Bob Brink: We Can't Pave Our Way Out of Sprawl

Thanks to Del. Bob Brink (D-48) for representing the interests of his constituents on this important issue.

P.S. This mailer is in response to the Washington Post's muddle-brained endorsement of Aaron Ringel for Delegate in the 48th. What were they thinking?!?

WaPo: Arlington's Delegates Should Fight for Loudoun!

When is an endorsement not an endorsement? When it calls the candidate great because he'd do the opposite of what his voters want.

That's the clear implication of the Post's endorsement of Aaron Ringel over Arlington incumbent Bob Brink:

Mr. Brink is a competent legislator but he has opposed widening Interstate 66. That wins points with some homeowners who'd be directly affected but does little for the tens of thousands of commuters who suffer that road daily. Mr. Ringel takes a broader regional view of that issue.

That Bob Brink! Always pandering to his constituents! Somehow I don't think Ringel will be changing his campaign slogan to: "Aaron Ringel: He Won't Look Out for Arlington Homeowners!"

Look, if delegates from the distant suburbs want to push to widen I-66, that's fine. It's their residents that chose a trade-off -- accepting a longer commutes in exchange for a less-expensive homes. And it's not their community that has to worry about the added pollution, noise and threats to local biking and walking trails, right? That's Arlington's concern. And that's why Arlington delegates like Bob Brink have taken the right stand against the expensive, inefficient widening of I-66.

But to say Arlington's delegate should give Arlington's concerns lower priority than those of other districts? That's just plain crazy.

As Lowell detailed, this is clearly the Post trying to look bipartisan by carefully endorsing a few Republicans with no chance of winning. I mean, we're really supposed to believe best candidate for Arlington is one who has nothing to say on his issues page about education, energy or the environment?

I-66 Widening Debate Heats Up in 47th District

The I-66 widening debate is heating up in Arlington's 47th House of Delegates district between Democratic candidates Patrick Hope, Adam Parkhomenko and Miles Grant. Here's the sequence of recent statements on the issue:

1. At a forum the other day in South Arlington, Patrick Hope said he'd support widening I-66 for "bus only" but then said he opposed widening I-66. Confusing.

2. Tonight, at a forum in Arlington's Lyon Park, 47th HoD candidate Adam Parkhomenko said that, unlike Patrick Hope, he opposes widening I-66 for a bus lane because "it won't be long before the state says, 'the bus lane's not working, let's make it 3 lanes in every direction.'"

3. Patrick Hope then responded to Adam by repeating that he opposes widening I-66 but also, seemingly in contradiction, that "the only way that I would ever agree to this is if that one lane that's widened is devoted solely to bus lanes." So...no widening except if it's for a bus lane, in which case widening is ok. Or something.

4. Miles Grant concluded the debate with the following zinger: "I think when we talk about I-66, if we start compromising here in this room right now, what's going to happen by the time we get down to Richmond...you need to ask for what you really want and what you really believe in."

So, the bottom line question on the issue of I-66 widening is simple: as Miles Grant asks, what does Patrick Hope "really want" and what does he "really believe in?" If you can figure it out from the video above, please let us all know. Thanks.