Voice in the Wilderness

What really causes campus protests

Today, I found "The Force Skeptics Page" by Roger M. Wilcox (hat tip Russell and McCullough). It is riotously funny!

"Palpatine shot such lightning bolts from his fingertips at another Jedi, Luke Skywalker, during the siege on the second Death Star. The young Jedi Knight may have been taught how to parry blaster bolts with his light saber, but Jedi "Master" Yoda had failed to instruct him in how to parry lightning bolts. "

Funny that Master Yoda did not foresee that little eventuality.

However, I'd have to disagree with Mr. Wilcox on influencing the weak minded. If you substitute "anonymous, inaccurate email" or "controversial conservative speaker" for "the Force", it clear that the weak minded can be very easily influenced....especially campus protesters.

Local Environmentalists Stick Their Head in the Sand Filter at CAMPO-TX DOT-SOS Confab

I recently received a postcard invite (colored green, of course) from Save our Springs (SOS), about a mutual confabulation they were putting on with the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO), and the Texas Department of Transportation (TX DOT). The topic was the development of south Mopac and SH 45 in southern Travis county. Being a denizen of southwest Austin, concerned taxpayer, and curious blogger, I decided to attend.

Mike Aulick of CAMPO rifled through their stock presentation (available here) that included some striking numbers. In 2000, there were 1.16M people in the Williamson/Travis/Hays county area. By 2030, there could be up to 2.75M, resulting in nearly 6M additional daily commute trips/day. Much of that population growth is moving into southern Travis and northern Hays county. Thus, Mopac needs to be expanded and SH 45 needs to be developed.

Spokesdude Colin Clark then presented SOS' slickly produced piece of media manipulation (where do they get the money for these technological wonders?) showing the horrors of south Mopac overpasses and the SH45 interchange: more noise and unsightly overpasses. Sadly for SOS, it seems that CAMPO plans to build underpasses at the main crossroads and the noise can be mitigated in a number off different ways. (By the way Colin, you seem like a pretty bright guy so I hope you'll heed this advice: when you go to present to regular citizens and voters, don't dress like a dope-smoking, college slacker. Wear a dress shirt, slacks, penny loafers and maybe a tie; it will immensely increase your credibility with every day working folk).

SOS' solution to the area's mobility problems seems to be using the tax money meant for roads to buy tracts of land then set this land apart as "preserves" to prevent any road or housing development on them. I'm not making this up. The SOS presentation and website seem totally oblivious to the fact that area is going to increase in population by as much as 1.6M people in the next 25 years. The only solution they offer is to make less land available to house and serve the area's rapidly growing population.

Furthermore, SOS appears ready to use liberals' favorite tool of social control to impose their will, the judiciary. When asked about SOS' potential legal actions in regards to SH 45, Mr. Clark ominously replied that SOS would do what is "necessary to protect the aquifer".

So there you have it, you 3-4 kid having, SUV driving, Salt Lick BBQ patronizing, Republican-voting Hays county residents. Austin liberals are going to sue on behalf of every rare, spotted bird and underground Karst feature they can find to force you into a longer commute and less time with your family. In this post-Columbine era, I would think this attitude would be unconscionable. SOS would rather spend the money that should be used to provide mobility solutions to prevent a solution with a more direct route to Austin, thus causing you to incur more vehicle miles traveled (VMT's). Curiously, another SOS speaker claimed that a "sustainable" mobility strategy must include a reduced number of VMT's per person, so SOS' recommendation seems to be at odds with its stated strategy.

Of course, we're all for understanding the environmental impacts of housing and road development and using the latest technologies and construction techniques to mitigate them. But to hear SOS talk, with their robotic recitation of "sustainability" and "induced demand", you would think that the biggest evil in the world were land developers and highway contractors, clandestinely plotting environmental holocaust in smoky backrooms.

What seems lost on our local environmental heroes is that large numbers of people are choosing to move to central Texas to work and raise their families. Some developers may be shady, but generally most are simply responding to the number of people moving to a region and choosing to invest their hard won dollars in projects that will yield a suitable return. In a perverse way, it is the same thinking environmental groups go through when they plot an obstructionist lawsuit on behalf of some endangered species: where can we get the most bang for the buck?

Instead of social manipulation and judicial obstruction, it would be more helpful if SOS pulled their head out of the sand filter and offered some constructive dialogue on the regional mobility and housing issues facing the region over the next 25 years, such as:

• Where should housing and office space be built for the projected 1.6M new residents in the next 25 years?
• How can more single-family dwellings be built over environmentally sensitive areas in a way that does not threaten the environment?
• What new technologies should be developed to help mitigate the environmental impact of roads and housing development? How can these technologies be reduced in cost while retaining their efficacy?
• Establishing an inclusive, diverse ethical dialogue on the rights and needs of humankind versus the needs of the animal kingdom and natural environment. How can conflicts be avoided? When a conflict cannot be avoided, which takes precedence? This dialogue should be undertaken before any legal action against a proposed mobility solution to ensure the moral sufficiency of the lawsuit.

Last Saturday, Austinites voted to force their will on minorities though the smoking ban and the ACC "Borg" referendum to "assimilate" parts of Austin with small voter blocs. Maybe we should change the city tagline to "Keep Austin Feared".

I'll post more on the election after I have some more time to analyze the data to see if there's any hidden stories. In the meantime enjoy this riotously funny post from schliefkevision.com about AUSThin, a group following the lead of the anti-smoking crusaders with a "campaign to end obesity and fatness within Austin's fair borders".