Comments on: Lose the Traffic Lights to Improve Our Streets?

By: ChipSeal

ChipSeal — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

It is hard for me to understand how Obama can see so well from Washington what my local needs are. I am likely to be better served by my locally trained politicians.

[i]“Cut traffic congestion and dependency on cars with more efficient urban planning.”[/i]

I don’t want Washington planning my city. That is not likely to be a good change.

[i]“Stop sprawl and create more livable, walkable communities.”[/i]

I detect some property rights issues here! Having Washington micro-manage zoning in our cities would truly be “change”. Sorry Mr. Obama, I don’t think you have the expertise nor the local know-how to execute these promises. Sounds like hokey-doke to me.

By: Mr Man

Mr Man — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

Yeah it would be very interesting to see how Obama implements those ideas because they definitely sound like areas best dealt with at a more local level. Although developing rail networks is probably part of his responsibility.

By: Mark R.

Mark R. — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

ChipSeal! LOL are you suggesting Obamas plan is a “patch job?” ;D

Doesn’t his plan sound nice? maybe we should elect him Miss America instead of the President?

I don’t know what I dislike more Democrats calling for bigger more expensive government that force more regulations you don’t need, specifically plans that could take away property rights, or people who think everyone should live on top of each other in a densely populated cesspool called a [s]concentration camp[/s] err city?

I’m just venting because my guy dropped out of the race last week and I think ALL the potential leaders are the worst of the worst, (well with exception of Romney). Now I’m waiting for who has the best vice president nominee because that’s probably how my vote will fall. not for the big bonehead but the second.

By: Carl

Carl — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

There’s a lot that the president can do. As for the highlights mentioned above, many of them are definitely federal issues: Amtrak, nationwide high speed rail, and safeguarding against terrorism.

As for the others, the president can help provide federal funding and support for local communities to make these decisions on their own. This is already being done. For instance, there is federal money which may be coming NYC’s way for congestion pricing, to be used how NYC decides to.

By: Josh

Josh — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

There is a great deal the president can do to curb sprawl. First off, up until President Reagan, the federal government awarded hundreds of millions of dollars to local planning agencies. Since then, it has been cut by 95%. That’s local decisions. Second, the president can drive policy concerning what programs have funding. Providing funding for mass transit, pedestrian, and cycling amenities at a much higher rate will directly translate into having better services. The Federal government subsidizes road construction – even you local neighborhood roads – why not non-car transportation? Next, the President can rebuild programs that keep central cities vital. These programs include HUD, crime prevention, and job creation programs. Suburbs attempt keep “problems” like abandoned buildings, crime, and noise out by using exclusionary zoning techniques which are essentially tools of economic, demographic, and social segregation as they are land use separation.