What can we do to stop this? All too many on the green community are burying their head in the sand over this. They think some wondrous technological breakthrough, like cellulosic ethanol or plug-in hybrids, will come and rescue us and bring on a whole world of ersatz feudal lords in their sustainable suburban castles and SUVs. Those who do realize that the source of the problem is the neurotic preferences of the consuming public, would demand national group therapy and a cold-turkey change in lifestyle that has as much of a chance of happening as having Hugo Chavez as keynote speaker at the Republican National Convention next year. The other side, the automakers, the oil companies, the real estate industry, etc. didn't achieve their present dominance by forcing themselves on a reluctant public, they exploited what they found. They worked alongside the national neurosis and led their customers to wherever their customers wanted to go. If we are to be successful at countering them, we must do the same.
Wow. That's not going to be easy. Reality would say that energy security and environmental sustainability require the masses to give up on these symbols of faux nobility. Certainly, if everybody lived in inner-city apartments, rode the bus to work, and sent their kids to school with the (other) riffraff, we'd sure be using a lot less petroleum and emitting a lot less CO2. But any politician who advocates that would never ever get elected. But I do have some suggestions to work with the popular dysfunction, not against it.
First off, the needed Federal policies:
- Very,very important is to control highway spending. I don't mean eliminate it, even. Pork is very important to the politicians. But there's no reason why they need to build high-capacity superhighways, and there's even less of a need to build them to low density "undeveloped" areas and subject them to a "buildout" of typical sprawl. Money can still go into local contractor's pockets and the local economy by keeping bridges in repair, repaving existing streets, and building an maintaining transit systems.
- For the real short term, fully fund Amtrak when the appropriation comes up next fall. Yes, As I've mentioned in a recent Daily Kos diary (which I hope to reproduce here), it's true that the fuel/CO2 savings from rail might not be all that high, but rail has an advantage in that it can interface far better with walkable/transit oriented communities than the alternatives. And for the longer term, make a commitment to having passenger rail make up a significant market share of all passenger traffic. They can do it in the Northeast, there's a lot of other places in the country where they can do it as well.
- Its' not just Amtrak that's in trouble, the entire rail system in this country is creaking and under strain. Sooner or later we're going to need to get rail infrastructure to be publically owned, just as highways, airports, ports, and inland waterways. Don't ask me how we can do that without making the railroad companies howl about their private property, but in the long run, it will be better for their bottom line as well as benefit the public. But I can't see how we can pay for the needed improvement in rail capacity and modernization by paying tax dollars to benefit private property. And it makes no sense to expect the private railroads to make the kinds of investment that is needed. (Just as it wouldn't make sense for trucking companies to build their own interstate highways and airlines to build there own airports and air traffic system, etc.)
- Sprawl control -- This is really a state/local thing, but all sorts of Federal rules, in addition the transportation funding, encourage sprawl. Things like Federal housing rules for subsidized loans and such. Maybe the mortgage tax deduction should be limited for residences located in urban areas with large populations are dependent on autos. (There would obviously have to be some way to avoid penalizing real rural people and also prevent gaming the system.)
- Propaganda (or "marketing") -- Effective propaganda that can show people how their psychic needs can still be met even if they own a smaller house and maybe do without a car. If our propaganda-meisters can sell America on the Iraq war, surely they can sell them on the joys of city (or real small-town) living. After all, the old-time nobility also had town houses in the city. Maybe liveried bus drivers and transit attendants are all we need to give people the idea that riding the bus is "first class." Or the hell with subtlety, why not give out knighthoods and titles of nobility to people who live in walkable neighborhoods and have a sustainable lifestyle? (This would require amending the Constitution, though.) Or at least free tolls on EZ pass for their relatively few vacation trips by (rented) auto.
However, most of what needs to be done is at the state and local level. First, of course, is that local grass roots need to let Congresscritters know that not all pork is equally desirable, specifically, there should be no political benefit for a Congresscritter to bringing a sprawl highway to one's district. Most local people don't benefit from the sprawl highway, only the few politically connected folks who own land that will become part of the buildout. (Think about Representative Dennis Hastert and the Prairie Parkway.)
Second, of course, is to fully fund transit, expand service in currently developed areas, and resist the temptation to expand more than overall regional population growth suggests is needed.
Finally, it's about time to build a political coalition of rural, inner city, and inner suburban voters to fight sprawl. Rural folks shouldn't be happy about the influx of extreme-commuter suburbanoids who are changing the character of their communities, but aren't bringing in any real contribution except inflated property values. On the other hand, continued sprawl decreases the value of inner-city and inner suburb property values and leaves homeowners in the older neighborhoods at risk of neighborhood deterioration. And, of course, abandonment of responsibility to the inner-city poor due to suburban flight is an old story. Most voters don't benefit from sprawl, but nobody has been able to organize an anti-sprawl political bloc. Who ever can do it will need to deal with the psychic reason why people move towards sprawl, provide an alternative emotional grounding, and educate the members of the diverse coalition about why it isn't in their interests.
