ThinkProgress Logo

Yglesias

Medium Speed Rail

450px_richmond_virginia_capitol_1.jpg

It’s not nearly as interesting as more dramatic passenger rail initiatives, but this Virginia plan to spend $13 million upgrading the passenger rail connection between Washington, DC and Richmond is a great example of harvesting the low-hanging fruit. That’s a low, low price tag for transportation infrastructure, because what needs to be done is quite simple — the money will go to “build a third train track on a three-mile stretch in Spotsylvania County to allow Amtrak and Virginia Railway Express passenger trains to avoid being stuck behind slow-moving freight trains.” That will speed up passenger service and (arguably more importantly) make it more reliable. Ryan Avent comments:

It’s worth pointing out how big an interest the state has in improving these rail connections. The economy in Northern Virginia is lightyears ahead of anything anywhere else in the state. Improving connections between other metropolitan areas and the Washington juggernaut will only increase the market potential of those other areas.

I think it’s also a great example of network effects in action. If all passenger rail in the United States was as bad as the current DC-Richmond link, then the value of this upgrade might be pretty low. But of course that’s not the case. We have a pretty good set of rail links between DC and Boston. So if the Richmond-DC corridor can be upgraded from “bad” to “mediocre” then suddenly passenger rail becomes an attractive method of getting between Richmond and Baltimore, Philadelphia, and New York along with DC. Building high-quality backbone lines like the Acela corridor is, of course, expensive. But one of the benefits of doing so is that along with the direct benefits flowing from those links, you open up a whole range of relatively cheap additional undertakings that wouldn’t otherwise make much sense.

Politics

Log Cabin Republicans: “We know people don’t ‘choose’ their sexual orientation.”

In an interview with Katie Couric, Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK) said that one of her friends who is gay “happens to have made a choice” that Palin would not have made herself. In a statement to ThinkProgress, Scott Tucker, the communications director for the Log Cabin Republicans — a group that endorsed Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) — defended Palin, though he emphasized that his group would have to “continue educating all Republicans” about the fact that homosexuality is not a choice:

In this interview, Gov. Palin expressed her support for a gay friend of 30 years and reiterated that she doesn’t judge people. She said she’s ‘not going to judge Americans and the decisions they make in their adult personal relationships.’ Frankly, I think that’s where most Americans are in their attitude toward gay and lesbian people.

Gov. Palin didn’t ramble uncomfortably about a ‘lifestyle’ or use the opportunity to reiterate her opposition to marriage for gay couples. She didn’t use the opportunity to express opposition to any gay rights legislation. Gay Democrats are pouncing on her use of the word ‘choice’ in talking about gay people. But, when asked the direct question by Charlie Gibson in a previous interview whether people choose to be gay, she said she didn’t know. Again, I think that’s where the vast majority of Americans are on this issue-they simply don’t know whether people choose to be gay.

We know that people don’t ‘choose’ their sexual orientation and we’ll continue educating all Republicans about that issue.

Politics

John McCain Must Release His Medical Records

Our guest blogger is Dr. Clark Newhall, MD/JD of Salt Lake City, UT, one of over 2,700 doctors from around the country who signed an open letter calling on John McCain to release his medical records.

mccainaid.jpg In a time of increasingly complex and difficult issues both here and abroad, it is imperative for Americans to know the health of the candidates. Yet John McCain has never released his full medical records and he has severely restricted the public’s ability to judge his health. When McCain publicly “disclosed” his medical history, what he really did was provide a carefully selected set of medical records (1,173 pages in all) to 20 carefully selected reporters who were allowed three hours to review that massive pile of paper. They were not allowed to make copies and not allowed to consult with medical experts during the review. With this kind of pseudo-review, it is certain that we cannot know much about McCain’s health.

What we do know is concerning: The Armed Forces Institute of Pathology reviewed the cancer taken off McCain’s head in 2000 and found it to be “highly suggestive of a metastasis of malignant melanoma and may represent a satellite metastasis.” Even with the most optimistic scenario, if McCain has a metastatic malignant melanoma, he has only a 38% chance of surviving past 2010.

McCain had a melanoma taken off his head in 2000 but he has had several other melanoma cancers removed before that. It is not difficult to believe that a previous melanoma could have been the metastasis to the temple that was removed in 2000. If John McCain has a recurrence of melanoma, the attendant surgery with the possibility of chemotherapy is likely to be debilitating.

For these reasons, it is imperative that Americans demand the full and unconditional release of John McCain’s medical records.

Yglesias

Conceptual Policymaking

mccainface.jpg

John McCain wouldn’t sit down for an interview with The Washington Blade (DC’s gay and lesbian newspaper) but he was willing to let the paper email his campaign some questions that an aide would answer in writing and then sign McCain’s name to. To his credit he said “I support the concept of non-discrimination in hiring for gay and lesbian people.”

But in much the way that McCain’s mentor, Barry Goldwater, thought that segregation was bad but not nearly so bad as legislation aimed at ending segregation, McCain supports “the concept” of non-discrimination but doesn’t support legislative efforts to prevent discrimination.

Yglesias

Regulation Moving Forward

Pretty much everyone agrees that the regulatory environment that allowed the current financial panic to develop needs to be changed substantially, but thus far there’s been relatively little specific commentary about what things ought to look like beyond short-term crisis-response issues. Martin Neil Baily and Robert E. Litan from Brookings weigh in with the first fairly detailed commentary that I’ve seen. As written, it seems convincing to me, though I’d certainly be interested in seeing further discussion of these issues.

Climate Progress

The scariest thing John McCain has ever said

John McCain told NPR this morning that, regarding Governor Palin, he has “turned to her advice many times in the past … particularly on energy issues.” Many?

This would be especially scary when you consider that few people in the country are more misinformed on energy than Sarah Palin, the fungible candidate, a woman

Here are John McCain’s full comments:

Read more

Politics

McCain Supports ‘Non-Discrimination In Hiring For Gay And Lesbian People’ In ‘Concept’ Only

mccainface.jpgAfter turning down an interview with the Gay History Project earlier this month, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) recently provided written answers to the Washington Blade, which “marks the first known time a Republican presidential nominee has agreed to an interview with a gay publication.” Though, as Marc Ambinder notes, it was really “a quasi-interview” since “the campaign drafted answers with McCain’s assent.”

Asked whether he would “support the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) if elected president” — which passed the House last year and stalled in the Senate — McCain said that he supports “the concept of non-discrimination in hiring for gay and lesbian people,” but not legislation that would protect against discrimination:

BLADE: Will you support the Employment Non-Discrimination Act if elected president?

MCCAIN: Gay and lesbian people should not face discrimination in the workplace. I’ve always practiced that in my hiring. I select the best people, regardless of their sexual orientation. I support the concept of non-discrimination in hiring for gay and lesbian people.

However, we need to make sure legislation doesn’t lead to a flood of frivolous lawsuits or infringe on religious institutions. What I can say now is I will give careful consideration to any legislation that reaches my desk, and confer with Congress before making decisions.

McCain’s campaign says that he would “give careful consideration” to ENDA legislation if he were president, but his record indicates he would not support it. In 1996, when the Senate rejected ENDA, McCain was the deciding vote that defeated it. In November 2007, McCain reiterated his opposition, saying that it would “open the door to endless litigation and court cases.”

McCain’s support in “concept” for non-discrimination towards the LGBT community is similar to his support in “concept” for equal pay for equal work. In both cases, McCain says he supports the “concept,” but he opposes any legislation to make the “concept” a reality.

Pam’s House Blend has more from McCain’s Blade interview.

Climate Progress

Palin, McCain’s Energy Czar: ‘Weaning Ourselves’ Off Of Oil By Using More

Written with Daniel J. Weiss, a Senior Fellow and Director of Climate Strategy at the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

McCain-Palin on CBSSen. John McCain (R-AZ) has handed to Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK), his running mate, the responsibility of handling his “energy independence” agenda — much as George Bush did with Dick Cheney. On NPR this morning, McCain expressed his devotion to her, saying, “I’ve already turned to Governor Palin particularly on energy issues.” In an interview last night with Katie Couric of CBS, Palin — who McCain claims “understands the energy issues better than anybody I know in Washington, D.C.” — outlined her plan for America’s energy future. What she says she wants to do is inarguable:

We need to make sure that our nation’s taking those steps to become energy independent. . . I support all that we can do to reduce emissions and to clean up this planet.

However, the steps McCain-Palin would take to “become energy independent” and “reduce emissions” would in fact achieve the exact opposite.

PALIN PLAN #1. ‘Weaning Ourselves Off The Hydrocarbons’ By Drilling For More.

And it’s why we should have started ten years ago tapping into domestic supplies that America is so rich in. Alaska has billions of barrels of oil and hundreds of trillions of cubic feet of clean, green natural gas onshore and offshore. . . Of course ramping up supplies domestically is a key to that. But so is weaning ourselves off the hydrocarbons.

FACT: Oil and natural gas are hydrocarbons. Weaning ourselves off them, by definition, means using less, not more.

PALIN PLAN #2. Energy Independence By ‘Tapping Into The Nuclear.’

Also tapping into the nuclear, the clean coal, to biomass, geothermal, tides, waves, all those things that we have as alternative energy sources, it’s gotta be an all-of-the-above approach to energy independence.

FACTS: The U.S. imports over 90 percent of the uranium used in nuclear plants. Russia is the number one uranium supplier to the U.S. And key components for new plants are only built overseas. Read more

Politics

Barbour: In a McCain administration,’ Palin will ‘not have much of a role in foreign policy.’

During an interview with NPR this morning, John McCain said he routinely turns to Sarah Palin for foreign policy advice. “I’ve turned to her advice many times in the past,” McCain said in response to a question about whether Palin would be one of his foreign policy advisers. But McCain’s message was contradicted by one of his surrogates, Gov. Haley Barbour (R-MS):

Obviously in a McCain administration she would not have much of a role in foreign policy because of his depth of experience and the people around him. … But in a McCain administration, her role substantively is gonna be primarily – in my opinion – about energy.

Watch video of Barbour’s remarks here.

Yglesias

More of the Same

I don’t totally grasp the argument, made by Dana Goldstein and others, that it would be horribly “undemocratic” for the New York City Council to repeal the city’s term limits that were imposed years back by referendum. I mean, suppose they did it, what could happen next? Well, either Bloomberg would lose to whoever wins the Democratic nomination or else Bloomberg would defeat whoever wins the Democratic nomination. In the first case, the will of the people to deny Bloomberg a third term would not be subverted — Bloomberg wouldn’t get a third term. And in the second case, the will of the people to deny Bloomberg a third term would not be subverted either — Bloomberg would have a renewed direct mandate from the public.

Now that doesn’t change the fact that the timing and manner of Bloomberg’s decision to seek this change seems kind of sleazy. But the time to take that into consideration is during his re-election campaign when you might think it renders him an inferior choice to the main alternative. But the idea of scrapping term limits can and should still be evaluated on its own merits and it’s a good idea.

Older

Newer

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up