intrigued to learn that Hill claims 51 members for the Blue Dog Coalition:
Last session, there were 49 Blue Dogs, and during the election season the caucus continually bragged about how they would add a substantial number of new members in 2009. Still, their PAC didn't give to very many Democratic candidates, two Blue Dogs lost reelection, and a bunch of their candidate prospects lost. If it's true that the Blue Dogs have only increased their number by 2, and I'm not sure it is, then they really are far weaker in the House than they were from 2006-2008. There are 257 Democrats in the next Congress and 178 Republicans. While the Blue Dogs are still a swing bloc, they only have 11 votes to give. That's not very many, considering that this number assumes all Republicans always vote with the Blue Dogs. If Republicans split off from their caucus on certain votes, even small numbers of Republicans, then Blue Dog priorities are far less likely to matter overall.
Leonard Boswell (IA-03) is the only Iowa Democrat in the Blue Dog group. Once the new House convenes, it will be interesting to see how the Blue Dogs compare in number to the Progressive Caucus, which had 71 members in the last Congress, including Dave Loebsack (IA-02). My hunch is that the Progressive Caucus will add a lot more new members than the Blue Dogs.
After the new year I'll try to find out how many members Bruce Braley (IA-01) was able to recruit to the Populist Caucus he is forming.
Whether or not Blue Dog power declines in the House, it may be on the rise in the Senate. Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana is setting up a Blue Dog caucus in the upper chamber. Although Senate Majority leader Harry Reid's spokesman claims Reid is "upbeat" about Bayh's plans, it's likely that the Senate Blue Dogs will collude with Republicans to obstruct Barack Obama's agenda.
Matthew Yglesias advanced a very plausible hypothesis about Bayh's move:
With Republicans out of power, the GOP can't really block progressive change in exchange for large sums of special interest money. That creates an important market niche for Democrats willing to do the work. It was a good racket for the House Blue Dogs in 2007-2008 and there's no reason it couldn't work for Senate analogues over the next couple of years.
Let's hope the memory of the 1994 Republican landslide will induce conservative Democrats not to block most of Obama's agenda. The Democrats who ran Congress in 1993 and 1994 wanted to show Bill Clinton who was boss, but the effect was to make Democrats look incompetent, depressing Democratic base turnout in 1994 and turning swing voters toward the Republicans.
On the other hand, I would not underestimate the Blue Dogs' willingness to do what big money wants, whether or not it's good for the Democratic Party.
Share any relevant thoughts in the comments.
UPDATE: Kagro X notes that the Progressive Caucus seems to be a more cohesive voting bloc than the Blue Dogs, which is surprising.
Meanwhile, Chris Bowers argues persuasively than the Blue Dogs have achieved little on their alleged signature issue of "fiscal responsibility":
If the Blue Dogs only exist in order to promote "fiscal responsibility," isn't it pretty clear that, rather than getting their way, they have actually failed across the board over the last eight years? From the Bush tax cuts, to soaring deficits, to making exceptions for war, to making exceptions for bailouts, to making exceptions to stimulus packages, the Blue Dogs have completely and utterly failed at their stated primary policy area and done so at every available opportunity.
The only actual successes of the Blue Dogs appear to be the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act] re-write and blank check funding for Iraq. It is notable that 38 of the 47 Blue Dogs voted in favor of both these measures, which jointly render a member a "Bush Dog" in Open Left's terminology. Given that 70 House members voted in favor of both those measures, the Democratic defectors on those issues were clearly spearheaded by the Blue Dogs.
Mainly, I am impressed that Blue Dogs keep earning press that describes them as fiscally responsible and wildly powerful, when the record shows otherwise. When offered opportunities to actually clamp down on spending over the last two years, the Blue Dogs have balked at every turn, favoring blank check funding for Iraq, blank check funding for the bailout, and massive funding for the economic stimulus. That a group of House members can do all of this and still be described as both "fiscally responsible" and "powerful" is pretty impressive. Maybe what we progressives really need is to hire the Blue Dogs' PR people.
|
|
Discuss
:: (7
Comments)
|
|
Fri Dec 05, 2008 at 12:19:26 PM CST
|
Worse than you thought:
Skittish employers slashed 533,000 jobs in November, the most in 34 years, catapulting the unemployment rate to 6.7 percent, dramatic proof the country is careening deeper into recession.
[...]
As companies throttled back hiring, the unemployment rate bolted from 6.5 percent in October to 6.7 percent last month, a 15-year high.
"These numbers are shocking," said economist Joel Naroff, president of Naroff Economics Advisors. "Companies are sharply reacting to the economy's problems and slashing costs. They are not trying to ride it out."
The unemployment rate would have moved even higher if not for the exodus of 422,000 people from the work force. Economists thought many of those people probably abandoned their job searches out of sheer frustration. In November 2007, the jobless rate was at 4.7 percent.
I knew things were bad (I have a couple of friends who've been laid off this fall), but I am surprised the monthly job-loss total is worse than at any time since 1974. That is terrible.
At Daily Kos, TomP has Barack Obama's response to the unemployment numbers. Excerpt:
At the same time, this painful crisis also provides us with an opportunity to transform our economy to improve the lives of ordinary people by rebuilding roads and modernizing schools for our children, investing in clean energy solutions to break our dependence on imported oil, and making an early down payment on the long-term reforms that will grow and strengthen our economy for all Americans for years to come."
It looks like Obama will try to fold a lot of energy and infrastructure programs into a large economic stimulus bill early next year. That's a smart approach, but I hope he won't make too many concessions to boondoggles like "clean coal." Also, I would hope that a large portion of the infrastructure spending goes on fixing and maintaining current roads and bridges, along with expanding rail travel. Too often federal spending on the transportation sector goes largely toward new road construction.
|
|
Discuss
:: (2
Comments)
|
|
Wed Dec 03, 2008 at 12:00:00 PM CST
|
A Siegel wants aggressive action to green our country's school buildings, which is a "win-win-win-win strategy" because it would:
# Save money for communities and taxpayers
# Create employment
# Foster capacity for 'greening' the nation
# Reduce pollution loads
# Improve health
# Improve student performance / achievement
The whole piece by A Siegel is worth reading.
Picking up on Vice President-elect Joe Biden's speech to the National Governors Association, in which he advocated greater investment in rail transit, BruceMcF wants a comprehensive rail electrification program. Click the link to read more, because BruceMcF is one of the most knowledgeable transportation bloggers around.
Neil Hamilton, director of the Agricultural Law Center at Drake University, wants Barack Obama to establish
a New Farmer Corps and set a 10-year goal of establishing one-half million new farms in the United States.
The New Farmer Corps would link his advocacy for public service with an initiative to plant the next generation of America's farm families. The program would assist current owners to transfer land and offer new farmers training, capital and markets to make their farms thrive. It would encourage states and counties to plan for supporting new farmers. [...]
The New Farmer Corps would build on existing efforts, such as Iowa's voluntary land-link program, which matches aging farmers with young families seeking a start. It would harness loans offered by USDA and Farm Credit banks, but supplement them with benefits new farmers could earn by caring for the land, conserving energy and producing healthy food. Congress could authorize education, training and health benefits to families investing their sweat, labor and dreams on rural and urban farms.
America has no shortage of people eager to put their hands in the soil to feed us. Thousands of potential new farmers exist - college students laboring on urban farms, farm kids hoping to continue the family tradition, and immigrants and refugees who brought their agrarian legacy to America. What we lack is a coordinated, creative national effort.
The New Farmer Corps could succeed by supplementing current efforts with new funds and tax incentives, such as Iowa's tax break for owners who make land available to new farmers rather than holding it until death. The New Farmer Corps could offer special training and credit incentives for veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, so they can join the ranks of America's farmers and continue serving, but in more pastoral and nurturing ways.
Speaking of agriculture, jgoodman wants better organic standards for livestock production.
TomP wants Obama to keep his promise to make the Employee Free Choice Act the law of the land.
What's on your wish list for the new administration?
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 19:58:08 PM CST
|
|
Representative Steve King has so little to show for his six years in Congress that he used his first television commercial to take credit for a Highway 20 widening project, even though the funding for that project came from the state (not a federal appropriation).
Apparently King just can't let go of this fairy tale:
FOR RELEASE:
Sunday, November 2, 2008
STATEMENT BY CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE ROB HUBLER
Rep. Steve King continues to mislead voters about state funding for Highway 20 project
During an interview with KMEG-TV yesterday, Rep. Steve King continued to mislead his constituents about the funding of the forthcoming improvements to Highway 20. While he acknowledged the appropriation of state funds--which King had nothing to do with, contradicting the claims he is making in his radio and television ads-King still can't admit that the state had to step in pay for the project rather than wait for King to obtain the federal funding needed to widen the highway.
For six years, King failed to do his job in Congress to obtain four-lane federal construction funding for his top priority - improving Highway 20. As State Senator Steve Warnstadt has stated, the Iowa legislature worked in a bipartisan manner to provide state funding for critical projects like four-laning Highway 20.
When the state announced that it was stepping forward with funding three weeks before the election, King shamelessly tried to take credit for the project when he clearly had nothing to do with the granting of state funds.
Steve King is right about one thing. He told KMEG that people should be offended when a politician "intentionally and willfully misinforms the public for their political gain." He should talk to the mirror about that. He has misinformed the public to get re-elected, by claiming credit for the $48 million in funding that was recently announced by the Iowa Department of Transportation.
That is separate and unrelated to any federal funds that may have gone toward the highway in the distant past, and not part of some "pool," as he now claims. And if such a pool did exist, King has done nothing to contribute to it.
If I'm elected to Congress, I will follow the example Rep. Leonard Boswell has set with the widening of Highway 34 in southern Iowa, obtaining funding for at least 10 miles every year. Had Steve King done that, we would have had at least 60 miles completed for Highway 20.
ATTACHED DOCUMENTS:
Iowa DOT Press Release:
http://www.news.iowadot.gov/ne...
Steve King Quote:
http://www.kmeg.com/global/sto...
If you can afford to do so, please make one last donation to Hubler's campaign. He's up on television now with three ads you can view here (scroll down past the text of the Des Moines Register's endorsement).
UPDATE: Got this e-mail last night from Hubler:
Dear [desmoinesdem],
Have you seen the ads? Heard the radio spots? Or seen the thousands of barn signs, bumper stickers and yard signs out? Travelling the district this week I have been amazed at all the green and white I see popping up amongst the changing leaves of fall.
The seasons are changing and so is the 5th district.
Everywhere I go there are signs that things are moving here on the ground and the whispers in D.C. have turned into rumbles as they talk about the campaign that is going to kick out Steve King. Check out this blog posted today:
http://downwithtyranny.blogspo...
The latest polling shows we're coming up behind him but this is still a tight race. We can win. And we will win. But we still need your help.
In less than 48 hours the polls will close but before that happens we need your help to get out the vote. Call your local office, email John (our field director), or call us at our headquarters 712-352-2077. But I am asking you to do everything you can between now and 9 PM on Tuesday; to get people to go out and vote in all the great democrats we have on the ticket this year from top to bottom.
Talk to people in the line of your local grocer, bug your neighbors, your relatives, and your friends and make sure they do their part.
After the polls close, come on over and watch the results roll in with me.
Ameristar
2200 River Road
Council Bluffs, IA 51501
Or contact your local county party to find a results party closer to you.
Peace and Justice,
Rob
|
|
Discuss
:: (1
Comments)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|