Check out new Janos blog!

Dear all,
I know this site has been dormant forever. There are good reasons/excuses for that. I've been heavily involved in a few local campaigns, to the point that I wouldn't feel sharing information that the campaigns might consider internal. Clearly that was not a problem on the Obama campaign. I've also been evaluating options for livingthedream.org, which should go live this summer. Finally, I have started a new site that will feature daily posts, GeneticsLaw.blogspot.com. I encourage you to check out the intro post. The opportunities to foster discussion about some critical issues that affect all of us are limitless. I hope to see you all there.

Again: GeneticsLaw.blogspot.com

And should the muses give me a kick in the ass, you may see a dispatch down the road. It's not as if Michael Jackson coverage, Obama's broken promises, the future of the NBA and the situation in Iran don't stir the blood!

Janos v. Kos

Earlier this evening, Kos, founder of DailyKos, one of my favorite sites for several reasons, launched into this misguided screed: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/4/16/720821/-Why-yesterdays-protests-were-stupid
It slams the tea-baggers, which we all know was a tough journalistic assignment, but also totally disses Code Pink and street protesting generally in the process. Why Kos felt compelled to rip apart another aspect of the same broader movement he's part of is beyond me, but my response is below, and cross-posted at DailyKos here:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/4/16/721107/-Tirades-against-Code-Pink-wrong-and-unhelpful
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Why Tirades Against Code Pink Are Wrong and Unhelpful

While I back Kos about 95% of the time, his bizarre screed against Code Pink makes no sense. Kos should not belittle activists who work towards the same causes he does, but if he is going to slam two organizations whose anti-Bush opposition predated DailyKos, I’d like to at least rebut with what street protesting has meant to me, and the specific experiences I’ve had with these organizations.

I’ll start by agreeing with Kos on a couple key points. Street protests often accomplish little individually. They are sometimes poorly run, and the messaging can be very muddled. ANSWER peddles simplistic and trite anti-imperialism lines that no one takes seriously. This much I’ll concede.

In mid-September of 2001, when like most New Yorkers, I was shell-shocked from 9/11, I trudged up to Dartmouth to begin my sophomore year of college. The country was rumbling towards war in Afghanistan. Something in my heart told me that it wasn’t right to bomb a destitute country “back to the stone age” over the actions of terrorists hiding out in caves. With some effort I tracked down a group of students going down to Washington to protest the war. Twenty of us in two vans drove through the night to attend the ANSWER-led protest rally, joining between 10,000 and 15,000. We were a proud part of the 9% that did not support a reckless invasion and a lengthy occupation.
I can speak to the sentiments offered by Cas2 in response to Kos, part of the benefit of the trip was a “feel-good/solidarity” notion. But it was more than that.

When we returned to campus, the core from that trip formed the Dartmouth Progressives. Over the next three years (and beyond, though I graduated), this group published our campus liberal newspaper, hosted speakers, and led efforts in local and national activism. To this day, I can count several close friends from that van ride. Stepping back more generally, protests are a chance for people to see, not just hear, but to see before their own eyes, that there are thousands of people who think like them, who are passionate about the same causes as them (at least!). That was truly eye opening for me at that first rally, and lord knows how many of my friends had similar experiences during the protests leading up to the war in Iraq, which featured thousands of “normal” people marching in the streets.

They felt GOOD at those rallies! And why not? There is an empowering feeling to walking down Pennsylvania Avenue, chanting “whose streets? Our streets!” Sometimes, sorry, almost all the time, America has to be woken out of its slumber. Why did it take Camp Casey to wake people up to the war, Katrina to expose the Bush administration, the AIG bonuses to get people asking questions about bailout money? A good protest is like a strong cup of coffee in the morning.

Would I ever suggest that marching up and down a pre-selected march route will change a policy by itself? Of course not. Neither will blogging. Would I prefer that a different group than ANSWER run these big protests? Probably. And I will show up when well-organized, on message, politically pragmatic people start regularly organizing major demonstrations. But I won’t hold my breath waiting for that to happen.

Now on to Code Pink. Kos laid out four principles for protests to live by, based on his vast experience/observations.
1. Be novel or unexpected
2. Have a sympathetic, singular, and media-friendly message
3. Provide great visuals
4. Tap into a hot-button and timely issue

1. How often do you see old women leading a protest movement? Or even women, which is part of their point.
2. Say what you want about Code Pink, but they have a simple message (end the war) delivered by sympathetic (ok, sometimes sympathic) women. Code Pink also delves into other tangents now and then, but war is their bread and butter. No more wars. Simplistic, but right more often than not looking at the past fifty years.
3. Um, they are DRENCHED IN PINK.
4. Even though this answer applies more to ANSWER, any issue that can get thousands of people in the streets is a hot-button and timely issue. And the war in Iraq is a timely issue. People are still there dying. The escalation in Afghanistan is timely- it was just ordered. I actually admire Code Pink, both for taking off Inauguration Day from protesting, and for continuing the protests the next day. It will be untimely for Code Pink to protest war when we don’ have any more war.

In the interest of full disclosure, anyone who clicks on my profile will see that I helped put together weekly events in Union Square, NYC, from February-April called “Make Out Not War”, which were affiliated with CodePink. Though Make Out Not War never garnered many spontaneous make out sessions like we envisioned, we handed out hundreds of Make Out Not War stickers, posed for many photographers, from amateurs to local media, and we spoke to primarily young passerbys about the war. We had regulars who joined us, and of that group, few had any serious activist history. And as far I know, we followed the Four Kos Principles. It wasn’t the best protest ever organized, but if it reminded even a few people that we are still fighting a senseless war, campaign promise or not, then it was worth it.

In closing, I’ll say this- it takes all kinds to make a progressive movement. We all know this. That’s why we donate money to our favorite progressive candidates. That’s why we knock on doors. That’s why we stop work to read a diary post by a blogger we’ve never met or heard of. I’ve been reading DailyKos since 2003, and touting it since I first laid eyes on it. But some people just want to march in the streets. I, for one, think every part of the movement helps it move forward, and at different times have contributed to as many parts as I can. So thank you, Kos, for helping keep this excellent site running, and let’s please not pretend we can get anything done without being in the streets, where all the people are.

Fear and Loathing in the Graveyard of Empires

I have always appreciated the freshness that President Obama brought to a broken, artificial political process. Only a few years removed from anonymity and relative powerlessness himself, Obama understands and fears the power of the mainstream media and special interest groups to shape and drive debate in this country. Throughout the campaign, particularly the more intimate settings of early primary season, I saw Obama plead for us, the Democratic primary voters, the progressive supporters, to hold him accountable once he won. He does not want people like me to support him blindly, he wants us to tug on him to the left, make some noise, and raise some hell, because God knows how many insidious forces will give no quarter in dragging him in the wrong direction.

That is why my honeymoon period with the President is over. Let’s start with the first issue to ever move me to the streets, the senseless war in Afghanistan. From the beginning it was a misguided adventure, where we sent 15 year old boys with pitchforks and rifles as proxies to fight the Taliban on the ground, carpet bombing and incinerating the already devastated countryside with 15,000 pound Daisy Cutters and dropping yellow cluster bombs that looked tragically like yellow food package drops. Children continued to be maimed by cluster bombs that failed to diffuse on impact long after our initial invasion. And despite the death of as many Afghani civilians as died on our soil on September 11th, we had little to show for our effort- most of Al Qaeda’s leadership had escaped, along with one-eyed Taliban leader Mullah Omar. We installed an oil hack, Hamid Karzai, as the glorified mayor of Kabul. Seven years later, the Karzai presidency faces its first serious electoral test, facing Haji Baryalai, whose main platform is reconciling with moderate members of the Taliban. Yeah democracy! That was worth it! Can we leave now?

Unfortunately not. President Obama wants to double-down, sending at least 30,000 more troops to a land that is actually called “the graveyard of empires.” It’s funny, during general elections all candidates are expected to make promises they don’t keep- just part of the game. When Obama would constantly bring up sending more troops to Afghanistan, it seemed like a pretty transparent ploy to make him seem tough, given his very well known (some chicken hawks would call it ‘weak’) position on withdrawing from Iraq. Especially when the recession could have given him an economic excuse, or at least sufficiently distracted the public, it seemed like the Afghanistan troop surge would quietly exit. And yet, here he is, sending more troops without any political demand whatsoever. It’s one of the few campaign promises he’s been able to follow through on. This insistence not only surprised me, but probably our European allies, who probably also thought he had been bluffing all along. When he went to Europe last week to ask him for more troops, the main response was, “No, are you joking?” Italy, France and Germany may send something like 2400 troops to help monitor elections, but then they’ll bounce. No, it will just be us, hanging out, living out a wretched, doomed plan.

Shockingly, the American people may actually come around on Afghanistan faster than the President. A USA Today/Gallup poll released on March 17 showed that 42% of Americans thought the U.S “made a mistake in occupying Afghanistan”, a number so mind-blowing that I did a triple-take when I passed a newsstand that morning and saw it. The recession is clearly a factor- the number was only 30% a year ago, and has been on a steady trajectory since its all-time low of 6% in January of 2002, back when we “won.” Maybe Americans don’t see the point in propping up a corrupt government in a country that exports 75% of the world’s heroin (though not 75% of the world’s heroines). Whatever the reason for the change of heart, I’ll take it, because that’s a number that will only go up.

I’d feel worse about opposing the troop escalation if it had any logical basis to it. Apparently, the current problem in Afghanistan is our troops are too centralized, and when we raid outposts in the countryside, extremist groups/Taliban/Al-Qaeda/local tribes tend to regroup as soon as we leave. Our solution is to send these reinforcements to stay at the outposts, so these enemies can’t regroup. And I imagine that these people, who have lived in the area for thousands of years, will eventually be discouraged by our makeshift barracks and surrender, bringing true democracy to Afghanistan. Assuming our presence in those regions last…forever?
Oh, and how could I leave out the “training”? You know, training the troops and the police officers. The thing we were so good at in Iraq. I’ve actually spoken to someone who had to train cops in Afghanistan, who told me the biggest problem he faced was illiteracy. “You can’t even give them a manual, assuming you had one in their language in the first place.” I understand that Obama is genuinely nervous about that region of the world imploding. After all, Pakistan is a deeply unstable nuclear state, and Waziristan is truly a threat to regional and global security. Sending unmanned drones in to blow up wedding parties and civilian homes isn’t going to solve the terrorist recruitment problem, though. The solution lies in partnering with India and Pakistan, both of whom have serious concerns about Waziristan-driven terrorism.

The politically savvy-to-the-point-of-cynicism in me says that perhaps Obama is only out front on Afghanistan to neutralize Republicans on the only issue that they could even lay a glove on him for in the ’08 elections, which is national security/foreign policy. Republicans have completely lost the battle on social issues (See Iowa) and Obama’s domestic plan, including the stimulus, is extremely popular. Cut off on foreign policy, Republicans will likely turn to nativist anti-immigration screeching and try to tie Obama to the bailout crisis, the latter being Obama’s biggest political vulnerability today. If all this ruminating is correct, Obama will turn around once his cute little “Afghani-surge” is over and bring the troops home.

On a related note, please continue to join us for Make Out Not War on Saturdays, 4pm-5pm, in Union Square. In my mind, this is the war I am making out against.

On a happier note, please enjoy David Bowie and Bing Crosby singing Christmas carols: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-OTQmVOqJU
I know. It’s been a weird day.

Make Out Not War!

This was cross-posted over at dailykos.com . Hopefully I'll get to posting the photos here too, not just providing links...
..................................................


Yesterday the latest CODEPINK production, Make Out Not War!, celebrated its third session in Union Square, New York City. Merging with Free Hugs movement and a few anti-war musicians, we had an absolute blast, and can't wait to return in ever greater numbers until the war comes to an end. More below the fold, including pics.

*

CODEPINK women and men believe that it is important to create a visible reminder that the President has to stick to his promise to end the war. Therefore, we are launching a new campaign: Make Out Not War!

Here are a few pics from first two MONWs:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/36147705@N08/3334632668/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/36147705@N08/3334632656/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/36147705@N08/3334632656/

Union Square is always full of activities on sunny Saturdays, and one steady presence is the delightful Free Hugs Movement. Yesterday we realized how much we had in common, and initiated one of the more successful mergers of 2009:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/36147705@N08/3339647907/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/36147705@N08/3339688105/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/36147705@N08/3340546308/
Hopefully the Free Huggers will be a permanent part of our coalition!

The festivities will continue every Saturday from 4pm-5pm, in Union Square, underneath the George Washington statue, around the inexplicable lifeguard chair- until the war ends. So BYO lovers, friends, kissing partner or find a friendly peacemaker in the street! Also, while making out is encouraged, you can also hand out stickers, or just engage passer-bys about the war. As if you need more of a reason to come, we have wonderful after-parties.

Sign Up For the Facebook Event:
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/event.php?eid=55630255853

Feel free to start your own MONW chapters around the country. We had some friends in Miami kicks things off this weekend. We can send you MONW stickers to pass out in the streets.

If you want to let us know about a branch you're starting, or send us fun pictures, just email makeoutnotwarnyc@gmail.com .

Everyone have a great week, and do your part to make out, not war.

A Tale of Two Hearings

A Tale of Two Hearings

The desperate attempts to salvage New York City’s public transportation have led to a convoluted political chess game, theater and reality hopelessly blurred together. The fourth wall is down. A few weeks ago I had the immense privilege of attending the Brooklyn Borough MTA Public Hearing at the Brooklyn Bridge Marriot. Still stinging from being shut out of the Manhattan hearing, I showed up especially early, and even got myself on the speakers list, representing the Williamsburg/Greenpoint community group, Neighbors Allied for Good Growth. A friendly woman handed me a placard that said, ‘Speaker.’

“You’re one of the first people not on the pre-registered list!”

I frowned. “How many people are on the pre-registered list?”

“About 100. Maybe more. But you’re probably tenth on the second list.”

I churned the math real quick. Three minutes per speaker, give or take 100 speakers- that had me speaking at 12:30am, assuming the meeting started on time and ran smoothly.

I took a seat in the fifth row. My section was about as diverse as a New York City subway car. Behind me were a few angry black women holding signs. To my right was an old Russian man missing most of his teeth. Next to him were several blind women and a Marxist MTA union organizer. In front of me was a Hasidim crew, surrounding the bubbly Councilman Simcha Felder. I was with my friend Rachel and a journalist from the Williamsburg Courier.

It was 7pm, a half hour late, when the meeting was finally called to order. The Marriot ballroom was filled with hundreds of rambunctious subway and bus riders ready to make hell. They got their chance right away as the MTA Board Members took their seats. These politically appointed hacks, mostly from the Pataki administration, were seated across a long table facing the crowd, about thirty feet from a velvet rope line, reminding the audience that they were very different people. On our side of the rope line was the podium, equipped with a little scoreboard to let speakers know how much time they had left. I thought that was neat.

The MTA Executive Director, Lee Sander, introduced each of the 12 Board Members present one by one. Each name was greeted by a tremendous round of booing.

“Andrew Saul.”

“BOOOOOOO!”

“David Mack.”

“BOOOOOOOOOO!”

“John Banks.” Mixture of booing and scattered applause.

“Carl Wortendyke.”

“BOOOOOOOOOOOO!”

The Courier journalist turned to me. “This is like going to a Knicks game- booing the home team before we’ve even started.”

Having just been booed for several minutes, Sander announced that despite the 200 person waiting list of speakers, the evening would begin with testimony from elected officials. Felder and I later shared our discontent about this policy in the men’s room, agreeing that elected officials had ample platforms to make statements, and should not cut into the only time allotted to regular citizens to address the MTA Board. Felder has a good sense of humor, and had declined to sit with his City Council colleagues so he could heckle them from the peanut gallery.

Things started off with a thunderous tongue-lashing from Brooklyn Borough Prez Marty Markowitz to the Board, who are legally not allowed to respond during these hearings. Things were uneven thereafter- the parade of City Council members, Assembly members, and State Senators included the shrill, the redundant, and the hopelessly inarticulate. We were awakened from the soporific drone when fierce Bloomberg critic, Councilwoman Letitia James, got to the mic and began, “I’m just gonna throw this out. This is a racist board!”

At that point I looked up and realized that, in fact, on the stage in front of me were ten old white men, a white woman, and a black man. Of course 11/12 doesn’t mean the Board members themselves are racist- there probably just weren’t a lot of minorities who donated heavily to the Pataki re-election campaigns.

The accusation did stir the room up though. The Marxists went back to distributing their literature (their main argument was that the subway should cost a dollar per ride, which seemed ridiculous until I realized that their plan also called for a revolution, at which point subway costs would probably not be the most pressing issue). Staffers for elected officials distributed little placards reading “B75”, “B48” and such, so that when their boss railed against “the service cuts to the B25”, audience members with B25 placards would wave them and shriek. Many of the speakers ended their rants with “Praised be to our President Barack Obama!” at which point the whole gallery would burst into cheers. Supporting “change, like our great President Barack Obama” seemed to be the only thing the whole crowd could agree on besides how much they hated MTA Board Members. I kicked myself for not having a flask so I could take a swig every time a speaker used the word “Draconian” to describe the budget cuts. It was the most fun I’d had on a weeknight in a while.

After about 55 speakers, however, no theme seemed novel anymore. When even the sun-glass toting Mr. X couldn’t get me fired up, I knew it was time to go. The momentum in the room had discernibly shifted from tirades about bus and subway lines to the topic of Access-A-Ride. This little known service essentially runs semi-regular van routes for disabled persons. The disabled community had come out for full force, at least 100 deep, and they were PISSED. Apparently, the MTA fare hikes included a proposal increasing Access-A-Ride from $3 to $6 in some areas, and from $3.50 to $7 in others. This was bad enough to elicit gasps of horror, since most of Access-A-Ride riders are on fixed income due to their age or physical handicaps. But their point went beyond that- Access-A-Ride is also apparently a disastrously run operation at its current cost. One after another, individuals told horror stories of waiting in the cold, or waiting in the dark for hours, waiting for their van ride that never came. If the imagery of an old blind woman waiting on a dark street by herself in the middle of winter for three hours isn’t bad enough, imagine telling that woman that now she’ll have to pay 100% more for the same service.

The Brooklyn public hearing may have been fun, but its usefulness as anything but a ventilation of frustration was questionable. That’s why this afternoon I braved the rain to Borough Hall, Brooklyn, where my own State Senator Martin Milave Dilan, the Chairman of the State Senate Transportation Committee, was holding hearings on the Ravitch Report. Also in attendance were my former State Senator Bill Perkins, the new political hotshot, 29 year-old State Senator Dan Squadron, and the gay-bashing State Senator Ruben Diaz, who left about ten minutes into the second presentation. With all due respect to the State Senators, who I’m sure had fundraisers to attend to later, 1:30pm-4:30pm seemed like an inconvenient time to have a hearing of this importance. It turned out that the room could only hold about 60 people, however, so between staffers, press, speakers and one curious law student, everyone was accounted for, and there was no room for the public anyway.

The hearing was scheduled for 1:30pm, with twenty minutes allotted per speaker. Aware of how local New York political events operate, I arrived at 2:30, having missed only one speaker, Comptroller Bill Thompson. We actually bumped into each other rounding a corner. We made weird eye contact, and I was going to tell him that whoever is running his Mayor’s race volunteer operation is terrible at getting back to people, but I didn’t feel like getting an underpaid campaign worker in trouble. Besides, Richard Ravitch, the illustrious maven of New York transportation, was about to begin his testimony.

Ravitch is one of those people who just exudes gravitas. He’s been around the political block- after starting his career in affordable housing development and working on an Urban Problems commission under LBJ, Ravitch worked for Governor Carey during New York’s budget crisis in the late 70s, was credited for salvaging the MTA as its Chairman from 1979-1983, and ran for Mayor in 1989 Democratic primary, where he got swamped by Ed Koch and the victor, David Dinkins.

Last year, when it dawned on elected officials and MTA leadership that their budget was a train wreck, they created the Ravitch Commission, so that the aging former chairman could take the heat for making the unpopular proposals that the politicians were too cowardly to make themselves. To cushion the blow Ravitch was sure to deliver, the MTA released its own “solution”, which called for 23% fare increases and massive service cuts. Seeing Ravitch and MTA CEO Sander speak back to back clarified it all of for me. All the wild public hearings, which I had suspected were just a ruse to for the legislature to give Sander more money to play with, were more specifically a ruse to make the Ravitch Report seem like a more palatable alternative. Sander, after all, is on the Ravitch Commission.

For fifty minutes, Ravitch hammered home the major findings of his report, which, by the way, clocks in at a bathroom reading-worthy 19 pages. Apparently 19 pages are all it takes to solve the biggest budget deficit in MTA history. You can read it for yourselves here: http://www.ny.gov/governor/press/pdf/press_1204082.pdf

The proposal has a few key recommendations.

First, a payroll tax in all 12 MTA-serviced counties. This would raise $1.5 billion.

Second, toll the currently free East River bridges: the Brooklyn Bridge, Manhattan Bridge, Williamsburg Bridge and 59^th Street Bridge.

Third, raise tolls and fares by 8%, and raise fares by smaller amounts on a steady basis, so we don’t need a major one-time hike like this in the future.

That’s essentially it. They got the best minds on this issue into the room together, and they solved it- raise taxes, charge tolls on free bridges and raise fares. That’s how you avoid cutting services, Ravitch proudly proclaimed. The report has been endorsed by Governor Paterson, Mayor Bloomberg, environmental groups and construction groups.

Ravitch made a strong case for his report. The elephant in the room, of course, is that Dilan’s district is home to several of the bridges that would suddenly face these tolls. It is a sensitive issue. To some extent the free bridges symbolize New York as one city, as opposed to the gilded isle of Manhattan and its ugly step-brothers. I’ve certainly driven across the Williamsburg Bridge to take care of errands in Manhattan that required a car, and more often I’ve shared inexpensive cab rides home across the bridge from the Lower East Side, in no small part because of the L Train’s pitiful late night performance, especially on weekends. But I ultimately agree that it is not fair for one random community of New York to have access to all of these free bridges, when all City taxpayers are billed for its maintenance. As the Environmental Defense Fund later pointed out, the ratio of Brooklynites who use public transportation over driving to work in Manhattan is 17 to 1, and the tolls come with a promise of increased bus service over the bridges. Oddly, the toll proponents are quite insistent that the tolls be unmanned and cash free, a system that has been enacted many places, but certainly not in New York. They didn’t have time to explain how that detail would work or how long it would take to set up in the confines of the 19-page report.

Among Ravitch’s most interest revelations was that his group had considered Comptroller Bill Thompson’s idea to raise revenues by increasing car registration fees based on car size. The Commission had not pursued that lead after learning from Governor Paterson that he completely supported the fees, but wanted to use them to pay for the costs of state bridge and highway repairs. If Paterson follows through on that plan, it will strip Thompson of one of his most potent issues, one of the few ways he has articulated how a Thompson administration would handle a major issue differently than a Bloomberg administration.

Next up on the bill was MTA CEO Lee Sander. He was generally smooth and in sharp control of his presentation, beginning with a recitation of how sweet the MTA’s progress had been over the last 27 years. Ridership is up 50% in the last ten years. Crazy! We should give these guys a medal. How did they pull it off? Oh wait, that’s when Sander dropped the first of his dreary states.

Today, the MTA faces at least a $1.2 billion budget gap. The MTA has always spent some money on debt servicing, but it seems that in the 90s the Board got a little carried away, borrowing heavily to pay for capital improvements. While ten years ago the MTA was paying $500 million for debt servicing, that figure has tripled to $1.5 billion (hence the payroll tax) and will soon reach $2 billion, accounting for 17% of the MTA’s entire budget. This places the MTA as the fifth largest debt holder in the United States, behind California, New York, Massachusetts and New York City.

That’s just the beginning. Another way the MTA has traditionally stayed afloat has been taking a percentage of tax revenues, including the real estate transaction tax. The lost revenues for the upcoming year figure close to another BILLION dollars.

In the face of these calamities, Sander essentially went on the record today saying that if the Ravitch Report was not adopted, New Yorkers should get used to a $3 single ride, $7 tolls, and the elimination of the free subway to bus transfer, in addition to a “drastic reduction in non-peak subway services” and the laying off of 1100 MTA employees, or “as many as civil service laws will permit.”

Somehow this wasn’t the worst news. Sander then explained that the $30 billion capital budget, separate from the $11 billion operating budget, was completely unfunded. He broke down the capital budget as follows: $22 billion was needed to replace buses, train cars, fix station platforms, train signals, etc. Approximately $5 billion was needed to continue the Second Avenue line, which has run out of federal grant money. Another $3 billion was needed to plan for future growth to meet growing demands in burgeoning communities. Apparently, out of that $30 billion, Sander is sure that he has secured… zero dollars.

At this point, Senator Perkins asked the question on everyone’s mind: “Can we expect some help from Obama’s stimulus? How would that affect his numbers?”

Sander explained that he was expecting a little over $1 billion in aid from the federal government. Of that amount, $500 million would go to the Fulton Street Transit Center, which won’t even begin construction until 2010.

The next time you hear Republicans bemoaning all the “pork” in the stimulus, thank them and those heralded “moderate Senators”, because the compromise bill that was practically written by Arlen Spector and Susan Collins cut three BILLION dollars from the House bill that would have been directed to fixing New York City’s transportation infrastructure. Congressman Nadler has been legendary for years for his ability to secure New Yorkers transportation funding, and he probably lies in bed every night, staring at the ceiling, wondering where that three billion ended up.

When the Ravitch Report was released in December, Ravitch warned ominously that if the legislature did not act immediately, the dreaded fare hikes could begin as soon as January. Today, Sander warned the Senators that if they did not act quickly, they could see fare hikes and service cuts as soon as March. We’ll see.

I left Borough Hall a little overwhelmed, but also feeling a sense of deja vous. If our public officials have learned anything, it’s that the American people are extremely reluctant to embrace big change unless they are scared to death. Invade a country halfway across the world? That’s absurd. Throw in some terror-mongering, and we support invading Iraq. Spend money on healthcare or education? Never! Henry Paulson says he needs $700 billion TODAY or the financial system collapses? Oh, ok! For better or worse, it seems like the Ravitch Report is our only option. But that is, of course, what we have been trained to believe.

Thus, after all that, the MTA, already a tragically unaccountable institution, has placed its entire future in the hands of two men, one of whom hasn’t held a government position in decades, another who was appointed by Eliot Spitzer. No accountability, just a lot of money, and no clear way out. Mark my words, friends, New York City public transportation is about to get a lot worse. Take a good look around your next couple commutes. Breath in your surroundings, so you’ll always remember what moderately decent service was like.

But I won’t let this end on a “the economy is doomed forever” note. The economy actually might be doomed forever, who knows, but the MTA- it will eventually turn around.

It’s like George Harrison said, “It’s not always gonna be this grey, all things must pass, all things must pass away: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vm_N3bjqlr4&feature=related .

No, I’m not worried about New York City. This city will always be destination for the third world immigrant who can take the low paying job we don’t want and still find a way to send money home. New York will always have an apartment for purchase from a trust-fund baby who loves the city as much we do. New York will always welcome the gorgeous aspiring theater girl, the starry-eyed poet from the Midwest, the rock and rollers who hop on a Greyhound bus with a duffel bag, a guitar and a pair of forties. People will come from across the country and world to study at our incredible colleges and graduate programs. Scientists will work in our labs. Star athletes will play on our fields and in our arenas (Hi, Lebron). Tourists will always visit us to see the sites and buy cheap electronics. People will always pursue their dreams in this city, and hopefully enough of them will swipe their Metrocards to turn this MTA crisis around.

For now, we’ll just need to wait a little longer for the next train. My advice: for the next couple years, when you’re using public transit, always have something to read. If you’ve been reading this, I hope you’re enjoying your ride.

Some 2010 Senate analysis

A little something I posted over at DailyKos, my first "Diary" there, in fact:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/1/30/0424/77019/794/690776

These are my initial observations on the 2010 New Hampshire Senate race. I'll concede that my conceptions of New Hampshire are colored in part by my experiences there 2002-2004, which is before the Democratic revolution of 2006. I have done my best to keep up with the times though. Since this was an intro to a different blogging community, it's heavy on analysis and light on wild anecdotes, but that will change in time.

Gregg as formidable 2010 foe

by janosnation [Subscribe] [Edit Diary]

Thu Jan 29, 2009 at 09:59:02 PM PST

In light of the Gregg for Commerce Secretary rumors, this is a narrowly tailored diary addressing the 2010 NH Senate election. It seems that some in the community have shown commendable, but perhaps misguided optimism about our chance to take this seat in 2010. If this seat is as unlikely a takeover as I suggest it is, then appointing Gregg and leaving Gov. Lynch to appoint the magical #60 may be in our best interests. This diary does not consider what Gregg would be like as Commerce Secretary, which Black Mage covers here: http://http://www.dailykos.com/story... . So for a crash course on dealing with Rethug Empires in New Hampshire, check out below the fold.

First, Judd Gregg is from one of the three titan families of New Hampshire Republican politics. Jeanne Shaheen took down the scion of the Sununu family, Sen. John Sununu, last year, and Paul Hodes took out Rep. Charlie Bass in 2006. It would appear fitting to knock out Senator Judd to complete the tri-fecta. But Judd is not as much of a lightweight as the other two.

John Sununu was a lame creature, with zero charisma, who would never have been able to match the record of his father. John H. Sununu had been a three-term governor, and George H.W's Chief of Staff. Little John barely beat Shaheen in the 2002 "national security" elections, a race that will always be remembered for the phone-jamming scandal that led to the imprisonment of multiple Republican Party operatives.

Charlie Bass was a third-generation pol who rode the 1994 landslide to victory over the colorfully-named Democratic incumbent, Dick Swett. He held his seat with numbers that rarely left the mid-50s, despite his very moderate positions. As a personal anecdote, I was able to visit his office as a member of a college delegation, and when I asked him what his favorite thing about being a Congressman was, he answered, "It's really fun when the Speaker gives me the gavel and I get to sit up in that big chair and run the show." Cute, but typically lightweight. Still, count me as among the surprised when Hodes, who had lost by 20 points in 2004, knocked him out in 2006.

Judd Gregg is the son of Hugh Gregg, a former governor and powerful leader of the business community and the Republican Party in NH for decades. He is known for his zealous defense of NH's first in the nation primary status, as bi-partisan an issue in the state as any. Judd has far surpassed his father's record, however. After spending four terms in the House, Gregg was twice elected Governor, from '89-93. In '92, Gregg won election to the Senate, and has cruised to re-elections twice since. He is without a doubt the most powerful political institution in the state. Which is not to say, of course, that he doesn't suck, and we shouldn't take him down. I'm just here to point out that it will not be easy.

Paul Hodes is a great guy. He is also coincidentally one of the few people I know who shares my high school and college alma mater. I had the privilege of sharing the stage with him on a panel about the 2004 election (I worked as a Kerry staffer) at our old high school, and he was very friendly. He is a good rep for the 2nd District, and would be an easy candidate to get behind in 2010. But let's be clear- he is not the rising star of the Democratic Party that some on this site, including Kos, make him out to be. He is only four years younger than Gregg (57 and 61, respectively). His candidacy would also certainly throw the 2nd district into toss-up status.

An ARG Poll from a few weeks ago showed Gregg leading Hodes 47-40, which is encouraging (Shea-Porter was also polled, but forget about her winning this seat).
Poll here: http://www.bluehampshire.com/...
I am absolutely not saying that this seat is 'unwinnable'. But having observed the last few cycles pretty closely, this race seems most similar to Susan Collins v. Tom Allen in Maine. Unlike Conrad Burns, George Allen and Rick Santorum, Gregg is neither a crazy old man, a racist, nor a right-wing lunatic. He is more savvy than the many Republican deuschebag Senators who were too cocky to listen to the rumblings on the ground. Gregg will likely continue to vote here and there for headline-grabbing Obama bills that make him look accommodating.

In conclusion:

1. If Hodes chooses to run, we should absolutely support him to the fullest.

2. This Senate race will be a tough, uphill battle.

3. If people really, really want this Senate seat, either right now, or in 2010, the Commerce Secretary offer seems like a decent trade off.

4. Whether that trade-off is something that can be morally or pragmatically stomached, I'll leave to all of you.

Fear and Loathing in the Purple Tunnel of Doom

It was fitting that we ended the last hours of the Bush administration in a cold, dark tunnel, being fed misinformation. Kate Gage had delivered us three elusive Purple tickets the midnight before the inauguration. Purple section tickets, and their blue counterparts, got you into a viewing area in front of the Reflecting Pool, well in front of the Mall. Weary of possible long lines, despite D.C relative tranquility in the days leading to the Inauguration, we had arrived at the Purple Gate at 7am, two hours before it was set to open. We were greeted by the longest line I have ever seen in my life.

The line flowed about two city blocks before a parked bus wreaked havoc, splintering the official line into a series of hydra-like offshoots. We followed one of these off-shoots for two more blocks before a group of policemen shuttled us, and our purple-ticket bearing brothers and sisters, into the 3^rd Street Tunnel. We marched into the abyss, finding the end of the line 20 minutes later. It was now 7:30am. We shivered for the next few hours, finally emerging into the sunlight at 11am, only to realize that there were no longer any policemen in the area, and that people had been cutting the entire tunnel line for hours.

The Purple Tunnel of Doom has become something of a legend, spawning a Washington Post article and a Facebook Group (I Survived the Purple Tunnel of Doom). Nothing awful happened down there, and there was even occasional happy chanting. But Dianne Feinstein’s Inauguration Committee really, really dropped the ball on this one. For hours, there were 20,000 people in a freezing tunnel, where cell phones don’t work, without any police supervision or staffers providing instruction. There was definitely a risk of a stampede or medical emergency, two of the many morbid scenarios we discussed to pass the 3.5 hours we spent down there. The steady flow of people joining the line (masochistically having to push through the packed tunnel crowd only to get in the very back of it) and our slow but sure advancement had convinced me that we were in at least a real line, but alas.

When we got out of the tunnel, and realized our 3.5 hours of waiting had been in vain, we charged towards the Purple Gate, still three blocks away. Thousands of other people had the same idea, and by 11:15am a giant mob had amassed on First and C, where it turned out that the Purple Gate wasn’t even open. Ticket-holders were told to go to another location, which was impossible, because no one could move at all. At this point, we made an executive decision. We are mobile, resourceful, and not afraid to push, so we probably could have made a last desperate effort for the remaining open gate. Even if we succeeded, however, we would probably have terrible spots, lacking proper audio, visual, or both. Bewilderingly, there were no speakers or screens outside Capital Hill, so if we were going to find another location, we’d have to book it.

The first three bars were full or reserved, and by 11:30am we had resigned ourselves to trekking back to Carrie Chess’s apartment, where we could at least watch the Inauguration on television. On the way, however, we spotted an old church with a banner reading, “Inauguration Welcome Center.” Old ladies were selling Obama buttons outside of it. We thought, ‘what the hell’, and asked if they had a TV. It turned out that they were having a viewing party, and had erected a big-screen at the front of the basement. The room was decorated with Obama paraphernalia, festooned in red, white and blue, and about 100, mostly elderly, African-American church members sat watching the ceremonies. There was also free tea, and a handful of soldiers who had come off of their street duties to watch the ceremony. Nearly delirious with cold, fatigue and emotion, this felt like the warmest place on earth. We were settled with our tea just in time to catch the beginning of the ceremonies, including MC Feinstein.

To Feinstein’s credit, she has offered an apology for the debacle, and in doing so, at least acknowledged that it happened. The same cannot be said of the Capital Police, who declared that everything ran smoothly except for the “4,000-5,000 discombobulated people.” That line is deeply insulting to the thousands of people who had flown in from all over the country to see the Inauguration, only to be stuck in a tunnel for the historic moment, at an event where there was no correlation between when you joined the line and whether you’d get in. Additionally, purple ticket-holders included many of Obama’s staffers, who sacrificed a year of their lives to savor this very moment. Just because the Capital Police were either too disorganized or too lazy to run the lines properly does not give them the right to mock all the people who went through that awful experience. Lord knows how angry I would have been had we not found that church. And to people who ask how the Inauguration Committee could have done a better job given the number of people, how’s this?

1. Have a police or volunteer/staffer presence at least at every block to direct the line.
2. Make periodic announcements, through those people or others, on what is happening.
3. Post signs!
4. Open the gates at 6am, when there was already a huge line, instead of waiting until 9am.
5. Open all the gates! Why have a gate if you aren’t going to use it? It’s a one-day event….
6. Observe the madhouse at the Sunday free concert, and note that maybe extra preparations should be taken for Tuesday.
7. Don’t give out so many tickets! I realize that I may not have gotten a ticket myself had this idea been implemented, but someone really fucked up here. I totally understand the logic of overbooking an event, especially one where the televised visual will be so pronounced. The Committee could probably have overbooked tickets by 10-15% and had certainty that the Purple section, and others, would fill up. Instead, they overbooked by way, way more than that, perhaps 100%. Especially when combined with the other cited failures, that was a recipe for a fiasco.

The people who ran the Inauguration are not fit to run a high school dance, much less a foreign war. I was relieved to find out that Feinstein and the Congressional Inauguration took responsibility, but Obama’s team is in charge now, and this is their bad too. I hope they have learned from this mistake.

Since we all saw the Inauguration itself, I have little to add about its substance. Rev. Warren stuck out like a lame sore thumb, Aretha was wonderful, Yo-Yo Ma and his crew were fantastic, Justice Stevens looked like the most relieved man on earth, and Rev. Lowry just kicked ass. Justice Roberts may have looked like a fool screwing up the oath, but the only person who deserves vitriol is Justice Alito, who arrogantly skipped the traditional meeting between the President and the Supreme Court earlier in the week, the only Justice in recent memory to pull such a stunt. To this day, Alito childishly refuses to walk on the sidewalk in front of the Senate Office Building because of his disdain for the Senators who votes against his confirmation.

When PRESIDENT Obama stepped up to the podium to face the largest crowd in Inauguration history, he seemed like a man calm and poised, ready to lead us through rough waters. It seems the nation agrees with me- his current approval rating stands at 77%, a level surpassed only by President Truman as World War II drew to a close, Obama’s speech echoed his campaign themes: restoring America’s position in the world, respecting the Constitution, and working to help Americans suffering here at home. The church crowd rallied behind him with affirmative exclamation of “yes”, “that’s the truth” and “tell it!” The most touching moment came when Obama spoke of a segregation policy that only fifty years ago would not allow his father the chance to be seated in a restaurant. An old man with gray hair raised his hand, and slowly rose to his feet. He doffed his cap at the television, and sat back down.

When I first began working on the Obama primary campaign in South Carolina, a group of volunteers were scattered across the Charleston area to reach out to churches. Shilpa and I were assigned to a small United Church of Christ congregation, where the pastor eschewed our pre-written statement and spoke of what an Obama presidency would mean to her, the congregation, and the country. The Charleston church also had a small, elderly, African-American congregation, and as I sat in that D.C basement I thought of them, and all of the incredible people I have met since this journey began more than a year ago. For at least a day, the whole world believed that democracy had delivered as a man ready to lead us together. There were no protesters, and the pundits shut up for a few precious hours. Less than an hour after the speech, the Mall seemed almost empty. D.C was still, and the Obama administration went to work.