I think voting for Bill Richardson would be a pretty bad idea, but much credit to him for noting that "land use policy" is something we need to improve to deal with global warming. This is the aspect of the issue that few people in politics seem to want to talk about. In a big-picture sense, all of the candidates have excellent positions on climate change issues so there's very little to debate here.
« The Myth of JFK | Main | Dem Debate Wrap-Up »
Idiosyncratic Interest Blogging
05 Jan 2008 10:25 pm
Comments (10)
Nothing against the other candidates, but I wish Richardson was a little more charismatic; he really seems to know what he's talking about. Anyway, he'll make a great VP.
Any candidate who makes serious proposals for a FEDERAL "land use policy" will have his nuts cut off by the legal and real estate lobbies. Just Look at who gives the bulk of the Congressional campaign donations.
Local zoning hearings make the US Congress look like a bunch of innocent virgins.
IF you want to know why Northern Virginia outside Washington DC is such a hopeless shithole, look at how many Fairfax County Supervisors were sent to prison about 25 years ago. Then look at how real estate developer Til Hazel make his fortune.
Then look at who funded Senator John Warner's career. The reason for Senator Warner's support for a "strong military" --especially in defense contracts flowing into Northern Virginia -- is left for the reader to figure out.
Richardson is right, however. And it is a major opportunity.
I think voting for Bill Richardson would be a pretty bad idea, but much credit to him for noting that "land use policy" is something we need to improve to deal with global warming.
Plus, water use. Which means NM, NV and AZ are fucked.
He was also the only one who mentioned nuclear fissile material in the non-proliferation discussion. And he had some really good moments during the Iraq discussion when he drove home the point that being bogged down in Iraq makes dealing with other important issues practically impossible.
Outside of federally-owned tracts of sagebrush where nobody lives, how is "land use policy" the responsibility of the President in Washington DC?
Lots of non-sagebrushy land is federal, Steve. Most of the forested parts of the Oregon coast is federal. Most of where our water is is federal, as are good chunks of land surrounding freeways/powerlines/pipelines. That's real land, unlike the 1,000 acres here and there surrounding some wal-mart that hummer drivers insist on building 40 mcmansions on that Easterners constantly love whining about.
Former Secretary of Energy Bill Richardson doesn't believe the costs of a Cap and Trade system will be passed on to the consumer. But a Carbon Tax will...mmmm
Because the DoT funnels huge amounts of sprawl-encouraging money into building freeways, Sailer, and vastly smaller amounts into things that encourage smarter development patterns.
Well,
I think the current mortgage crisis and overall economic meltdown (in combination with rising energy prices) will take care of the carnage being wrought by speculative development. Well – going forward anyways. Places like Northern Virginia or the Denver/Boulder Corridor are permanently screwed.
Comments closed January 19, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
After this campaign is over, a great reality show would have Huckabee helping Richardson drop a hundred pounds.
Posted by Fred | January 5, 2008 10:32 PM