I gots me some pork! Yay?
T.A. Barnhart
I'll be honest. I was conflicted about the bailout bill. Yes, I know the people who are responsible for this economic mess should be boiled in oil and not given a "get out jail free" card. But too many ordinary people, not to mention pension and other worthwhile funds are also at risk. Not to mention the future of Western Civilization. I don't know if Wyden or Obama was right on this one, but I do know this: I get some of the bailage. I get pork.!!
Damn, how cool is that?
I was just reading around the interwebs, HuffPost etc, when I saw something that caught my eye (and of course I can't find the original link): the bill included money for bicycle commuters. Yow! That's me. Yahtzee!
In the middle of the $110 Billion in pork doled out mostly to convince a handful of recalcitrant Republican House members to vote for the bill — throw out the slop and the piggies will always come running, and that's an insult to the porcine community, for which I apologize — was a bill that had been slapped aside several times previously: Earl Blumenaeur's "Bike Commuter Act." And of course, now that it had a chance to pass, poor Earl had to vote against it.
Let no one say he's not a man of principle. Not many in Congress vote No on one of their most cherished pieces of legislation. Earl did.
From his legislative website, here's the lowdown on the Act:
Bike and Pedestrian Issues
Congressman Blumenauer has introduced H.R. 1498, the Bike Commuter Act, extending commuter benefits to bicyclists. Currently, employers may offer a transportation fringe benefits to their employees for certain costs incurred while commuting to work. Employees who take advantage of this benefit may receive a tax-exempt benefit up to $215/month for parking, or $110/month for those who use transit or vanpooling. The Bike Commuter Act aims to balance the incentive structure by extending these benefits to bicyclists. Portions of this Act were included in the “Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act,” H.R.5351, which passed the House of Representatives, but which has been stymied by the Senate.
What the Bike Commuter Bill Does:
- Amends Section 132(f) of the IRS code of 1986 to include “bicycles” in the definition of transportation covered by the qualified transportation fringe benefit.
- Provides a strong incentive for employees to bike to work, which is a cleaner, healthier, more efficient mode of transportation.
- Financial incentives are currently offered for other modes of transportation. It is time to level the playing field to include bicyclists in the Transportation Fringe Benefit.
- With over 50% of the working population commuting 5 miles or less to work, bicycles offer the strongest potential for reducing single-occupancy vehicle trips.
- According to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, bicycles are second only to cars as a preferred form of transportation. Excluding this highly preferred mode of transportation is counterintuitive.
- Studies have shown that when facilities such as bike parking or showers are readily accessible, individuals are 40% more likely to bike to work.
Communities across the nation are seeking to reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and enhance neighborhood safety. The federal government can assist in those efforts by promoting bicycle use through a small change to the tax code.
How porky is the Act? Well, instead of the $215/month for parking, I can get $20/month to cover the expenses of bike commuting. And guess what? I am buying a new bike tomorrow. Really. A total coincidence. I had selected my new Surly Long-Haul Trucker yesterday, before I knew about the Act. So I need to check on how all this works, but apparently I'll be able to get $20 in fringe benefits each month. Thanks, alas, to the bailout.
Boy howdy, talk about conflicted. The Act is not pork, of course. It's sensible legislation with a vital outcome; it pushes the nation a bit further down a road we will need to travel. It makes the goal of reduced auto-miles a tiny bit more achievable. And it's cheap: only $10 million over 10 years. (I guess that speaks to how few people they expect to take advantage of it and how small the benefit is, compared to those who get it for parking their frikkin car.) But to come as part of the bailout? Ugh.
But we know that Congress rarely passes decent legislation like this on its merit. This is the kind of bill that always gets attached to some big-ass piece of legislation and then goes up or down with it, or perhaps (as in the case of the BCA) gets zapped off because some Senator doesn't like bikes or goddamn hippies. Well, it got stuck on the big-ass bailout bill, and this time it came through with all the pork. Does it matter that it's good law? Does it matter that it will have good outcomes? Does it matter that it will likely provide a net gain, fiscally, to society?
Does it matter that I may start collecting $20/month in pork while the crooks at Lehman Bros. walk away with tens of millions in their pockets?
It's how the game works and why we need to rid Washington of lobbyists. The Bike Commuter Act is the work of a Congressman who cares about bicycling and introduced this bill to help the cause of bicycling and cleaner, healthier communities. It's not pork, and it's not the problem. It just got taken along for the ride.
Like the rest of us.
 |
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
Oct 7, '08
"I gots me some pork"?? Um, what are you parodying here?
Please wake up.
Oct 7, '08
joel dan wallis - T.A. is not exactly the sharpest tack in the box.
And of course, a slice of Oregonians are also just a little mentally ill when it comes to their views about bicycling as saving the world. It's not much of a stretch to see them in the same category as fundamentalist religious zealots in their unbalance, and my experience is that they actually make it much harder for the rest of us to make biking part of a normal life.
8:43 a.m.
Oct 7, '08
joel, if you have something to say, please be direct. you obviously think i'm saying something wrong, or bad, or icky. what is it?
but i do appreciate the opportunity to see a trollski like Wabta have a chance to spew a bit of vitriol and personal slur. it's so precious.
Oct 7, '08
Yeah, Blumenauer really won my respect over last week. I honestly hadn't paid much attention to him before, but I'm proud to be represented by him.
Oct 7, '08
I am trying to get interest going with my employer. Anyone have ideas on where to get more info on what the employer has to do to enroll in this program?
Thanks
9:26 a.m.
Oct 7, '08
Let me make a defense for pork here. Too much is a bad thing, because congresspeople start larding bills with dubious projects, sometimes so dubious they raise the question of payola. But too little pork is clearly a problem, too. Structurally, we have to have pork or money won't bet back to the states. The Senate is way too slow-moving to consider small items. Legislators have to load them into other bills if they ever want to get passed.
In fact, as we saw in the bailout bill, they are sometimes critical to getting other legislation passed. By scenting the stinky bailout with the smoky aroma of bacon, House leaders were able to get it passed the second time around.
It's popular to decry pork. Right up until it's on your plate.
Oct 7, '08
Yeah--the title of this is post is pretty offensive--maybe you can photoshop some blackface onto your picture next time.
Anyhoo, since this is the only post related to the bailout, I comment here.
Hey Bush, Pelosi, Obama and friends: can I have my bailout back? It seems to have made things worse on the old stock market. In case you haven't heard, the Dow dropped below 10,000 for the first time in a long time--the first day after your bailout passed--WTF?!? I'm sorry your plan seems to have failed so miserably. Maybe you should have passed a people's economic recovery plan first.
9:55 a.m.
Oct 7, '08
The "incentives" in the bill seemed targeted as much at wavering Dems as at Reps. The timber money, for instance, was directly aimed at deFazio and Wu.
Oct 7, '08
Jeff: I agree that, having taken our money, the feds ought to give it back, (or at least pay down debt) but wouldn't it be preferable to have sent that money directly to Oregon in the first place?
If the goal is to redistribute wealth among the states, why don't we just do that directly? Surely every state government has a better idea of where to spend money in their state than the US Congress does.
11:42 a.m.
Oct 7, '08
Paul, I refuse to let the facts get in the way of a good argument. I did not miss the irony of how the timber payments and bike commuter subsidy failed to induce DeFazio and Earl to support the bill. I stands by me point!
Joel, I'm not talking about what should be, but what is. The kind of change you're talking about would require massive structural changes. We're stuck with pork. Or put another way, "how I stopped worrying and learned to love the pork..."
Oct 7, '08
Mr. Barnhart, yeah, your title reads like the "blackface" version of Black English dialect. Not exactly what I would hope to see on Blue Oregon. That's my last word on the topic of your title.
I'm afraid I'm choking on Mr. Alworth's defense of pork barrel politics. I would say that stuffing things like county "timber" payments for Oregon into the bailout bill was a crude way to either buy votes or blackmail congressional representatives.
"It's popular to decry pork. Right up until it's on your plate." Right. That's why people claim to detest "Congress" but love their own representatives. That's why, in my opinion, Mark Hatfield was so popular in Oregon: he was a grandmaster of pork-barrel politics. That's why I want to scream when my Democratic friends and acquaintances from Alaska tell me how happy they are to vote for Ted Stevens.
Oct 7, '08
Mr. Barnhart, yeah, your title reads like the "blackface" version of Black English dialect. Not exactly what I would hope to see on Blue Oregon. That's my last word on the topic of your title.
I'm afraid I'm choking on Mr. Alworth's defense of pork barrel politics. I would say that stuffing things like county "timber" payments for Oregon into the bailout bill was a crude way to either buy votes or blackmail congressional representatives.
"It's popular to decry pork. Right up until it's on your plate." Right. That's why people claim to detest "Congress" but love their own representatives. That's why, in my opinion, Mark Hatfield was so popular in Oregon: he was a grandmaster of pork-barrel politics. That's why I want to scream when my Democratic friends and acquaintances from Alaska tell me how happy they are to vote for Ted Stevens.
Oct 7, '08
The bicycle bill pork is chicken feed compared with the $600-plus billion given the same week to the military-industrial complex.
Oct 7, '08
Too bad both parties could not work together for a longer time period to get a bill that was not such a turkey. Turning turkey into pork. Everyone likes a bit of pork on their plate. The question is will the bailout bill work? So far, I'd say no. So it feels like we are getting pork for free but what is the real cost?
Oct 7, '08
Good for you, Bill B. Ignored in all of this financial crisis is the fact that the MOB (McCain, Obama and Bush) have not only turned over 800 billion or so to Bush, but they have also threatened to bankrupt us with continuing outrageous and immoral military spending, which Obama wants to INCREASE.
Chalmers Johnson, The Pentagon Bailout Fraud:
"This is pure waste. Our annual spending on "national security" -- meaning the defense budget plus all military expenditures hidden in the budgets for the departments of Energy, State, Treasury, Veterans Affairs, the CIA, and numerous other places in the executive branch -- already exceeds a trillion dollars, an amount larger than that of all other national defense budgets combined. Not only was there no significant media coverage of this latest appropriation, there have been no signs of even the slightest urge to inquire into the relationship between our bloated military, our staggering weapons expenditures, our extravagantly expensive failed wars abroad, and the financial catastrophe on Wall Street."
And that trillion dollars isn't enough for the likes of Obama. How can you Dems continue to support this? (I know, Obama is less insane, isn't he?)
Oct 7, '08
With all due respect to our Jewish, Muslim, and Vegan friends, continuing to call this stuff pork is an affront to the modern pig farmer. The quality of pork meat has risen in the last two decades as pork has become the "other white meat". Earmarks have not!
But alas, I cannot think offhand of another term for these earmarks. I guess that old saw "Even a pig can bring home the bacon" is too entrenched in my mind.
Oct 7, '08
Blumenauer is full of pork. Any suggestion that more subsidies to free loading pedal pusher bicyclists is leveling the playing field is total bottom of the barrel and gutter propaganda rhetoric. While motorists pay gas taxes and other road fees that also include subsidizing the free loading pedal pushers, and transit passengers pay the bare minimum of 21 percent of the costs for their ride with the capitol costs and the other 79 percent of operational costs being picked up and bailed out by taxpayers; bicyclists are 100 percent subsidized continually feeding off of the rest of society like leeches. They pay no direct taxes for the specialized infrastructure they use and continually rant for more of it as long as somebody else pays the price tag. When bicyclists claim they are taxpayers too, then ask them why they need being bailed out for their transport choice when they pay nothing in direct transportation taxes or fees. To truly level the playing field in an equitable manner, all motorist mileage costs to and from the work place need to be made totally deductible on both Federal and State income taxes and bicyclists need to be charged a direct bicycle tax road fee. As for Blumenauer with his social engineering behavior and narrow focused special interest agenda, he is the true definition of a socialist only masquerading as a Democrat rather than an actual representative member of what in times past was called the party of the people.
Oct 7, '08
I think it would be better to say that kind of change would require undoing massive structural changes.
2:37 p.m.
Oct 7, '08
boy, some of you people have your mind in different places than me. you ever watch Letterman? he does that all the time, and i don't think he's being racist. i certainly wasn't. you need to stop thinking the worst of people, joel; i have never come close to writing anything racist in here. i'm aware of what i carry within me on those grounds, and i take great care to be thoughtful. the title was not racist, whatever your interpretation.
how about we turn it around? your interpretation of my title could indicate that you are likely to think that's the way a lot of blacks talk?
Oct 7, '08
T.A.'s correct, I believe. The colloquial language could be part of racial stereotyping, but it's not specifically Afro-American usage. Poorly educated south-eastern US would be an accurate description, in my experience.
5:31 p.m.
Oct 7, '08
I hear people say "I gots me" all the time. And it's never said in a way to be racially biased towards anyone.
Also, I get tired of this idea that bicyclists don't pay for anything. Unless they pay no income tax, no property tax, no sales tax, etc., they are indeed paying for things. Our gas tax DOES NOT cover the cost of our transportation infrastructure.
Incentives like this are given in order to pull more vehicles off the road. You can only build so many roads, so many lanes, etc. The Houston area is constantly adding more lanes, more roads, etc., yet they still rank in the top 10 in the nation for worst traffic. You can only truly attack the problem by getting some of the vehicles off the road, and getting people to bike, walk, or use public transportation is a good way to do that.
Who are we going to go after next - owners of electric cars? They don't pay the gas tax either, you know. And cars with really good mileage aren't paying their fair share either, right?
Getting more vehicles off the road is a good thing. It decreases congestion for those who have to drive. It decreases the amount of pollution we're putting into the air. It decreases demand for gas. And for those who are walking or biking - it means they're healthier. I know just in the past month I've seen a significant decrease in body fat just from walking. The pants I'm wearing today didn't fit just 3 weeks ago.
Oct 7, '08
"Who are we going to go after next - owners of electric cars? They don't pay the gas tax either, you know. And cars with really good mileage aren't paying their fair share either, right?"
Jenni, you're right on those points, as far as not paying fuels taxes goes. For years now ODOT has been complaining about the drop in fuels tax revenue due to increased mileage and lowered vehicle use due to increased fuels costs. That's why the pilot project in the Portland area for tracking driving was done.
ODOT would like to have a flat fee per mile driven for all vehicles. That would be fair, and would involve minimal surveillance. I'm not sure how bycicles fit into this. I don't think anyone's looked at bikes as a revenue generator, although I'm sure that as bycicle use becomes more popular, and revenue from vehicle use drops, bike riders will become a target.
Certainly, while bikes alter the transportation infrastructure through requiring that bike lanes be built, etc., that infrastructure will last considerably longer with bikes running on it that that built for vehicles, heavy trucks, etc..
The thing that scares the bejesus out of me though, is the congestion/corridor pricing they did in the second half of the pilot project. In addition to charging 10 cents per mile for driving, the only way for that to work is to set up 24/7/365 surveillance zones in the area where the increased fees would be charged.
So don't worry about the electric cars and the high mileage vehicles, with mileage taxes, they'll be brought into the revenue fold eventually. It's my understanding that ODOT has plans to introduce legislation in 2009 to make this possible. At least that's what I read on ODOT's website.
That kind of surveillance just doesn't belong in a 'free' society.
7:34 p.m.
Oct 7, '08
Yea, I know they've been talking about some sort of mileage tax. It's going to be difficult, though, since people will balk at having something on their vehicle that shows how many miles are driven in-state. And any plan that just has you submit your mileage will be fought since it doesn't prove how many miles are in-state versus out of state.
It's just funny that people will attack bicyclists and those using public transportation for "not paying their share," but overlook the fact that the "fair share" argument doesn't even work for vehicles. That's why I brought up electric cars, more fuel efficient cars, etc.
The fact is the gas tax doesn't pay for our roads, bridges, alternative transportation, sidewalks, etc. It pays for a portion, but an increasing share is paid via other forms of taxes - taxes paid by all of us, regardless of how we get from Point A to Point B.
Back home, there was constantly work on the roads, bridges, etc. And that's because the state and county bring in a lot more funds via vehicle registrations. Our yearly amount is more than Oregon drivers pay for a two year tag, and it includes an amount that is dedicated to the county for roads/bridges. Amounts paid take into consideration the type and size of vehicle.
Instead of attacking some groups and saying they don't pay their fair share, we have to look at how we fund our transportation system and figure out how we can fix it. We're falling further and further behind on the upkeep of our system, increasing access to alternative forms of transportation, etc. And there is less and less funds every year to take care of it.
Oct 7, '08
Damn, this is turning awfully meta, and I swore I would say no more about Mr. Barnhart's title, so I'll just say that I've only ever encountered constructions of the form "I gots me some" as representations of Black English Vernacular, and by "representations" I mean stuff by white writers like Mark Twain, black writers like Zora Neale Hurston, and so on. I'm perfectly willing to accept that this sort of nonstandard English could be used more broadly; I've hardly been to every corner of the United States. Not intending to stir up a hornets' nest, and I apologize for any distractions.
10:01 a.m.
Oct 8, '08
Google to the rescue. Search "I gots me" and you find a whole raft of people using it in a wholly non-racial context. There may be a racist use for the phrase, but if so, it appears to be a niche use.
We should really be careful before we call someone racist--it's a pretty brutal charge.
Oct 8, '08
Thanks to Mr. Alworth. I have plenty of my own failings to deal with, and now I can add inadequate background checking to the list.
<h2>I recently watched Spike Lee's Bamboozled and heard lots of stuff along the lines of "I gots me some". I may have been overly influenced by that viewing experience. BTW if you haven't seen that movie, do so, but only if you have a stomach for brutal parody and satire.</h2>