I think we will see significant improvement in funding for cities and mass transit when Obama takes the presidency.

 

News Summary: Urban Policy and the Obama Presidency

5 November 2008 - 5:00am

Author: Nate Berg and Tim Halbur

http://www.planetizen.com/node/35907

 

A Regional Outlook

Mayor Manny Diaz of Miami was at the U.S. Conference of Mayors back in June, and witnessed one of the few speeches by Obama focused on the concerns of local government. Diaz believes that Obama will be a significant force for urban issues. "From business incubators to the college tuition tax credit," the mayor told Planetizen, "from the National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank to the Foreclosure Prevention Fund, Barack Obama has offered comprehensive programs to invest in the assets of cities."

 

 

Energy Policy

The subject of energy is of great interest to Planetizen readers, and has surfaced frequently in this presidential election. Much of the rhetoric on energy has focused on the obvious: reducing reliance on foreign oil, investing in renewable energy sources, cutting excess use and expanding domestic production of "clean" energy. In August, Obama called for an investment of $150 billion in renewable energy production -- an investment towards a goal of doubling the nation's renewable energy sources to 10% of total needs. This is a goal he hopes to achieve by the end of his first term.

 

Transportation

The campaign's emphasis on infrastructure extends to transportation policy as well. As explained at The Daily Kos, Vice-President Elect Joe Biden famously rides Amtrak to work, and was the original co-sponsor of the Amtrak Reauthorization Bill. "For 30 years, I have witnessed Congress dangling a carrot in front of Amtrak's eyes, funding it just enough for it to limp along," said Biden as he introduced an early version of the bill. "And I'll tell you, this has to stop. Now is the time to commit politically and financially to a strong, safe, and efficient passenger rail system."

 

MORE: http://www.planetizen.com/node/35907

Congressman Earl Blumenauer is a major supporter of mass transit, sidewalks and bicycling infrastructure. This could be a huge move towards Federal support of these projects throughout the country and smart growth in general.

 

Blumenauer Tapped as Likely Secretary of Transportation

by Nate Berg

4 November 2008 - 11:00am

http://www.planetizen.com/node/35888

 

Democratic insiders have mapped out the possible face of an Obama presidential cabinet. Shortlisted for Secretary of Transportation are Oregon Congressman Earl Blumenauer and Minnesota Congressman Jim Oberstar.

 

"Sources close to Barack Obama have quite specific ideas about his most likely choices for a wide array of top jobs."

 

"The list is heavy on campaign heavyweights and Washington insiders, many of them from the administration of President Bill Clinton. So while surprises can be expected to crop up especially on any Republican members of the Cabinet many of the selections would likely be proven hands who would provoke little controversy. Obama has not communicated his final choice on any of these posts but plans to move very quickly if he is elected, according to the sources. They point to the political price that Clinton paid for dilly-dallying on his appointments and nomination."

 

"Here is the list of names being widely discussed in Democratic circles, compiled with the help of ABCs Jonathan Karl and Politicos Ben Smith. Some of the names are more likely than others, but all are being seriously considered by Obama advisers. Some of the sources would be involved in decision making, and some were making educated deductions."

http://www.planetizen.com/node/35888

 

 

"While greenhouse gas emissions can be substantially reduced by increasing fuel efficiency, these technological improvements are likely to be offset by continuing growth in vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Since 1980, the number of miles Americans drive has grown three times faster than the U.S. population, and almost twice as fast as vehicle registrations. Congressman Blumenauer supports a number of straight-forward policies that can reduce VMT, such as providing people transportation choices through increased mass transit, sidewalks, and bike lanes."

http://blumenauer.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=267&Itemid=149

I think we will see significant improvement in funding for cities and mass transit when Obama takes the presidency.

 

Ragerunner - I share your optimism on this.  Thanks for posting this info.

Dingdingding.

Obama next President .. perfect .. nice ..

Cities certainly have their best chance with Obama.

Some kind of national level infrastructure project, which would create lots of jobs and of course have all kinds of longterm benefits. 

Your optimism is refreshing in this cynical world.  I expect a little improvement, but not much to make a real impact.  He won't have the dough to increase spending.

Obama's win in combination with the ousting of long time Republican Congressman Steve Chabot is what has Cincinnati buzzing with optimism...

 

Local Dems have high expectations after Driehaus win

http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2008/11/03/daily39.html

Business Courier of Cincinnati - by Dan Monk Senior Staff Reporter

Wednesday, November 5, 2008

 

More federal money for sewers, bridges, rail lines and the National Underground Railroad Freedom Center. That’s what local Democrats expect Cincinnati will gain from the Nov. 4 election, in which Barack Obama won the White House and Democrats widened their majorities in the U.S. House and Senate.

 

Yesterday’s Democratic wins included the election of Steve Driehaus to the U.S. House of Representatives, where he will replace seven-term Republican Steve Chabot in the 1st Congressional District.

 

“I think it will make a difference to have a member in the majority who is working very closely with both the County Commission, the city of Cincinnati and other local governments in the region to make sure that the federal government is being responsive to the challenges we face here,” said Driehaus, at a lunch-hour press conference at Mount Echo Park in Price Hill.

 

more: http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2008/11/03/daily39.html

Your optimism is refreshing in this cynical world.  I expect a little improvement, but not much to make a real impact.  He won't have the dough to increase spending.

 

We haven't had the dough for most things over the last several years. Its just more debt. But, if we are going to have more debt lets use it for more sustainable cities and a better environment.

That's what's always interested me in the fire-breathing, no pork whatsoever, congressman.  Of which Chabot was a charter member. That sounds all well and good (who wants wasteful spending after all?) but if everybody else is doing it, and your congressman isn't sending a little back to his/her distrcit, then you're just effectively subsidizing the pork for everybody else....

obama wont do anything. i doubt there will be any  drastic change in our lives or anything. hope dude can prove me wrong but the president doesnt matter. he's merely a figurehead to appease the masses and believe they live in a "democracy" with choices. yeah, a choice between 2 who are the same. there are bigger plans, and the people at the top dont reside in the whitehouse. open your eyes........its there for you to see

 

if anything could possibly change here in ohio, it would be from local politicians...not barack obama.

^ You know it's Sad But True. What I do hope is that Obama will bring transit issues more to the forefront and raise the national consciousness of cities vs. suburbs/exurbs.

Barack Obama will be a lame duck president, mark my words, especially in our daily city lives.

It took an act by President Clinton to push transit for the forefront in the Cincinnati metro area -- regarding the area's non-attainment regarding pollution and our potential loss of federal highway funds. Funding was the key issue, and it was voted down by the citizens of Hamilton County.

 

I expect to see a return of the MetroMoves proposal -- which was as damn close as we got to a true mass transit system -- in the next few years. I also expect to see the high-speed rail network that was once proposed to connect to Chicago, to be revived.

 

Biden has already stated that we need to stop dangling out the carrot for Amtrak, and to seriously invest on our mass transit and rail network. And Obama has already stated that more money will be devoted to these transportation nodes. There is no reason to believe otherwise, and it sure can't get much worse than what has happened over the past eight years.

Obama is supposedly forming an urban affairs department that works with mayors to improve cities. I'm not sure exactly how it works or how funding gets allocated but it sounds like something on his back burner. The best thing he can do is give grants to partnerships between universities and start up firms ("incubators"). People don't realize the potential we have with using university resources for small companies.

Barack Obama will be a lame duck president, mark my words, especially in our daily city lives.

 

Huh?  Do you know what a "lame duck" is in politics?  Hint: President Bush is one, but only as of yesterday.

Obama is supposedly forming an urban affairs department that works with mayors to improve cities. I'm not sure exactly how it works or how funding gets allocated but it sounds like something on his back burner. The best thing he can do is give grants to partnerships between universities and start up firms ("incubators"). People don't realize the potential we have with using university resources for small companies.

 

That sounds great.  Several people have mentioned that most successful urban renewal has been started on the city government level, so it would be ideal if the president can put this type of system in place to offer local government the resources they need.

"Now is the time to invest in our future and strengthen our core infrastructure...I will re-commit federal resources to public mass transportation projects across the country. And I will further promote transit by creating incentives for transit usage that are equal to the current incentives for driving."  -Obama

 

If he does just that small bit of policy, it will have a big difference. And national transportation policy leaders aren't some abstract group to me. I call several of them "boss."

 

Obama will go into his presidency with enormous political capital. That is the most important thing a president can have, for people to like him. If you think this is just fluff, go read any book on American political theory.

 

Someone like Blumenauer or Rendell in the cabinet would be such a reversal of fortune for transit that I can not even overstate it.

 

Barack Obama will be a lame duck president, mark my words, especially in our daily city lives.

Huh?  Do you know what a "lame duck" is in politics?  Hint: President Bush is one, but only as of yesterday.

Yes it means a president that nobdoy likes !

obama wont do anything. i doubt there will be any  drastic change in our lives or anything. hope dude can prove me wrong but the president doesnt matter. he's merely a figurehead to appease the masses and believe they live in a "democracy" with choices. yeah, a choice between 2 who are the same. there are bigger plans, and the people at the top dont reside in the whitehouse. open your eyes........its there for you to see

 

if anything could possibly change here in ohio, it would be from local politicians...not barack obama.

 

CTownsFinest, by “lame duck” maybe you mean he’s going to have to compromise or at least temper some of his more extreme positions. I believe today was Obama’s first security briefing. That’s when they take a new President into a room and tell him the real deal on what power he can really expect to have :wink:. The Democrats have a lot of grand plans to radically change the zeitgeist of the nation. But if Obama expects to be successful he’s going to have to “govern from the center,” as the saying goes. Reagan, arguably the most popular President in the last forty years (with Bill Clinton running a close second), achieved this by gradually winning over large numbers of moderates (obviously the firmly-entrenched left never warmed up to him) into his camp. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi have a lot of “plans” for an Obama agenda; and yes, the Democrats are clearly in control. But Obama is also smart enough to know that if he goes too far left there’s going to be hell to pay two years from now in the mid-term elections. After all, though he lost, McCain still got a huge number of votes at 47% of the total. A large swath of Obama’s vote—the normally center-right crowd that would have normally voted conservative and that put him over the top--switched to him due to their disgust with the economy. He knows this, and it would be foolish of him to alienate them.

 

Barack Obama will be a lame duck president, mark my words, especially in our daily city lives.

Huh? Do you know what a "lame duck" is in politics? Hint: President Bush is one, but only as of yesterday.

Yes it means a president that nobdoy likes !

 

Well, to you, perhaps.  But to most people it means an elected official finishing out the remainder of their term after a successor has been chosen.  Like I said, President Bush is a lame duck, but only as of Nov. 4th.  "Nobdoy" has liked him since well before that.

Barack Obama will be a lame duck president, mark my words, especially in our daily city lives.

Huh?  Do you know what a "lame duck" is in politics?  Hint: President Bush is one, but only as of yesterday.

Yes it means a president that nobdoy likes !

 

Please don't be personally offended by this, but if you're going to make blanket predictions on  the relative success (or failure) of an Obama administration, comments like these pretty much negate taking anything you might say seriously. The same goes for those who claim that there's "no real difference between the two candidates."  If this is really what you believe, I'd suggest you brush up on such topics as the Iraq War, the Supreme Court, tax policy, etc., etc.  So you know, as X was so subtly hinting, a "lame duck" is an elected official who remains in office after an election in which he/she either lost, or was not a candidate.  That's high school civics class stuff, folks.

 

But to get back on topic, I also believe that Obama's election does provide hope for increased attention to cities...certainly when you consider that the other guys referred to our urban areas as "Fake America"!  If you want to see what impact the President can have on the health of our cities, take a look at the impact Clinton had: Empowerment Zones, Community Development Block Grants, drastically increased law enforcement funding, etc.  And the Bush administration decimated all of these programs.  And let's not even get started onto the manner in which Reagan turned his back on Urban America.

 

It sounds as if Obama intends to reenergize Federal attention on the plight of our cities, and it's our responsibility to keep the pressure on him and the Democratic Congress.

 

As an addendum, the fact that Democrats are now in control in the State House in Columbus is wonderful news for those who are arguing that change will come more effectively from the local and state levels.  Armond Budish will be the first Speaker of the House from the Cleveland-area in over 70 years.  And we'll no longer be at the mercy of all the rural Republican State Reps who year-after-year torpedoed spending programs that targeted our big cities (especially public transportation funding!).

^Sorry but what are you talking about! I think everyone here knwos that Obama is just going to mean a lot of bad kinds of taxes and stuff like that! More out of our pockets and more for foodstamps or whatevre !!

^As brtshrcegr said so eloquently "if you're going to make blanket predictions on  the relative success (or failure) of an Obama administration, comments like these pretty much negate taking anything you might say seriously."

This topic was not meant to be a political discussion. It was meant to discuss the potential for more focus on urban needs and infrastructure for our cities and how Obama and some of his potential appointees have shown significant support for these items in the past. Will these efforts overcome the focus on suburban sprawl, No. But it might make the playing field a little more level. I would think that anyone that supports urban redevelopment, mass transit and cities would be happy to hear a President elect talk about these items in a proactive way.

Mayors of ailing big cities see Obama as a "partner", optimistic about potential help

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/11/mayors_of_ailing_big_cities_se.html

By Damon Sims

November 07, 2008, 11:44PM

 

On his historic path to the White House, Barack Obama pledged billions of federal dollars to decaying urban cores.

 

Washington, he said, had for too long turned its back on places like Cleveland, Detroit and Youngstown -- the crippled backbones of once-flourishing metropolitan areas.

 

Now, armed with an electoral landslide and congressional majority of fellow Democrats, President-elect Obama faces tremendous expectations from big-city mayors and community activists. Not since 1964, when Lyndon Johnson set the framework for his Great Society programs, has a dramatic shift in the nation's domestic policy been so hungrily anticipated.

 

more: http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/11/mayors_of_ailing_big_cities_se.html

:clap: :clap: :clap:

 

Sounds like great news! Please help our decaying urban cores. I'm so happy to have someone with experience and knowledge of a Midwestern gritty city like Chicago helping us instead of the out of touch cowboy we have in office now! GOBAMA!!!

cowboy? don't insult them. sure dubya wears the hat sometimes, but if you move to cape canaveral and wear a astronaut suit does that make you an astronaut?  :wink:  don't be fooled by that ruse, the bushies are old connecticut yankees.

 

to air your fears yes there is a chance obama is another jimmy carter at worst, but i dont think so. give the guy a freakin chance he hasn't even gotten started!

Pres-elect Obama has already, yesterday, stated from his 2-part bailout packages, he plans for relief to states to support distressed cities (see "foreclosure relief" under Cleveland); plans which were, in part, hampered under W’s New Federalism, where plans – many of them infrastructure plans – were transferred (see ‘dumped upon’) the struggling states by the Feds.

 

As for transit, Ford and Carter combined for rail progress in terms of new transit starts in cities.  Also Carter liberalized urban interstate highway funding viz cities allowing cities to transfer designated hwy funding to rail transit start-ups and/or major expansions.  Under this plan, Washington, D.C., under Marion Barry, cancelled I-95's extension through D.C. to complete the planned, full 100-mile Metrorail program -- completed in 2002 (then expanded 3 miles around 2004/5) -- which is why southbound I-95 today weirdly ends at the Beltway while a northbound piece of it, called I-395, juts north over the Potomac then thru a tunnel but dead-ends at New York Ave.

 

In Cleveland in the late 70s/early 80s, there apparently were plans to transfer funding sitting on the books for Al Porter’s old defeated Clark Freeway, I-490 connecting to the freeway stub at E. 55  from – which, btw, planners are still fighting for a freeway lite in the so-called  Opportunity Corridor to Univ. Circle – to planned RTA rail projects.  But, as rail transit projects always seem to go in this town, squabbling “leaders” couldn’t make up their minds what to do and ultimately, as I understand, I-490’s $$ were either outright cancelled or transferred to other Interstate hwy projects in the area.

 

As for Amtrak the Northeast Corridor electrification extension from New Haven to Boston was scheduled under Carter and was set to go until Reagan came in and nixed it, allegedly for fiscal conservatism -- although, as we now know, Reagan tremendously increased the nat'l debt by tremendous inflationary military spending.  The NEC electrification thus lay dormant for 2 decades until the next Democrat occupied the White House, Bill Clinton, at which time it was finally completed and led to 1999's introduction of Acela -- America's 1st and only high-speed train project actually realized since WWII.  The Acela saga may be indicative of where Obama is headed on Amtrak.

 

As for highway expansion: despite Obama’s statement in the debates, I’d suspect he was merely trying to appease the ex-urban and rural vote; people who always love pork-barrel freeway expansion projects.  Republicans were good at that so I don’t see Obama expanding this.  My guess is Obama, to his word, will focus on road infrastructure: in particular, bridges like the Twin Cities’ infamous W35 (?) that collapsed last year.  I do think Amtrak projects like Ohio Hub have a better shot to get done under Obama since there was already more favorable talk of it under Gov. Strickland and Sen. Brown, 2 new dems to their posts, and the Dem takeover of congress in 2006.  Like FDR's alphabet soup agencies -- also during distressed econ times -- people were put to work and public services were improved.

 

As for Cleveland transit, I don’t see much hope for any serious rail transit expansion other than, perhaps, the West Shore commuter rail project; a single, highly focused program being pushed by grass-roots All Aboard Ohio.  As long as Joe Calabrese is RTA chief – a man who behaves like an anti-rail conservative Republican – rapid transit expansion, or serious rail commuter programs besides West Shore, have virtually no shot, at least not imho. 

A president is only as good as the people he appoints to run various departments and to advise the president on issues facing those departments. The president cannot be expected to know all things about all departments, but to trust others of like mind to manage those departments. Those hiring moves are the most important decisions a president makes.

 

Thus, the appointments made in the coming months (they'll keep coming even after Jan. 20) are just as important as the vote Nov. 4. Follow them closely.

A president is only as good as the people he appoints to run various departments and to advise the president on issues facing those departments. The president cannot be expected to know all things about all departments, but to trust others of like mind to manage those departments. Those hiring moves are the most important decisions a president makes.

 

Thus, the appointments made in the coming months (they'll keep coming even after Jan. 20) are just as important as the vote Nov. 4. Follow them closely.

 

AMEN.  It's not easy.  Its very intricate chess game. 

 

There is lots of political and public jockeying as names of people for various posts are being submitted to the Chief of Staff. 

 

A lot of it to depends on "who you know".

" although, as we now know, Reagan tremendously increased the nat'l debt by tremendous inflationary military spending. "

 

And in doing so he ended the cold war!

Obama to Create White House Office of Urban Policy

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/11/obama-to-create.html

November 12, 2008 8:59 AM

 

On National Public Radio's "All Things Considered" yesterday, longtime Obama family friend and Obama-Biden Transition Team co-chair Valerie Jarrett said that the President-elect would, as pledged during the campaign, create an Office of Urban Policy.

 

Jarrett said the office would "have a comprehensive approach to our urban development," who will be an "advocate for cities" within the White House, taking "all the variety of different federal programs and help target them in a logical and systematic way."

 

"For those of us who have worked in city governments across the country, we recognize how invaluable that person will be," she says.

 

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/11/obama-to-create.html

^This is HUGE.  Groundbreaking and historically significant.  I can see this really making some much needed things happen.

Yes, we need to fight crime. Yes, we need to strengthen our cities. But we also need to stop seeing our cities as the problem and start seeing them as the solution. Because strong cities are the building blocks of strong regions, and strong regions are essential for a strong America.

I love that line, its a good summary of my attitude toward why we need to improve our cities. I'm excited and encouraged.

Stimulus: The stuff Obama would build

The president-elect is proposing a massive project to overhaul the nation's infrastructure, but can it keep a deep recession at bay?

By Steve Hargreaves, CNNMoney.com staff writer

Last Updated: November 26, 2008: 2:24 PM ET

 

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- America may soon get a whole lot of new stuff.

 

As part of a new, massive spending plan designed to jumpstart the economy, there's talk of spending hundreds of billions of dollars on new roads, bridges, trains, schools, power plants, transmission lines and energy-efficient homes.

 

Details on the plan are few. Numbers tossed around range anywhere from $300 billion to $700 billion, and include other measures aimed at stimulating the economy such as tax cuts and money for businesses.

 

On Monday, President-elect Barack Obama said the measures would be "creating and saving 2.5 million jobs - jobs rebuilding our crumbling roads and bridges, modernizing our schools, and creating the clean energy infrastructure of the twenty-first century."

 

http://money.cnn.com/2008/11/26/news/economy/obama_infrastructure/index.htm?postversion=2008112608

Keep in mind, anything Obama would put into cities through his programs could easily be sucked back out again through his tax increases on high income earners.  I can't imagine Mayor Daley is looking with enthusiasm on the idea that tends of thousands of upscale city residents in Chicago now have less in their pockets to spend, especially with the ill winds of recession already blowing (home sales down 21%, prices down 9% - worse than the suburbs, many restaurants and stores closing, etc.)  Real estate prices in say Cincy type cities in the downtown are very high compared to metro area medians, and require significant free cash flow to afford.

 

Yes, in this moment in time we must do all we can to protect the riches 2% of the population. And I'm sure they all created tons jobs. None of them sit on their fat asses collecting their capital gains income each year. Obama will get to them shortly, but I've heard the top 2% won't have stock pile can goods just yet. Obama will simply let the cuts expire in 2011.  Cuts that should of never been made when your "fighin terrorism".

Keep in mind, anything Obama would put into cities through his programs could easily be sucked back out again through his tax increases on high income earners. I can't imagine Mayor Daley is looking with enthusiasm on the idea that tends of thousands of upscale city residents in Chicago now have less in their pockets to spend, especially with the ill winds of recession already blowing (home sales down 21%, prices down 9% - worse than the suburbs, many restaurants and stores closing, etc.) Real estate prices in say Cincy type cities in the downtown are very high compared to metro area medians, and require significant free cash flow to afford.

 

 

Cincy type cities? Cincy's downtown is cheap. The economy is very diversified in Cincy, it'll do better than most. A lot of the white collar workers are getting nice severance pay plus collecting unemployment after that.

 

I don't buy that trickle-down economics stuff as much as I used to. Not after finding out how inefficiently these companies operate. Innovation comes from desperation, not having it good. America is suppose to be the breeding ground of innovation. Companies like Exxonmobil, while their profit margins are still at the same percentage, they've been making record profits and have little to show the U.S. in terms of R&D and contributing to our economic growth. When it comes to trickle-down, I think we've been had. They've had 8 years to prove Bush's tax policies would be getter. Investment bankers and economists are starting to come out and write books regarding its failings.

David, I'll admit to not being that up on the prices in downtown Cincy, but from what I've seen of Indy and Louisville, most downtown condos are luxury units that are at a significant price premium to the rest of the market.  In fact, they are often marketed as pieds-a-terre.  The prices on many units in Indy aren't that much cheaper than Chicago.

 

I'd love to see some dirt cheap condos in downtown Cincy.  If you've got a link to some, please send my way as I am definitely looking for undervalued properties to purchase.

 

Cheap means different things to different people. I want to buy downtown, but I can't afford it, not compared to what I currently own. I can rent downtown, but not buy.

 

There is a condo unit in Downtown that is about 700 sq. ft., it is priced at $175k. That's $250/sq. ft. Of course every block makes the price per sq. ft. a different amount.

The McAlpin units seemed reasonably cheap - aren't they/weren't they 250-350k on avg?

 

Adam your house is nice as h#ll, and in a great neighborhood - you have nothing to complain about!

The McAlpin units seemed reasonably cheap - aren't they/weren't they 250-350k on avg?

 

Adam your house is nice as h#ll, and in a great neighborhood - you have nothing to complain about!

 

Thank you, I appreciate it, but our main desire is to move back into the CBD. I know I can walk there now, but it is fun as hell to walk out your door and everything awaits you. Plus, it's a great investment still, imo.

 

Yes, those prices are accurate about the McAlpin, my main point was that every block is different. That's like me saying there are 3 people in my livingroom, one is 15, the other is 50, and the third is 85. The average age is 50, but that's not representative of the age group in my livingroom.

Obama: I'll help cash-strapped states

The nation's governors make their case to the president-elect for federal money to stem the economic downturn. Experts say the sooner aid is given, the better.

By Jeanne Sahadi, CNNMoney.com senior writer

Last Updated: December 2, 2008: 2:04 PM ET

 

 

"NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- President-elect Barack Obama on Tuesday told governors from across the country that he wanted them to work with him to "help design" a massive economic recovery package he hopes to sign shortly after he takes office.

 

"If we're listening to our governors, we'll not only be doing what's right for our states, we'll be doing what's right for our country," Obama said in remarks to a meeting of the National Governors' Association (NGA) in Philadelphia. "That's how we'll grow our economy -- from the bottom-up."

http://money.cnn.com/2008/12/02/news/economy/obama_talks_aid_with_governors/index.htm?postversion=2008120214

Obama says Big Three automakers must not fail

President-elect voices opposition to court-supervised bankruptcy

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-says-big-three-automakers-must-not-fail

By John Spence, MarketWatch

 

"BOSTON (MarketWatch) -- President-elect Barack Obama said Sunday that the auto industry is the "backbone" of American manufacturing and that top automakers can't be allowed to go bankrupt.

 

Speaking on NBC's "Meet the Press," Obama said management at the Big Three auto companies -- Ford Motor Co., General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC -- made "repeated strategic mistakes."

 

But he added that millions of Americans rely on the Big Three for their jobs, directly or indirectly, so they should not be consigned to court-supervised bankruptcy as some people have suggested.

 

Obama said he wants assistance to be conditioned on restructuring."

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/Obama-says-Big-Three-automakers/story.aspx?guid={64498E11-8A43-4723-9294-C9315E4A639C}

Interesting opinion piece from

 

The New York Times

This Old House

By DAVID BROOKS

Published: December 9, 2008

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/09/opinion/09brooks.html?_r=3

 

The 1980s and 1990s made up the era of the great dispersal. Forty-three million people moved every year, and basically they moved outward — from inner-ring suburbs to far-flung exurbs on the metro fringe. For example, the population of metropolitan Pittsburgh declined by 8 percent in those years, but the developed land area of the Pittsburgh area sprawled outward by 43 percent.

 

If you asked people in that age of go-go suburbia what they wanted in their new housing developments, they often said they wanted a golf course. But the culture has changed. If you ask people today what they want, they’re more likely to say coffee shops, hiking trails and community centers.

 

People overshot the mark. They moved to the exurbs because they wanted space and order. But once there, they found that they were missing community and social bonds. So in the past years there has been a new trend. Meeting places are popping up across the suburban landscape.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/09/opinion/09brooks.html?_r=2

 

I think the guy who wrote the article is clearly wrong about how we should change the highway system to adapt to current traffic patterns. Highways are used to manipulate traffic patterns and the last thing we need is more highways. We need alternative modes of transportation and creative infill.

 

I definitely do not think they should take on the role of upgrading computers in classrooms  - it's very 1990s; leave that to local public officials who need to look good. It seems like his plan is pretty vague.  If his plan is to improve what currently exists, I don't think we'll see much improvement in rail infrastructure. Personally I would love to see large scale inter-city rail as well as a lot more money given to HUD and public-private partnerships who deal with mixed income housing. Fiber optics reaching every city would be nice too.

I definitely do not think they should take on the role of upgrading computers in classrooms - it's very 1990s; leave that to local public officials who need to look good. It seems like his plan is pretty vague. If his plan is to improve what currently exists, I don't think we'll see much improvement in rail infrastructure. Personally I would love to see large scale inter-city rail as well as a lot more money given to HUD and public-private partnerships who deal with mixed income housing. Fiber optics reaching every city would be nice too.

 

Totally agree with all of that.  Instead of computers, I'd like to see more teachers hired.  A lot of my friends and family are teachers and that's part of the reason, but hiring more would fix employment and class size at the same time.  That, and rail.  He hasn't said much about rail yet at all.  He talked about fiber optics during the campaign, and housing was one of his resume items so I don't see it getting left out.

^ Plus, computers don't become obsolete nearly as quickly today as they did in the '90s except in something like a graphic design lab.

Never heard of this guy.

LaHood to Get Transportation Post

Illinois Congressman and Friend of Emanuel to Be Second Republican in Obama Cabinet

 

By JONATHAN WEISMAN and CHRISTOPHER CONKEY

DECEMBER 18, 2008

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122955244259215675.html?mod=article-outset-box

 

Rep. Ray LaHood, an Illinois Republican and close friend of incoming White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, will be nominated as secretary of transportation, congressional officials said Wednesday.

Obama's Cabinet

 

Mr. LaHood would be the second Republican picked to serve in President-elect Barack Obama's cabinet, helping to fullfill a pledge for a bipartisan panel of advisers. The first was Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, whom Mr. Obama has asked to stay on in that role.

 

Mr. LaHood's resume on transport matters was seen as thin by some critics. He does not currently serve on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, although he has in the past. As a member of the House Appropriations Committee he did not work on transportation funding.

 

more: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122955244259215675.html?mod=article-outset-box