michael's thoughts » politics

Barack Obama’s Infrastructure Spending Plans

Michael Ridley — Thu, 25 Dec 2008 13:11:51 +0000

The latest news I’ve heard is that Barack Obama’s administration is looking for between $850 billion and $1 trillion in infrastructure spending over the next few years to address aging transportation infrastructure and help jumpstart the economy.

While I tend to be fairly fiscally conservative, I’m not completely opposed to the idea of spending some money to bring our nation into the 21st century. I do hope it is spent well, however. Gas prices have come down a lot in recent months, but the ultimate trend over the next fifty years is clearly up and to the right.

I hope that the short term repreieve we’ve been given from high gasoline prices doesn’t detract from our national focus on new and better energy and transportation policy. I own a car that I drive every day and often I am the only occupant. The car gets reasonable gas mileage, but since I live in the suburbs and drive in traffic it’s not spectacular gas mileage. Yet I have no other transportation options.

Carpooling is not a solution since my work schedule varies and nobody I know lives near me and works where I work. Mass transit does not go from my home to my office. Yet I live in a fairly densely populated suburb of the nation’s capitol.

What I’d love to see is investment in ubiquitous mass transit in our urban and dense suburban areas. I’m not a huge fan of riding the bus, but my experiences with the Santa Clara Valley Light Rail system were positive when I lived in Silicon Valley. Why can’t the DC metro area have a comprehensive light rail system that interfaces with existing bus routes and heavy subway (Metro) stations?

From the renewable energy research I’ve done, it seems that hydrogen is our best bet for an energy future. Let’s start making the investment in hydrogen infrastructure today. The hydrogen fuel cell technology exists today and will only get better with time. But there is no fueling infrastructure. It’s the type of economic chicken and egg problem that the federal government is uniquely positioned to address.

I hope these sorts of things are on the infrastructure spending agenda. It would be a shame to waste a trillion dollars on more freeway lane expansions and bridges to nowhere.

Local Ballot Measures

Michael Ridley — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 12:12:53 +0000

I voted on Tuesday. Sadly Bob Barr didn’t win the presidency, but I’m hopeful that the Libertarian Party will make a strong showing in 2012. Or, perhaps, not. That’s a subject for another day. Today I want to share my view on ballot measures for local bond initiatives and why I won’t vote for them when I have no information about them.

When I went to vote on Tuesday, the front of the ballot had the Presidential, Senate, and Congress candidates. The back had several local Loudoun County bond measures. Two were to authorize the issuance of bonds for school construction. One was to issue bonds for a fire and rescue station. I voted against the first two and for the third. The reason actually has nothing to do with whether or not we should have more schools. The problem is, I know nothing about these measures.

I try to be an informed voter, but I have seen nothing in the local media or in any mailings about these bond measures. I am not going to vote yes to authorize somewhere between $50 and $100 million dollars in new municipal debt without knowing what I’m voting for.

Perhaps because it’s education and they assume people like education, the forces behind the bond measure didn’t feel it necessary to communicate anything about it. But that argument doesn’t work for me. I want information.

If there is going to be a bond measure to pay for school construction I want to know what that does to our local government’s financial position. Why do we need these schools? I’m aware that Loudoun County is growing quickly, but what is the status of the current schools? Are they overcrowded? When will the new schools be ready for students to attend? How long will these new schools “hold us over” until we need to build yet more schools?

I have not even heard these questions be asked, much less any answers. So I can’t vote for these initiatives in good conscience. Which is unfortunate, as I suspect we probably do need more schools in the county. But in the future I’d love for Loudoun County to provide me more information before asking me for my money.

As an aside, I voted for the fire and rescue station because it was a relatively small amount of money (about $8 million) and from the mailings I get from our local volunteer rescue squad I do believe it’s needed.

Wikinomics Author on Web 2.0 Technologies in Government

Michael Ridley — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 03:46:19 +0000

I saw this article in CIO Insight and I thought it was worth reading. The article is an interview with Anthony Williams, co-author of Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything. I enjoyed the book and I was interested in his thoughts on the subject.

A lot of “CIO type” interviews and articles are long on theory and short on practical reference. This article does include some concrete references to real projects under way. Notably the intelligence community’s answer to Wikipedia, Intellipedia. Also mentioned are Politicopia, a Utah project to create a wiki community where citizens can voice their opinions about pending legislature.

The article mainly discusses theory and a few wiki examples, so I’m not sure that it lives up to it’s “Web 2.0″ claim as many other “Web 2.0″ technologies are ignored. Still, it’s worth skimming. Not so much to learn anything groundbreaking but to get the cognitive juices flowing.

Richard Stallman on Pedophilia

Michael Ridley — Sat, 10 Jun 2006 08:03:34 +0000

I suppose I mention this only because I find it interesting when people of some notability make such controversial public statements. On his June 5th blog, Richard Stallman, founder of the GNU/free software movement shares some unorthodox philosophies on the dangers of pedophilia:

“05 June 2006 (Dutch paedophiles form political party)

Dutch pedophiles have formed a political party to campaign for legalization.

I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on cases which aren’t voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing.”

Seems odd to me to put something out there like that without any citations to peer reviewed studies supporting such a claim. But whatever.

DPW Nonsense

Michael Ridley — Mon, 27 Feb 2006 22:15:21 +0000

I feel compelled to comment about this tempest in a teacup. So much is being made of the fact that a Dubai-based company is attempting to purchase the UK-based company responsible for terminal operations at several United States ports. Yet all the security experts I’ve seen interviewed have said there is no additional risk from this transaction. And the Coast Guard and Customs are still actually responsible for security. And the real port security issues are at foreign ports, long before the cargo gets to the US.

Yet Congress seems all worked up about this. I saw a press conference the other day with Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton where they were lamenting how dangerous this is and pointing out that we don’t let foriegn owned companies own US airports. I know it’s great politics to call the White House out on this. But let’s be realistic for a second. First of all, it would be entirely within Congress’s power to change the law to prevent foreign ownership of ports. So instead of critisizing of the executive branch for not enforcing a law that doesn’t exist, they should legislate if they so choose. Of course in the interest of a fair playing field that would mean that all foreign port operators would need to be kicked out and their interests nationalized. Oh…that’s not politically palatable? Yeah…how about that.

Second of all, on the subject of Bush not being up to speed on the issue quickly enough. I’m not a big fan of George Bush. Having said that, there are many many international business deals going through every day. It is not part of the President’s job description to monitor and individually approve or disapprove of each one. Nor should it be. Remember that whole capitalism/free market thing? And for business transactions that do raise special national security implications, such as the DPW deal, there is a process in place for experts to assess the risks and make a determination. That process most often does not involve the President. Is the President an expert on port security and operations and the implications of a UAE versus UK company as terminal operator? I would imagine not. How about we let the people who know what they’re talking about work on that one.

Tags: DPW

ID Cards to Travel to Canada

Michael Ridley — Wed, 18 Jan 2006 12:29:43 +0000

I was listening to the radio and heard a report that apparently the US Department of Homeland Security and the State Department are working together to create ID cards for US citizens who frequently travel to Canada and Mexico. This confuses me a bit, as I thought we already had ID cards for that. Called passports.

The news story said that apparently these cards will be simpler to get and create a more streamlined and simple process. I didn’t realize getting a passport was that laborous. This seems like a solution in search of a problem to me. What’s the point of doing this? I don’t get it.

Satellite Radio Copyright Infringement

Michael Ridley — Thu, 06 Oct 2005 11:42:33 +0000

I was watching CNBC’s Squawkbox this morning and they’re reporting that the record industry is contemplating bringing a copyright infringement suit against the Sirius and XM satellite radio operators because of their new portable devices. As I understand it, the way these devices work is somewhat like TiVo for radio. The portable units don’t have a satellite receiver built into them, so they record content while they’re docked and then you can play it back when you’re out and about.

There was a comment made by a CNBC reporter that the fair use doctrine allows you to save broadcast music for personal use. I’m not so sure about whether that’s settled legal precedent, but there is a settled precedent for time shifting and that seems to be the main point of these portable devices. Hopefully if they do bring a suit the satellite operators can get summary judgement and move along quickly.

PS – so Becky Quick has an unofficial fan site? That’s hot. She’s a cutie pie.

Google Library

Michael Ridley — Tue, 20 Sep 2005 19:41:24 +0000

There was a post on Slashdot about this CNN article discussing the publishing industry’s mixed feelings about Google’s plan to scan in a ton of books and make them searchable. Normally this is not an interesting enough story for me to mention, but this excerpt got my attention:

Richard Hull, executive director of the Text and Academic Authors Association, called Google’s approach backwards. Publishers shouldn’t have to bear the burden of record-keeping, agreed Sanfilippo, the Penn State press’s marketing and sales director.

“We’re not aware of everything we’ve published,” Sanfilippo said. “Back in the 50s, 60s and 70s, there were no electronic files for those books.”

On the whole, I support intellectual property rights. But I support them because of their intended purpose- to create an incentive for creative minds to generate compelling content. I do think the current copyright expiration limits are way too long. But even more to the point is the case mentioned by the publisher in that CNN article.

He is concerned that Google may scan books they don’t even remember or have records that they published? It sounds to me as though they are giving up any claim to ongoing ownership of that intellectual property by abdicating their role as stewards. I know that’s not the law, but from a public policy perspective I think that position makes sense.

Tags: Google, Copyright

Bush’s New Deal

Michael Ridley — Fri, 16 Sep 2005 22:47:59 +0000

I was listening to President Bush’s national address last night about plans to rebuild New Orleans. It sounded like a relatively good plan to me, in the abstract. I guess we’ll see how it plays out. If you’d asked me a few weeks ago, I wouldn’t have picked this president to revive the New Deal and create his own TVA.

I wonder if the liberal Bush opponents recognize that his plan to rebuild the gulf coast is a page out of the playbook of FDR.

Tags: Bush, Katrina

Thought: Titles in the US Federal Government

Michael Ridley — Thu, 08 Sep 2005 17:22:54 +0000

I was listening to a news report today and one US congressman made the statement that he’d like to see a “czar” appointed to lead the investigation into the problems surrounding government response to hurricane Katrina. That got me thinking- where did this use of the word “czar” come from? I know we’ve had it for some time. We call the head of anti-drug enforcement the “drug czar”. But why? We are a democratic federal republic, not a czarist monoarchy.

And what about the heads of federal programs who don’t get to be czars? I would think they’d feel left out. Are we going to see a press release by the head of the FDA informing us that he is now the “Emperor of Food”? Ponderous.