A Regional DMU Network for Portland, OR & Vancouver, WA

OK, so I've got another proposal for the Columbia River Crossing:

A regional commuter rail network, based initially on DMU technology. The relevant two links would be Vancouver to Washington County, and Vancouver to Downtown Portland.

This would not replace light rail, but rather supplement it.

Gee, I must be a DMU fan, this is the second time in as many weeks that I've brought up the topic.

The Vancouver to Washington County connection would utilize abandoned rail ROW that runs from near the west end of the St. Johns Bridge to the Beaverton/Hillsboro area, and would require extension track, bed and trestle reconstruction. I bet that DMU passenger service between Washington County and Clark County could be initiated for a fraction of the cost of a new freeway, and if everybody is right about the volume of traffic between those two points, it would do quite well.

Of course, there is the matter of the spectacular railroad trestle that burned to the ground about a decade ago, which would need to be re-built along with much of the rest of this line (if, in fact, any of the rails/trestles/tunnels are still serviceable). However, the fact that the ROW exists already should still bring the cost of implementing a new service in this corridor way down.

Perhaps DMU service could be implemented before light rail service; in this scenario, the Portland to Vancouver run might ultimately be replaced by light rail into downtown Vancouver... or it might remain as a more expensive (fare-wise) express service.

It would be interesting to determine if a stop near St. Johns might be possible for both of these services, as the only interim stop between Portland and Vancouver.

Longer-term, this basic network could add routes to Columbia County (St. Helens & Scapoose), to McMinnville, and out the Gorge to Hood River & The Dalles.

The era of building freeways in Oregon is over. We now need to think of better ways to get people around, for less money and less damage to the natural landscape. Putting old railways back to use to serve new markets is an example of the type of innovative thinking that will cause Oregon to emerge as a leader in the 21st century.

The Case for a Large Hotel in Portland's Rose/Lloyd District

This post is in response to the Willamette Week editorial, "Ill-Starred," that makes the case that the reason why Portland, an NBA city, has never hosted the NBA All-Star Games (in 35+ years of having an NBA team in a league with only 30 total teams) is related simply to one fact: It doesn't have a large enough hotel to host the 800+ people who the NBA would need to host adjacent to the stadium.

This got me thinking that Portland is also not really taking full advantage of the Oregon Convention Center, also due to the lack of an adjacent large hotel that would allow it to attract the sort of large conferences that make the circuit of places with these facilities.

You know, as somebody who goes to conferences sometimes, I wish I could go to a large conference in Portland. The Convention Center actually *is* large enough to accommodate a large conference (10-12,000 people or so). However, there is no appropriate mix of nearby large hotels to support such an endeavour. There certainly is no single large (800+ room) hotel.

Let me be straight: I don't really like large hotels. I don't like the rich Republicans who run them; I don't like their exhorbitant rates; I don't like their rather white-bread cuisine; I don't like the generic stamped-out-of-a-moldness of their rooms.

However, I think that it would do Portland good to have a large hotel in the Lloyd District/Rose Quarter area, or preferably, a cluster of large hotels. It would be *best* if they were locally-owned, so that *all* the profits stayed within the city. It also would be best if they didn't drive the other hotels in town out of business (maybe their high rates wouldn't be such a bad thing, actually...).

This NBA All-Star Game issue is just another reason why such a large hotel/cluster of large hotels would be a great addition to the city, a boon to tourism, and allow for the possibility of attracting larger conferences and other events.

Why are these events good? They DO boost the economy. Sure, no sales tax, but those dollars brought here stay here, for some time, recirculating around within the local economy. Might be a while before they end up in the tax coffers, but they help the small businesses out for a while in the interim. Plus, I do believe Portland has a hotel tax, so the fact of having a large hotel or cluster of large hotels would in and of itself boost the tax base.

I don't think Portland is a po-dunk town (as one other commenter of Willamette Week's article suggested); I think it's a major cosmopolitan city that goes rather largely under-appreciated outside of Oregon and the West Coast, mainly because most people outside of this region *haven't been here yet*. More large hotels, as inherently evil as they may be in some respects, certainly could do a lot towards alleviating that problem.

Sharing the BART tube with Commuter Rail

In reading Wikipedia's entry on railroad switches, I found the following quote rather inspirational:

"A gantlet track can also be used when two railroads of different gauges share right-of-way; the standard-gauge Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad used the wide-gauge Erie Railroad's tunnel through the New Jersey Palisades in this way before the DL&W built its own tunnel."

Gee, so... in the SF Bay Area, BART has a tunnel. Which is nearly at capacity, not because of the physical limit on the space between trains, but because of the physical limit of the stations at each end only being able to hold one train at a time.... basically, headways through the tunnel are limited by the time it takes a train o slow down, stop, open doors, load/unload passengers, close doors, and move on. Two to three minutes or so, it how long I believe this takes.

One potential solution to this problem, which I believe Portland, OR is attempting to enact to solve the light rail capacity problems over the Steel Bridge, is to build a wye and two sets of stations on either side of the bridge/tunnel.

BART pretty much hosed this option for themselves using BART technology by locating their wye after West Oakland station, and not accommodating a wye prior to Embarcadero Station.

However... with Caltrain being planned to extend underground to within two blocks of the tube entrance in San Francisco, it would make potentil sense for Caltrain and BART to share the tube underneath the Bay, using a gauntlet track construction to accommodate the various gauges and kee the Caltrain cars away from the third rail. Caltrain could enter the tube just after Embarcadero, then exit where the tube crosses the grade prior to West Oakland (and from there be given the option of its own split, to either Jack London to the south or Emeryville to the north).

Operationally, it might be tricky to run Caltrain and BART through the same tube, EXCEPT that I believe BART trains may actually be slightly longer in length with 10 cars. There may be a height issue through the tube for the double-decker Caltrain rolling stock, but that might just be a matter of only running lower-height-profile rolling stock on transbay runs.

Anyways, it is definitely a point worth considering.

The OregonBike

There's a good discussion going on now over on the www.portlandtransport.com blog, where Bob R. said:

"What would really give bike commuting as serious boost among the general populace would be to promote a simple, durable commuter bike for under $500 (even under $400 if it can be managed.) Something with fenders, a unisex design, a comfortable adjustable seat, and easy shifting."

This was in response to a post about Portland's announcement of its mission to achieve Platinum certification (it currently has Gold) as the most bicycle-friendly city, anywhere. It's attempting to get 15% of its trips to be made by bicycle. In response, Trek has produced a new model of bicycle, called the Portland, which retails for about $1500.

I agree completely with Bob's comment, which was in essence that $1500 was a bit steep for most Portlanders, and that there needed to be a good mike for the masses. When I was in Amsterdam, I noticed how the same bike was *everywhere*. It was called the AmsterBike, and it was what most people rode in the central city.

Of course, the AmsterBike was really heavy, like 45 pounds or so, which doesn't matter because the tallest hills in Amsterdam are the ones that you climb as you go over the little bridges arching gently over the canals. And, I don't know exactly how much an AmsterBike actually costs, as I only rented one for $6/day, rather than purchasing one.

Still, it seems like some Oregon-based bicycle manufacturer could probably provide some living-wage jobs for some employees, and some affordable, good-quality bicycles for the riding population, by stepping up and designing an OregonBike that would be light enough to make it up most hills, cost $400 or so, have fenders and a rack, rechargeable lights, and either be unisex or have enough models in the same price range that it didn't matter.

Any entrepreneurs care to step up and fill this market niche?

:-)

cheers,
~Garlynn

Outrage over... cartoons. (?)

So, it seems that certain individuals within the Muslim world are aghast at a series of cartoons that depict the prophet Muhammed in a less than flattering manner.

One quote attempts to make the case that, if it were Jesus being defamed, the Western world might react differently:

"Freedom of speech has its limits when it concerns others... How would it feel if Jesus Christ was the one insulted instead?"
Randa Ahmed Essa, Egypt
(from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4675462.stm)

In fact, according to this story at scotsman.com, Jesus has been insulted by a new comic book, entitled The Life of Jesus. And indeed, the article concludes that the book is jumping off the shelves, this in a country where the population is predominantly Christian (or at least, more Christian than Muslim).

Apparently, the Muslim world has trouble comprehending what us Westerners mean when we say "Freedom of Speech." This is the freedom to defame leaders, to poke fun at deities, and to laugh at current world events.

In fact, I thought that some of the cartoons were actually rather funny. See for yourself:

http://www.di2.nu/files/Muhammed_Cartoons_Jyllands_Posten.html

Insensitive to another world religion? Perhaps. But, learn to laugh. In this country (the United States), people make fun of one another all the time. I could see myself having laughed at this cartoon that implicitly compares the Unibomber to back-to-the-land environemntalists back in the 90's. Similarly, what conservative wouldn't at least chuckle at this liberal cartoon site?

Frankly, on this one I must say that I'm going to come down on the side of freedom, liberty, and the free press. At the same time, people do have the freedom to peacefully assemble and express their viewpoints, so if some people in the Arab world would like to come together to express their outrage at these cartoons, sure, that's perfectly OK. As long as it ends there, and nobody, you know, does anything drastic.

And, I sense that some people in the Arab world share this viewpoint. According to that same British (BBC) article, "In Jordan, an independent tabloid, al-Shihan, reprinted three of the cartoons on Thursday, saying people should know what they were protesting about."

Comments?

Comments on the Oregon Transportation Plan

to: michael.d.rock@odot.state.or.us
principal planner for the 2006 oregon transportation plan update

***

Hi Michael,

First off, the plan looks great, and I support Investment Strategy 3, with the addition of a north/south rail transit super corridor (to complement an east/west transit super corridor).

Specifically, however, I would like to recommend that the State, in partnership with regional and local jurisdictions as well as the private sector and community groups, take a *strong* look at constructing a new multimodal rail system to serve the major north/south and east/west axes out of Portland (that is, Astoria to Pendleton via Portland, and Portland to Medford/Ashland via Eugene, in addition to examining the Eastern Oregon corridors). While the road system in the state is in fairly good shape (certainly better than that in most states), the rail transportation system could be better.

I would use Switzerland as the example, where in addition to roads connecting all towns, rail systems connect most towns, and most trains are electric. The trains tend to carry both passengers and freight, and most destinations are accessible by foot, bicycle or connecting transit from the train station.

How would this work in Oregon?

As with Switzerland and Germany, there would be commuter-level service on specific links in the system (Astoria to Portland, The Dalles to Portland, Grants Pass to Ashland, Portland to Salem, etc.) with multiple a.m. and p.m. peak period trips. The backbone of the system would be twice-daily service throughout the state on most other links. Certain backbones would have priority for upgrading of the trackbed to high-speed standards, with the ultimate goal of 200+mph service on the main north/south and east/west spines, with the potential for service of up to 100mph on the feeder lines made possible by improved trackbeds and tilting/high-speed rolling stock. Small freight would travel with the twice-daily service; large freight would, as now, travel in separate trains.

Around each station in the system, Tax-Increment Financing would collect the improvement in tax collect as a result of the upgraded transit service, and in addition to user fees collected from passengers and freight, provide all of the operating expenses for the system, as well as contribute to capital cost recovery and debt service on bonds needed to build the initial infrastructure.

Public/private partnerships would allow increased development intensity around each station to proceed in tandem with station construction/expansion/upgrade, and commencement of service (or improved service in areas that already have some service).

Statewide growth management goals could be achieved by allowing existing communities with struggling economies to host new transit-oriented growth. Astoria, for instance, could build more housing for commuters near its transit station, and an upgrade rail connection would allow them to commute into the Portland market in well under an hour, while saving money on housing costs. Astoria would reap the benefit of hosting families with greater income, contributing tax revenue and cashflow to the local economy; Portland would benefit by having Astoria take some of the burden of providing market-rate workforce housing. In time, the hosting of more knowledgeable workers could allow Astoria to develop a more intensive local knowledge-based economy, and even eventually play host to an expansion of the state higher education system.

Oregon's congressional delegation could lobby for federal support to assist with constructing interstate links to connect this with systems elsewhere, but the main bulk of the system would be an in-state effort, with the state reaping the rewards.

The existing rail network ROW would provide most of the ROW necessary for the upgraded system; existing operators would be encouraged to participate as willing partners, rather than risk condemnation and state takeover of their facilities.

Oregon may double its population over the coming century. By beginning to invest now in this expanded rail/public transportation system, it can easily accommodate the transportation needs of this growth without needing to make significant changes or expansions to its highway system, as well as meet its environmental and sustainable growth objectives.

Finally, with the aging of the population over the coming decades, more and more people are going to need mobility without needing to use cars, as they lose the ability to drive. Building this sort of integrated rail/public transportation system will allow Oregon's aging population to travel and live with grace and dignity without needing the automobile for long- and medium-distance in-state trips.

This is not a pipe dream. This is the future of Oregon's transportation system, and it is the natural conclusion of the policies quoted below, as laid out in the current draft of the OTP.

Thank you for your careful consideration of this matter.

Sincerely yours,
~Garlynn Woodsong
6610 SE 50th Ave
Portland, OR 97206
garlynn@gmail.com

Selected Policies from the current draft of the Oregon Transportation Plan:

POLICY 1.1 – Development of an Integrated Multimodal System
It is the policy of the State of Oregon to plan and develop a balanced, integrated
transportation system with modal choices for the movement of people and goods.

STRATEGY 1.1.1
Plan and develop a multimodal transportation system that increases the efficient
movement of people and goods for commerce and production of goods and services
that is coordinated with regional and local plans. Require regional and local
transportation plans to address existing and future:
a. Centers of economic activity,
b. Routes and modes connecting passenger facilities and freight facilities,
c. Intermodal facilities, and
d. Major intercity and intra-city transportation corridors and supporting
transportation networks.

STRATEGY 1.1.2
Promote the growth of intercity bus, truck, rail, air, pipeline, and marine services to
link all areas of the state with national and international transportation facilities and
services. Increase the frequency of intercity services to provide travel options.

STRATEGY 1.2.1
Develop and promote inter and intra-city public transportation.
• Optimize existing services and find innovative ways to augment public
transportation infrastructure and travel options to levels appropriate to the
community size and to an effective network of connections.
• Where opportunities for coordination with other transportation service
providers exist, work to integrate programs and align investments of service
providers involved with the design, delivery and funding of mobility
services. Focus on mobility management and customer needs.
• Use information technologies to effectively link customers and
transportation services, and support local transportation options programs
including individualized marketing programs.
• Promote frequent public transit and passenger rail services as a method to
increase ridership and decrease travel times, especially during peak travel
periods and on heavily traveled highway corridors.

STRATEGY 1.3.2
Develop and manage the transportation network so that local trips can be conducted
primarily on the local system and the interstate and statewide facilities can primarily
serve intercity movement and interconnect the systems. Develop, maintain and
improve parallel roadways, freight rail, transit, bus rapid transit, commuter rail and
light rail to provide alternatives to using intercity highways for local trips where
possible.

STRATEGY 3.2.3
Support intercity, interstate and international rail and air services to facilitate business
and recreational travel.

STRATEGY 3.2.5
Promote tourism via air, bicycle, motor vehicle, rail and ship. Support connections to
hiking trails.

STRATEGY 4.2.1
Encourage the sustainable development of land with a mix of uses and a range of
densities, land use intensities and transportation options in order to increase the
efficiency of the transportation system.

STRATEGY 4.2.3
Promote location efficient incentives in Oregon to help increase the opportunities for
individuals and families to purchase homes and businesses within areas well-served
by transit.

STRATEGY 6.1.3
Increase the diversity of funding sources to provide greater stability, predictability
and flexibility for funding transportation facilities and services.

STRATEGY 6.1.6
Fund projects through public/private partnerships that balance statewide
environmental, land use and economic goals and state, regional and/or local plans.

STRATEGY 6.2.1
Examine mechanisms to fund major capacity-adding and related transportation
facilities that raise revenues including but not limited to tolling, congestion pricing
and capturing increases in real estate value resulting from investments or potential
investments. Funding mechanisms may include system development charges, tax
increment financing and other forms of value pricing.

Passenger and Freight Rail
While private firms own and operate rail short lines and mainlines for freight, Amtrak
operates passenger rail services. The state supports two daily round trip rail passenger
services from Eugene to Portland and connecting bus services with state general or
lottery funds. Oregon has five programs for rail improvements based on revenue from a
corporate income tax on private rail operators. State funds have also been used to upgrade
the Union Pacific rail infrastructure to better support passenger rail services.
Ensuring that Oregon’s rail system can efficiently move freight into and out of ports and
into and out of the state is a state concern. However, the level of future investment in
mainline railroads in Oregon is dependent on national rail company investment choices;
short line rail operators lack sufficient revenue to make capital investments. Elimination
of bottlenecks at river crossings and mountain tunnels may require more resources than
private sector rail operators can currently afford on their own. While common in other
states, public investments in privately owned systems have been limited in Oregon. State
funding for passenger services and rail improvements depend on biennial legislative
appropriations. The lack of a long-term funding source creates an obstacle to long term
investments and expansion of rail in Oregon.

IV-10: Investment Strategy Level Three includes major investments in new infrastructure. Some
of these investments would be financed from traditional sources, while others would be
funded in part through mechanisms such as value capture, including tolls.

Investment Strategy Level 3: Adding and Expanding Facilities

Intercity Bus and Rail:

Add two round trips to rail
service between Eugene and
Portland. Add Eastern Oregon
Rail and commuter rail
between Wilsonville and
Salem after 2020.

Capital costs are estimated to
be $116 million, with
increased operating costs of
$7.5 million annually.

Funding source: State general funds and fares

Convenient rail alternatives
attract intercity passengers,
improve auto/rail/bus mode
split and improve intercity
passenger access, especially
to Eastern Oregon after 2020.
The technical analysis for OTP development supported the following potential
investments. This list is not inclusive:
• Build a north-south highway and rail super corridor.
• Preserve and extend highway, public transportation and rail options in east-west
and north-south corridors.
• Expand public transit services.
• Create second day rail freight service to Southern California.
• Expand regional air services, especially air freight services.

--
O
O ...let's go do
O something
O i n t e r e s t i n g
O .garlynn.g.woodsong.

Holy sh*t, Grover Norquist does the right thing (Or -- this is the tide turning)

See below:

Grover Norquist (president of Americans for Tax Reform and one of the leading Republican think-tank hawks in Washington, D.C.) has just joined forces with Democrats and the ACLU in calling for President Bush to reverse his position on wiretaps (though no mention has been yet made of torture). Norquist says he is doing this because he is a Republican and a friend of the President, and he feels that somebody like that needs to say this now. Though Norquist wants to see the terrorists caught/killed, he does not want that outcome at the expense of the liberties upon which this country was founded.

When Norquist comes out against a Republican President on any issue, you know something is up. This issue matters. You probably won't see this on ABC/CBS/NBC/CNN/FOX/etc. T.V. news anytime soon, but word will creep out. Torture and the invasion of the privacy of Americans will not be tolerated by the people of this country. Driving SUVs, drilling in the arctic, and running the government bankrupt to fight unnecessary foreign wars... that's another thing. But apparently, a line in the sand has been drawn, and the Bush administration has crossed it.

Impeachment does seem unlikely... but add this to the current corruption scandal, and it certainly seems like the tide may be turning, the pendulum losing momentum and beginning the turn-around for the swing back.

see for yourself:

************

Political opposites aligned against Bush wiretaps
- James Sterngold, Chronicle Staff Writer
Thursday, January 26, 2006

Larry Diamond, a Democrat and a Hoover Institution senior fellow, went to Baghdad in 2004 as a consultant for the U.S.-run Coalition Provisional Authority, believing strongly in the Bush administration's goal of building a democracy there. While critical of many aspects of the Iraq war, he has, he says, wholeheartedly supported President Bush's aggressive approach to the war on terror.

Grover Norquist is one of the most influential conservative Republicans in Washington. His weekly "Wednesday Meeting" at his L Street office is a must for conservative strategists, and he has been called the "managing director of the hard-core right" by the liberal Nation magazine. Perhaps the country's leading anti-tax enthusiast, he is, like Diamond, a hawk in the war on terror.

Despite coming from opposite ends of the political spectrum, they agree on one other major issue: that the Bush administration's program of domestic eavesdropping by the National Security Agency without obtaining court warrants has less to do with the war on terror than with threats to the nation's civil liberties.

"My view on the terrorists is that we should find all of them and kill them," said Norquist. "But we should also protect our civil liberties, which the terrorists are trying to destroy."

Diamond, whose academic specialty is the building of democracies, has taken his opposition one step further, joining a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union last week to halt the president's program.

"I teach about democracy and the rule of law, the quality of a democracy," he said. "I meet so many people around the world who want to look up to the American model, and a spying program like this really harms us."

Bush and his senior officials have defended the wiretaps as essential in a time of war, while many White House and GOP officials have attempted to characterize opposition as coming mostly from partisan Democrats critical of the war in Iraq. In a speech to the Republican National Committee last Friday, Karl Rove, the president's chief strategist, accused Democrats of making "wild and reckless and false charges" on the wiretap issue.

But, in fact, a number of prominent Republicans, including Sen. John McCain of Arizona, have criticized Bush and the wiretapping without court warrants as a violation of the law and basic civil liberties. So have other well-known conservatives, including former Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia. Bruce Fein, a lawyer who worked in the Justice Department under President Ronald Reagan, wrote in a commentary in the Washington Times last week that Bush should face "possible impeachment" if the practice is not stopped.

"There have been as many Republicans as Democrats who've spoken out on the issue," Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., said Tuesday as he stated that the Senate Judiciary Committee, which he heads, will begin hearings on the matter on Feb. 6.

Norquist and Diamond explained in interviews why this odd alliance has come together in spite of the bitter divisions between left and right on most other political issues.

Diamond, who also teaches at Stanford University, is an expert on democratic development -- the reason he was hired as a consultant for the Coalition Provisional Authority by his old friend and former Stanford colleague Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

He says that, though he is a Democrat, his focus is civil liberties, not the president.

"I give Bush credit for his vigilance since 9/11," said Diamond. "I'm very much in sympathy with the need to monitor al Qaeda and terrorists, to uproot them, interdict them, catch them and when necessary to kill them. But we can't roll over on something like this."

Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, says he knows some fellow conservatives have labeled him a traitor for condemning the same administration that instituted the biggest tax cuts in recent American history -- cuts for which Norquist vigorously lobbied. But an even greater disloyalty, Norquist responds, would be to allow what he regards as the trampling on civil liberties to go unimpeded.

"The president's friends are exactly who you want telling him this," said Norquist. "No one else has the credibility. We are being team players by telling him, not by keeping quiet."

Norquist said one of his main concerns is that, once the government becomes so intrusive, there is no way to prevent continued erosion of individual rights.

"Even if you believed an angel was making these decisions, and that's not what I'm saying, at some point the person in the White House will change," he said. "Hillary Clinton might be making these decisions."

The New York Times first disclosed last month that the president had approved a program under which the NSA had been intercepting an apparently large volume of communications to and from the United States without first obtaining special court approval, as required by the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

But the president and senior administration officials insist that Congress gave the president the authority to bypass that law. They also say that the extraordinary threat presented by terrorist groups require such measures. Initially, most national opinion polls narrowly favored the administration's position, but polls released this week show a majority in favor of obtaining a warrant before such surveillance is permitted.

Last Tuesday, the ACLU and the New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights filed separate lawsuits in federal courts seeking to stop the administration from the eavesdropping without obtaining warrants.

Joining the ACLU suit were a mix of supporters and opponents of the Bush administration, including Diamond, James Bamford, who has written several books on the NSA, and Christopher Hitchens, a columnist who vocally supported the Bush administration's invasion of Iraq and has written extensively about the threat posed by "Islamo-fascism," the term he uses to characterize the ideology of al Qaeda.

Diamond and the others who have signed on to the ACLU suit say they suspect that some of their overseas communications might have been intercepted.

Diamond also fears that some researchers, especially in the Middle East, will stop communicating with him for fear they might be caught in the NSA's electronic net, making it harder for him to continue his own work on democratic development in countries like Egypt and Iraq.

And, like Norquist, Diamond worries about how the Bush administration or others might use the wiretap information.

"That information could be sitting in a database somewhere for a long time," said Diamond. "It might be there not just for this administration, but for anyone.

"That data could be mined for any reason," he added. "It's frightening."

Norquist is not a party to either suit, but he has been outspoken in criticizing his party's leader. He said that he had brushed aside concerns that he was harming the president or being disloyal at a critical time.

"You need someone who is a Republican to call the president on this," he said.

Norquist said, ironically, he was particularly concerned about the problem because the Democrats appeared to be so weak.

"For 40 years we always assumed the left would take care of our civil liberties," he said. "If there were problems, the Democrats were the ones who would push back. But now with a Republican Congress and a Republican in the White House, the ACLU can't get their calls returned."

Referring to what some see as a conflict between fighting vicious terrorists and upholding all civil liberties, Norquist said: "It's not either/or. If the president thinks he needs different tools, pass a law to get them. Don't break the existing laws."

E-mail James Sterngold at jsterngold@sfchronicle.com.

Page A - 1
URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/01/26/MNG24GTB8O1.DTL
©2006 San Francisco Chronicle

Fixing health care in this country

Health care in the U.S., as a system, is broken. Does this mean that you or I can no longer get coverage? No. This means that the system as a whole, costs too much with relation to the services that it provides. The price is high beyond justification.

Paul Krugman has written many articles on this topic. One of the latest makes a bogeyman out of health savings accounts, as created in 2003 by the Bush Administration:

"In practice, the health savings accounts created by the 2003 Medicare law will serve primarily as tax shelters for the wealthy. But let's put justified cynicism about Bush administration policies aside: is giving individuals responsibility for their own health spending really the answer to rising costs? No."
source: http://paulkrugmanarchive.blogspot.com/2005/12/medicine-who-decides.html

Personally, I'm on the fence about this. I would like for my naturopath to be my primary care physician, but my health plan does not allow this. Perhaps a personal health savings account would allow me to pay for my naturopathic visits using my pre-tax health care benefit, rather than having to pay for most of it out of pocket. If I'm misunderstanding the nature of this benefit or how I might be able to use it, I'd like to know.

In another article, Krugman writes:

"Several readers have asked me a good question: we rely on free markets to deliver most goods and services, so why shouldn't we do the same thing for health care? Some correspondents were belligerent, others honestly curious. Either way, they deserve an answer."
source: http://paulkrugmanarchive.blogspot.com/2005/11/health-economics-101.html

This is the one to read for a really good argument for nationalizing our national health care system. Incidentally, Oregon's former governor John Kitzhaber, a former medical-room physician from Roseburg, OR, has presented a plan for Oregon as a state to do exactly that. He's calling it the Archimedes Movement:

http://archimedesmovement.org/index.html

...and he's posted a manifesto there, one that does a good job, over 10 pages, of outlining the problem with the U.S. health care system, and intimating what the shape of the ultimate solution might look like. In case you fear that this might be dry reading, here's a quote from near the end:

"Albert Einstein once said, “We can’t solve today’s problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” That is true. But I think that Edward Abbey -- the late Western novelist -- put it more succinctly, if not as eloquently when he said: “Society is like a stew. If you don’t stir it up you get a lot of scum on the top.”

The manifesto, entitled Road to Revolution, is at: http://archimedesmovement.org/documents/Road_to_Revolution.pdf

So, let me close this blog post by quoting directly from Kitzhaber's manifesto, in fact, his closing statement:

Let me close with the words of Oregon poet Kim Stafford who eloquently defines the
challenge, the opportunity – and, indeed, the responsibility -- that lies before us in what he calls “Lloyd’s Story.” Lloyd Reynolds, the international citizen of Portland, spent his last days in pain, silent, unable to speak or to write, lying in his hospital bed. On his last day at home, as his wife scurried to pack his suitcase for the hospital, Lloyd made his way outside to the garden and there she found him on his knees, with a spoon, awkwardly planting flower bulbs. “Lloyd,” she said, “you will never see these flowers bloom.”

He smiled at her. “They are not for me,” he said, “they are for you. The salmon
coming home? They are for you. The calls of the wild geese? They are for you. The
last old trees? They are for you and your children, to the seventh generation and
beyond. They are all blooming into being for you.”

That is our challenge today. To plant the seeds of tomorrow; to change the world by
acting, by leading, by personally reengaging in this struggle -- not as victims of the status quo, but as architects of a new future.

30 Beers to have on tap

Somebody recently asked "If you were to wander into a bar with 30 beers on tap, which 30 would they be, in your perfect world?"

Golly, what a question. Here's my answer today:

1. Hair of the Dog: Ruth
2. Bridgeport: IPA
3. Deschutes: Black Butte Porter
4. Rogue: Dead Guy
5. Lagunitas: 10
6: Widmer: Drop Top Amber
7. MacTarnahans: Amber
8. Bridgeport: Ebeneezer
9. Deschutes: Jubelale
10. Hair of the Dog: Doggie Claws
11. Widmer: Snow Plow
12. Full Sail: Wreck The Halls
13. Full Sail: Wassail
14. Full Sail: Sessions Lager
15: Full Sail: IPA
16: Bridgeport: Pintail Copper Ale
17: MacTarnahans: Mac Frost
18: MacTarnahans: Black Watch Porter
19: Rogue: Morimoto Black Obi Soba Ale
20: Hair of the Dog: Fred
21: Lagunitas: Censored
22: Deschutes: Cascade Ale
23: Deschutes: Obsidian Stout
24: Pelican: MacPelican's Scottish Style Ale
25: Rogue: Shakespeare Stout
26: Hair of the Dog: Rose
27: Caledonian: 80/-
28: Murphys: Irish Stout
29: Widmer: Dopplebock
30: Salvator: Dopplebock

cheers,
~Garlynn

My ideal hybrid diesel/electric all-purpose vehicle

What would my ideal vehicle be, for driving from America to Argentina nonstop (except perhaps for the ferry from Panama to Ecuador)?

It would be based on something that was a cross between a Jeep Commander, a Toyota Pathfinder, a Jeep Liberty, a Subaru Forester, a Saturn VUE, a Volvo Cross Country and a Unimog. Basically, it would:

* Seat 5 normally, with the option for a 3rd row of seating in a pinch to accommodate 7-8
* Be light-weight, with the polymer body panels that Saturn uses on all their vehicles
* Be tough, with skid plates underneath it to protect from rocks, etc.
* Be truly 4wd, with the ability to drive in loose sand, mud, potholes, dirt roads, as well as city streets and on the freeway
* Not necessarily be the fastest thing around, but be able to keep up with traffic and pass slower vehicles without needing an airplane runway to get the speed up to do so.
* Climb hills steadily carrying a heavy load
* Hold a winch on the front bumper to allow it to get out of a pinch, or pull another vehicle out, or do the other things that winches allow for
* Have a heavy-duty roof rack on top that could carry the cargo for 4-5 people on a 2-week (or 1-year) journey, in combination with the storage space below
* Have a rear-mounted spare tire that also had room for a spare gas (diesel) can
* Have fog lamps
* Have crush protection for all lights, so they wouldn't get smashed by debris
* Operate using a hybrid diesel-electric powertrain, possibly one with a separate electric motor for low and another for high speeds.
* Have the ability to run entirely off of battery-electric power until the batteries run nearly dry
* Have the ability to use biodiesel/SVO
* Get at least 45mpg on diesel fuel, averaged between highway and city (but not less than 42 in either situation).
* Have at least a 450-mi range on a single tank of gas (preferably 500mi)
* Have rollover protection -- it must not roll unless driven in the most extreme/insane situations, such as at 50mph on a 15% slope while turning the wrong direction (i.e. it shouldn't roll in any situation that a regular passenger car would not roll in). Volvo, I believe, can already make this claim with its SUVs.
* Potentially have solar panels to assist with charging the battery to provide additional motive power (hey, this might help increase fuel economy by another 5 mpg, right?)
* Be able to tow a trailer (though not necessarily quickly)
* Have durable leather seating (I haven't met any other type of seat that I like as much as leather in an automobile)
* Have the potential for a 50-year life span (or even 100 if well-maintained and lucky), assuming that some parts would need replacement or refurbishment at semi-regular intervals (batteries, tires, windshield wipers, etc.)
* Have at least a 10-year/250,000-mile warranty on the essential systems (drivetrains, computers, etc.) ...if you're going to build it, build it right!
* Have a good sound system with a subwoofer, at least 4 tops, and an RCA aux-in port
* Cost less than $50,000 (And I'd prefer $30-35,000!!!) with all of the above features.
* Have a good security system engineered into it from the beginning, so you could park it anywhere without fear of what might happen to it while you're away. Part of this would be not looking too flashy, fading into the background, having shatter-proof glass, good solid electronic locks, electronic ignition lockout, good
* Have oh-shit handles accessible to every passenger that will not break under any circumstances or loads
* Have cargo hooks in every conceivable useful location
* Have rubber/waterproof floors and durable interior materials throughout. Not necessarily be able to spray down the interior with a hose, but at least be able to wash it and maintain it for 50 years without it rotting/molding/mildewing if it gets wet repeatedly/prolongedly or if somebody spills their coffee/soda/etc on it.

Sure, I'd pay up to $50,000 for a vehicle that was engineered to last 50 years and guaranteed for the first 10 to have the manufacturer replace faulty parts for free! Especially if it could go anywhere and do anything, with finesse and style!

UC Davis, NUMMI, anybody else care to partner up and/or take these specs and run with them? I'd like to test-drive this sucker in 2007.

cheers,
~Garlynn