Metro to Dulles Debacle: A Tunnel Where It Shouldn't Be; No Tunnel Where It Should Be

So, in their infinite wisdom, our fine elected officials - and also the folks who run the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority - have managed to get things exactly backwards on the Metro to Dulles project. In the first place, they managed to punt on the serious possibility of running Metro underground through heavily built-up Tysons Corner, despite strong evidence that such an approach would have been far preferable in just about every way (faster, cheaper, smarter growth, easier access to the stations, better integration of Metro most effectively into the community) to the ridiculous, ugly, penny-wise/pound-foolish "aerial" approach that was selected. In sum, deciding not to run Metro via tunnel through Tysons Corner clearly was a huge mistake, one that we will regret for decades to come.Now, the WashingtonPost writes, we've gone ahead and made the exact opposite mistake at Dulles Airport itself: In electing to build a hugely expensive, financially reckless and utterly unneededunderground Metro station at Dulles International Airport - rather than an aboveground stop that would have sufficed - the board that runs the airport didn't just rebuff the pleadings of Virginia officials and the board's project partners, Fairfax and Loudoun counties. It also rejected the advice of the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority's own staff, which recommended the aboveground option. In doing so, the airports board heedlessly handed a $330 million bill to itself, to the counties and, most of all, to commuters on the Dulles Toll Road, who can expect to foot the bill in the form of higher tolls.[...] It's true that five years ago, all the parties agreed in principle to an alignment that included an underground station at the airport. But that agreement was based on a preliminary cost estimate for the Phase 2 extension that was $1 billion lower than the revised cost announced last fall. What's more, what may have looked affordable in 2006 is simply not affordable today. Local officials in Fairfax and Loudoun, along with toll road users, should push back hard against the airports board's profligacy. Brilliant, huh?  Actually, on both counts - the "aerial" monstrosity in Tysons Corner itself and the tunnel white elephant at Dulles Airport - these were both huge, yet totally avoidable, mistakes. Which does make one wonder: what's driving these constant screwups? Are the people making the decisions idiots? I doubt that. Do they simply not understand transportation, smart growth, etc? Possibly. Or, are there major financial interests at stake that keep pushing these decisions in the opposite direction of what smart policy choices, made solely on the merits, would have dictated? I vote for the latter. Anyway, I hate to say "we told you so," but the Tysons Tunnel folks and their allies - John Foust, Chap Petersen, Dave Marsden, Charlie Hall, and many others, including yours truly - warned against this over and over again back in 2007 and 2008. Did the "powers that be" listen to us?  Of course not. Do they ever listen to the people over the powerful? As the recent redistricting fight, which ended up with politicians protecting themselves and choosing their own voters, totally overriding communities of interest or any other considerations that weren't motivated by pure power politics, the answer is "rarely if ever."

Republicans to Shut Down Government Over Abortion, Climate Change, "Obamacare?"

How wildly irresponsible are the Republicans and their frenemies (friends? enemies? both? who knows!) in the Tea Party? Well, as the New York Times explains in its lead editorial this morning, they're about to shut down the government even though Democrats have already "gone much too far in giving in to the House demands for spending cuts" - $33 billion, which is actually $1 billion MORE than Republicans themselves were seeking back in February. Also, I'd point out that $33 billion is a drop in the bucket (2% or so) compared to this year's $1.65 TRILLION deficit, and it does next to nothing about the long-term, structural deficit problem our country faces (to do that, you've got to address "entitlements" and defense, which is where the money is), so it's clearly not about the deficit, as Republicans and their Tea Party frenemies claims.So, what is this all about and why are Republicans about to shut down the government? The New York Times explains: If the federal government shuts down at midnight on Friday - which seems likely unless negotiations take a sudden turn toward rationality - it will not be because of disagreements over spending. It will be because Republicans are refusing to budge on these ideological demands.[...] Abortion. Environmental protection. Health care. Nothing to do with jobs or the economy; instead, all the hoary greatest hits of the Republican Party, only this time it has the power to wreak national havoc: furloughing 800,000 federal workers, suspending paychecks for soldiers and punishing millions of Americans who will have to wait for tax refunds, Social Security applications, small-business loans, and even most city services in Washington. The damage to a brittle economy will be substantial. So, there you have it. Republicans and Tea Partiers claim they care first and foremost about "the spending" and "the deficit," yet what they're fighting for right now in Congress has essentially nothing to do with either of those things.Let me repeat: the current "budget fight" is NOT a fight over the budget after all, given that: a) Democrats have already (foolishly) given in to Republicans on their $32 billion demand; and b) what's left is Republican "policy" riders completely unrelated to "the spending" or the deficit. The point is, if Republicans and the Tea Partiers really cared about "the spending" and the deficit - let alone the economy! - above all, they'd be acting completely differently here. But they're not acting the way people would act if they really cared about "the spending" and the deficit, and that says it all. Instead, what they really care about is their far-right-wing social/corporate agenda of defunding health care reform; doing as much damage to the environment as possible (and serving their Dirty Energy industry/Koch brothers funders/allies); denying anthropogenic climate change; ensuring that consumers aren't protected from predatory lenders; and above all, making sure that not one penny of federal money is spent helping women prevent unwanted pregnancies and/or have an abortion if it (unfortunately) comes to that. Believe it or not, that's why the Republican Party - pressured by its Tea Party wing - will be shutting down the government.

Felix Macacawitz Assumes All Black Men Play Sports (UPDATE: And Asians Don't)

The idiocy and racial stereotyping continue from the same guy who introduced a North African ethnic/racial slur ("macaca") to the American vocabulary.

NBC 4’s reporter-anchor Craig Melvin is a tall African-American. Which apparently led to this exchange with former Sen. George Allen, according to Melvin’s Twitter account Tuesday night: “For the 2nd time in 5 months, fmr. gov. and sen candidate George Allen asks me,”what position did you play?” I did not a play a sport.” And we’re off!

Sure, Allen issued a lame non-apology apology ("If I offended...Grew up in fball family found sports banter good way to connect") for his ignorance (yeah, right, EVERY black man plays sports; right Felix!), but the bottom line is that he just doesn't "get it" when it comes to racial issues. At best, he's a clueless doofus who can only speak in sports metaphors and calling people "patriots" or whatever. At worst, he's a racist. Either way, he shouldn't be back in the "wounded sea slug" Senate he hated so much. Update by Miles: From ThinkProgress' Lee Fang:

[L]ast year, I attended an event featuring Allen at the Heritage Foundation. After speaking once with the senator during the question and answer period, I again raised my hand for a second question. For some reason, possibly because I was the only minority in an all-white audience, Allen dismissed my second question by asking if I understood what an “at-bat” meant. ... In Allen’s worldview, every tall African American is a sports player, but Asian Americans have never heard of baseball.

Del. Adam Ebbin Responds to Sideshow Bob's Comment that Gays are "intrinsically disordered"

Earlier today, Del. Adam Ebbin (D-Alexandria) responded to Del. "Sideshow" Bob Marshall's hateful comments that gay people are "intrinsically disordered" and should not be allowed to adopt children. Here's what Del. Ebbin had to say in response to "Sideshow Bob" and his brand of bigotry (bolding added by me for emphasis). Mr. Speaker,While we are on the topic of adoption, I would ask: Is it really better for children to spend time in an orphanage rather than a loving home? Friends of mine are the best parents I know; one is a foster parent who is raising and nurturing a High School senior whose relatives did not send him to school. A guidance counselor recommended that he be placed in easy classes. My friend fought and had the student enrolled in courses suitable for a career in aviation. He fostered another child until that child's dad got out of rehab. Other friends left the state--with their tax revenues and with their salaries. Those who engage in adoption placements are agents of the state. How dare a member of the this body call me intrinsically disordered. Is it intrinsically disordered to love a child? Is it intrinsically disordered to ensure that a child has an education? Am I intrinsically disordered? No, Del. Ebbin, you most certainly are not "intrinsically disordered," nor are GLBT people in general. That's just the ignorance and bigotry of hateful fools. As for "Sideshow Bob," he's an embarrassment to Virginia who badly needs to be defeated in November. Let's hope.P.S. It appears that Bob McDonnell has joined forces with "Sideshow Bob," although at least McDonnell hasn't called gays "intrinsically disordered." Apparently, McDonnell's too disciplined a politician to make a mistake that egregious. P.P.S. On another important social issue, a woman's right to reproductive freedom, State Senator Janet Howell (D-Fairfax) says that Bob McDonnell has definitively proven that he is no "moderate," but instead is "actually quite a zealot on social issues." Yes, Pat Robertson trained him well, whether it's anti-gay or anti-women or whatever...no surprise there.

Del. Adam Ebbin Responds to Sideshow Bob's Comment that Gays are "intrinsically disordered"

Earlier today, Del. Adam Ebbin (D-Alexandria) responded to Del. "Sideshow" Bob Marshall's hateful comments that gay people are "intrinsically disordered" and should not be allowed to adopt children. Here's what Del. Ebbin had to say in response to "Sideshow Bob" and his brand of bigotry (bolding added by me for emphasis). Mr. Speaker,While we are on the topic of adoption, I would ask: Is it really better for children to spend time in an orphanage rather than a loving home? Friends of mine are the best parents I know; one is a foster parent who is raising and nurturing a High School senior whose relatives did not send him to school. A guidance counselor recommended that he be placed in easy classes. My friend fought and had the student enrolled in courses suitable for a career in aviation. He fostered another child until that child's dad got out of rehab. Other friends left the state--with their tax revenues and with their salaries. Those who engage in adoption placements are agents of the state. How dare a member of the this body call me intrinsically disordered. Is it intrinsically disordered to love a child? Is it intrinsically disordered to ensure that a child has an education? Am I intrinsically disordered? No, Del. Ebbin, you most certainly are not "intrinsically disordered," nor are GLBT people in general. That's just the ignorance and bigotry of hateful fools. As for "Sideshow Bob," he's an embarrassment to Virginia who badly needs to be defeated in November. Let's hope.P.S. It appears that Bob McDonnell has joined forces with "Sideshow Bob," although at least McDonnell hasn't called gays "intrinsically disordered." Apparently, McDonnell's too disciplined a politician to make a mistake that egregious. P.P.S. On another important social issue, a woman's right to reproductive freedom, State Senator Janet Howell (D-Fairfax) says that Bob McDonnell has definitively proven that he is no "moderate," but instead is "actually quite a zealot on social issues." Yes, Pat Robertson trained him well, whether it's anti-gay or anti-women or whatever...no surprise there.

Barack Obama Launches 2012 Reelection Campaign with Video

Not that it's a big surprise or anything, but now it's official -- Barack Obama today is launching his 2012 reelection campaign. I watched this video and was struck by a few things -- its slick production, of course; its images of people from key groups (white male, Latino, white female, young people) and key states (North Carolina, Nevada, Colorado) that Obama is going to need in large numbers in 2012; its focus on grassroots volunteering for Obama in 2012, but perhaps in a more sober way than the frenzy of 2008; its emphasis on the importance of winning this reelection and how much more there is left to do; its subtle acknowledgment that the intense excitement and historic nature of the 2008 campaign won't be replicated in 2012; also, its subtle acknowledgment that Barack Obama now has a record as an incumbent, so of course we're not going to agree with everything; its catch phrase, "It begins with us," which is a different - and again, more sober, less "movement" feel - way of saying "yes we can."Clearly, President Obama's 2012 reelection campaign can't - and won't try to - recreate 2008, which was an obvious "change" election from 8 years of George W. Bush and Republican (mis)rule.  However, to the extent the Obama campaign can do so, it will need to bring the coalition that came together in 2008 together once again in numbers close to those seen in 2008. Can the Obama campaign compensate for the passion and historic excitement of 2008 with discipline, organization, a record of accomplishment, a recovering economy (instead of a collapsing one in 2008), upwards of $1 billion, and possibly a very weak Republican candidate? That's the challenge of 2012: whether "Yes we can!" can be translated into the more sedate "It begins with us." We're going to find out, starting now.

Ward Armstrong, Others Blast Redistricting Process as "entirely political," "flawed," "horrific"

(In related news, Dave Leichtman came up with a superb tool for everyone to see how the old and new districts compare. For the House, see here. For the Senate, see here. - promoted by lowkell) The Washington Post provides more background on the just-completed redistricting process -- who's responsible, who's happy, who's not happy, and just how badly Bob McDonnell betrayed his campaign promise to "ensure bipartisan citizen involvement in the state legislative and Congressional district redistricting process in 2010-2011," and to draw legislative districts "in a way that maximizes voter participation and awareness and lines [that] reflect commonsense geographic boundaries and a strong community of interests." Needless to say, the latter did not happen.A few "highlights": *"[D]espite the appointment of a bipartisan commission to advise legislators, the lines were largely drawn by two men: Sen. George L. Barker (D), a health-care planner from Prince William County, and Rep. S. Chris Jones (R), a pharmacist from Suffolk." *Overall, "[f]ewer than 10 of the state's 140 legislators were privy to the lines before they were made public last week" (and none of the public, needless to say) *"The Republican-led House of Delegates and the Democratic-controlled Senate have already agreed to vote for their own plans, and then each other's, as part of a deal between the chamber's leaders." Both maps are expected to be approved "with few alterations and within days" *The end result? "Lines that protect incumbents and punish challengers" and gerrymandering run amok (e.g., "the Senate has proposed stretching one district from North Carolina to Maryland, accessible only by boat," the House "has proposed combining the bustling Northern Virginia suburbs of Loudoun County, including Leesburg, with rural areas of the Shenandoah Valley, into one district"). Over at Waldo Jaquith's blog, he's got a few thoughts on all of this. For instance, Waldo isn't sure whether to be "depressed or pleased" that George Barker (and/or Barker staffers like Sean Holihan) used a program called Dave's Redistricting, "a free web application so you can draw your own congressional districts the way you think they should be!" In addition, Waldo correctly calls Bob McDonnell's bipartisan redistricting commission "more of a fig leaf than ever," with the legislature having "one half of one working day to even consider [its recommendations]," and with the governor completely distancing himself from a commission that he created and that he promised would "ensure bipartisan citizen involvement" and draw district lines "in a way that maximizes voter participation and awareness and lines [that] reflect commonsense geographic boundaries and a strong community of interests." Liar. Other reactions?

Ward Armstrong, Others Blast Redistricting Process as "entirely political," "flawed," "horrific"

(In related news, Dave Leichtman came up with a superb tool for everyone to see how the old and new districts compare. For the House, see here. For the Senate, see here. - promoted by lowkell) The Washington Post provides more background on the just-completed redistricting process -- who's responsible, who's happy, who's not happy, and just how badly Bob McDonnell betrayed his campaign promise to "ensure bipartisan citizen involvement in the state legislative and Congressional district redistricting process in 2010-2011," and to draw legislative districts "in a way that maximizes voter participation and awareness and lines [that] reflect commonsense geographic boundaries and a strong community of interests." Needless to say, the latter did not happen.A few "highlights": *"[D]espite the appointment of a bipartisan commission to advise legislators, the lines were largely drawn by two men: Sen. George L. Barker (D), a health-care planner from Prince William County, and Rep. S. Chris Jones (R), a pharmacist from Suffolk." *Overall, "[f]ewer than 10 of the state's 140 legislators were privy to the lines before they were made public last week" (and none of the public, needless to say) *"The Republican-led House of Delegates and the Democratic-controlled Senate have already agreed to vote for their own plans, and then each other's, as part of a deal between the chamber's leaders." Both maps are expected to be approved "with few alterations and within days" *The end result? "Lines that protect incumbents and punish challengers" and gerrymandering run amok (e.g., "the Senate has proposed stretching one district from North Carolina to Maryland, accessible only by boat," the House "has proposed combining the bustling Northern Virginia suburbs of Loudoun County, including Leesburg, with rural areas of the Shenandoah Valley, into one district"). Over at Waldo Jaquith's blog, he's got a few thoughts on all of this. For instance, Waldo isn't sure whether to be "depressed or pleased" that George Barker (and/or Barker staffers like Sean Holihan) used a program called Dave's Redistricting, "a free web application so you can draw your own congressional districts the way you think they should be!" In addition, Waldo correctly calls Bob McDonnell's bipartisan redistricting commission "more of a fig leaf than ever," with the legislature having "one half of one working day to even consider [its recommendations]," and with the governor completely distancing himself from a commission that he created and that he promised would "ensure bipartisan citizen involvement" and draw district lines "in a way that maximizes voter participation and awareness and lines [that] reflect commonsense geographic boundaries and a strong community of interests." Liar. Other reactions? In Anita Kumar's Washington Post article, we've got the head of the Virginia Interfaith Center for Public Policy and chairman of the Virginia Redistricting Coalition calling it "horrific" and saying that it should "disappoint us" even if the totally political and undemocratic outcome shouldn't "surprise" us. Of course, most incumbents are pleased as punch, since these are above all incumbent protection plans, and since they all were "consulted" and given exactly "what they like." Charming.What I find most telling is the differing reaction from those incumbents who benefited from all this unsavory sausage making, and those that didn't. For instance, Del. Ward Armstrong basically was redistricted out of existence, after he "wasn't contacted" and given no chance to "offer a plan." Not surprisingly, Armstrong is blasting the process as "entirely political," and "flawed when Republicans are in charge...flawed when Democrats are in charge." That's actually the correct answer, but not for the right reasons. In fact, it's extremely likely that if Armstrong had been given a chance to draw House district lines the way he wanted them, he would have been pleased as punch. Because in this business, the only thing that apparently matters is power, and specifically incumbents holding on to power. Forget the public having any voice. Forget "communities of interest." Forget any idealism whatsoever. It's all exactly what people expect of politics - dirty, cynical, self-serving, blatantly political, you name it. And we wonder why people aren't excited about or engaged in politics in this country? Duh. As bipartisan commission member Gary Baise puts it, this was "an incumbent protection program, and that's not good for democracy." So now, advocates of true bipartisan, or even nonpartisan, redistricting will have to wait until 2021. When, I can almost guarantee you, the same exact process will take place, with the same types of people (paid political insiders, people vested in the process, those who benefit in some way) defending it, and everyone else just utterly disgusted by it. Ah, Democracy...(paraphrasing Winston Churchill) the best system ever invented, except for all the other ones! P.S. In the blogger meeting we had with Brian Moran in the spring of 2008, as he geared up to run for governor, we asked him what the top 3 things were that he wanted to accomplish if he were elected governor. Moran's #1 answer? By far, it was bipartisan or nonpartisan redistricting, about which Moran talked for several minutes. Why? Because without getting that right, Moran argued that it would be extremely difficult to get anything else right either. Which makes it all the more interesting that we've barely heard a peep from the DPVA Chairman about this entire charade, although we did get a statement by DPVA spokesman Brian Coy blasting Bob McDonnell's bipartisan redistricting commission nothing "more than an empty political promise."

Dick Saslaw "Clears the Field" for Barbara Favola in 31st State Senate District

Over the past week or two, I've spoken and/or emailed with about 15 or so Arlington Democrats - including several prominent ones - about the 31st State Senate district race (Mary Margaret Whipple is retiring). One thing is absolutely clear, as I've heard it over and over again: Senate Majority Leader Dick Saslaw is actively working to "clear the field" of any other candidates (and there have been many names mentioned the past few weeks), in order to guarantee Arlington County Board member Barbara Favola the nomination. It's not a big secret or anything, as Saslaw's apparently "bragging" about it. How is he doing this?Specifically, what I'm being told is that Saslaw is actively badmouthing Del. Patrick Hope (D-47), telling everyone that Hope "can't win," and helping to dissuade potential donors from giving money to Hope. Why is Saslaw so interested in "clearing the field" for Favola? I'm told that this is because Saslaw doesn't want a real progressive or anyone who would cause him trouble (e.g., not do exactly what he tells them to do) in this seat. Also, I'm told that Saslaw doesn't want an expensive, contentious primary, leaving just a couple months for the Democratic nominee to run their general election campaign against the Republican nominee in what will be a less "blue" district than it is now. I'm also being told, by multiple sources, that Barbara Favola is misleading people intentionally about Patrick Hope, telling them that she "knows" Hope isn't running. Yet people who have talked to Hope in recent days - and that includes yours truly - have confirmed that he has not made up his mind definitively. At least, he HAD not made up his mind definitively on what he was going to do, as of a couple days ago, when Favola was busy telling people that Hope was "definitely not running." Finally, one prominent Arlington Democrat noted, "The sad thing is that all of this energy by Saslaw/Whipple et al. to 'clear the field' in this historically blue seat...could and should have been devoted to recruiting candidates in other districts in which it has been much harder to recruit them." Uh, yeah!

Dick Saslaw "Clears the Field" for Barbara Favola in 31st State Senate District

Over the past week or two, I've spoken and/or emailed with about 15 or so Arlington Democrats - including several prominent ones - about the 31st State Senate district race (Mary Margaret Whipple is retiring). One thing is absolutely clear, as I've heard it over and over again: Senate Majority Leader Dick Saslaw is actively working to "clear the field" of any other candidates (and there have been many names mentioned the past few weeks), in order to guarantee Arlington County Board member Barbara Favola the nomination. It's not a big secret or anything, as Saslaw's apparently "bragging" about it. How is he doing this?Specifically, what I'm being told is that Saslaw is actively badmouthing Del. Patrick Hope (D-47), telling everyone that Hope "can't win," and helping to dissuade potential donors from giving money to Hope. Why is Saslaw so interested in "clearing the field" for Favola? I'm told that this is because Saslaw doesn't want a real progressive or anyone who would cause him trouble (e.g., not do exactly what he tells them to do) in this seat. Also, I'm told that Saslaw doesn't want an expensive, contentious primary, leaving just a couple months for the Democratic nominee to run their general election campaign against the Republican nominee in what will be a less "blue" district than it is now. I'm also being told, by multiple sources, that Barbara Favola is misleading people intentionally about Patrick Hope, telling them that she "knows" Hope isn't running. Yet people who have talked to Hope in recent days - and that includes yours truly - have confirmed that he has not made up his mind definitively. At least, he HAD not made up his mind definitively on what he was going to do, as of a couple days ago, when Favola was busy telling people that Hope was "definitely not running." Finally, one prominent Arlington Democrat noted, "The sad thing is that all of this energy by Saslaw/Whipple et al. to 'clear the field' in this historically blue seat...could and should have been devoted to recruiting candidates in other districts in which it has been much harder to recruit them." Uh, yeah!