The Lounge Chair Rebellion Strikes Again

The April 16, 2007, edition of the Bacon’s Rebellion e-zine has been published. Visit the e-zine here. Never miss a single issue, subscribe here and get the latest edition e-mailed to you free.

Here are this week’s columns and features:

Honoring Hallowed Ground
Cate Wyatt is reinventing the economy of Virginia’s northern piedmont. The Journey Through Hallowed Ground weaves together heritage tourism, sustainable agriculture, landscape preservation and Main Street renewal.
by James A. Bacon

Rule of Law
Jamestown 2007 is taking Virginia back to basics.
by Doug Koelemay

All Aboard!
An above-ground version of METRO rail can work in Tysons Corner. But it will take two things: Public Way Rights and a Pyramid development strategy.
by EM Risse

Call for a “Roads Blueprint”
Between the new taxes just enacted and financing by the private sector, Virginia should have ample funds to keep traffic congestion under control. The trick is crafting a plan and sticking to it.
by Michael Thompson

Legislative Tyranny
Speaker Bill Howell and AG Bob McDonnell circumvented the Virginia Constitution by passing the 2007 transportation bill in defiance of the multiple object rule.
by Phil Rodokanakis

I Think We Should See Other People
Libertarians have lost patience with big-government Republicans. But it’s not clear where they’d feel more welcome.
by Norman Leahy

Road to Ruin: Auto Busters
Arlington County’s population is growing but traffic congestion isn’t. What makes the difference? Five Metro stations, smart land use and control over local streets and roads.
by Robert L. Burke

Nice & Curious Questions
Ties that Bind: Virginia’s Sister Cities
by Edwin S. Clay III and Patricia Bangs

Share this article


(comments below)


(comments below)


One response to “The Lounge Chair Rebellion Strikes Again”

  1. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    re: “Call for a “Roads Blueprint”

    I actually am in agreement with some of what the Reason Foundation advocates – with respect to using TOLLs to generate revenues but the rest of it.. despite lots of pages and data that one has to plow through ends up like this for me.

    1. – they basically believe that more lane miles is the most cost-effective solution to traffic congestion at rush hour and explicitly conclude that transit is not. No convincing proof mind you – just assertions.

    2. – In doing so, they essentially pretend that the EPA and pollution caps don’t exist and that adding lane miles is merely a question of will and money.

    3. – Finally .. this exerpt tells it ALL in my view (Page 20):

    Cost per Added (Urban) Lane-Mile
    = 9.4 million (in 2005 dollars)

    Someone might want to check this but if this is what they are claiming – all the rest of their words, analysis and study are not credible because for myself, if I cannot trust them on this number, I cannot trust their other numbers either.

    The ICC – a major new urban interstate TOLL road will cost 10 times per lane mile what the Reason Foundation is claiming.

    And THAT number – 100 million per mile is in question because of inflation and other escalating costs.

    So.. in “Call for a Roads Blueprint”, Mr. Thompson cites this:

    “That plan outlines how just …$10 billion in projects in Northern Virginia …. can keep congestion in check through 2030 if executed carefully and professionally.”

    Are we REALLY talking about about $100 Billion in 2005 dollars?

    THIS is my frustration with virtually all the advocates – low ball numbers that are sooooo low ball as to border on disengenuous followed by … “let’s now get on with turning dirt”…..

    Whether it is the Reason Foundation, NVTA, the TPB or VDOT – all of them should be using valid real-world estimates because – if they did – the public, EVERYONE would instantly know and understand the true fiscal magnitude of the circumstances

    … and realize that building our way out of it – while not impossible – is such a ludicrous endeavor as to call into question our entire planning strategy.

    The FEDs got it right with the MPOs and I do note that the Reason Foundation CHOSE to depict the phrase LRP – long range planning rather than CLRP – which is CONSTRAINED LRP – with the Constrained defined explicitly as the true cost of the projects … AND that there is identified funding for them.

    I have about 1000 more words but I’ll stop here.. cuz I suspect few read to this point anyhow…

Leave a Reply