H 32°, L 7° | Tomorrow: 
H 17°, L 4°For hip progressives, there is nothing lamer than admitting you are a Democrat who likes Barack Obama. It’s far cooler to show your independence by proclaiming, “I would have voted for John McCain in 2000,” or even better, “We need a third party.” It perplexes me why one would want to vote for a man who sold his soul to get elected president; however, I can appreciate the desire to see our two-party system opened up to a third party.
A third party for the sake of a third party or a party with a liberal platform that sounds like Dennis Kucinich’s greatest hits are likely to derail before they leave the station, but history has shown that third parties focused on one key issue can be successful. Although the thought of a “Packers Suck Party” is tempting, a more viable option is the Mass Transit Party.
Whereas third-parties’ past have often been based around being anti-something-or-other — Dixiecrats (black people), Know-Nothings (immigrants) — the MTP promotes our national desire for affordable and accessible public transportation. Coincidentally, the current economic climate is the perfect stop from which the MTP can help America embark on its journey back to economic prosperity.
It’s no secret the American economy is currently the equivalent of a massive train wreck. The last time America faced such dire economic times, Franklin D. Roosevelt implemented the New Deal, which included a massive jobs program to build the nation’s infrastructure. If the New Deal can help break the Great Depression, an enormous mass transit infrastructure program can certainly help the nation back up the truck on Phil Gramm’s mere mental recession.
The short-term gain will be an economy riding along via the production of actual infrastructure — not funny money mortgage options — and in the long-term, the public transportation network will become a more tangible benefit for all.
The other big issues putting the brakes on the nation are energy costs and energy dependence. The MTP is the logical home for those Americans who hate paying $4 for a gallon of gas while funding oppressive regimes worldwide. Public transportation is a winner on all accounts as commuters save money while reducing their energy consumption. One might even say it’s patriotic to take the train.
Furthermore, the MTP will prove that it is a uniter and not a divider by bringing together an eclectic group inspired by mass transit’s energy-related benefits. Tree-hugging environmentalists who are stoked by mass transit’s pollution reduction will find themselves sitting across the aisle from the car lovin’ Joe-Sixpacks who are trying to save a few Benjamins on gas for their SUVs.
While the MTP is most likely to appeal to those run over by the craptacular-economy bus, it will still provide a welcome vehicle for social issue voters. For pro-choice folks, the MTP will provide accessible and affordable transportation to Planned Parenthood, and for the pro-life people, it will provide that same level of environmentally friendly service to those heading to the latest Planned Parenthood protest. And the party will be fair to both gays and straights by honoring all marriages and offering the weekend family discount to all — no questions asked.
When the focus turns to the lands beyond America’s shores, conventional wisdom would probably hold that mass transit has no role to play in foreign affairs. After all, train-mounted guns are so World War I. However, that assumption is just plain wrong. The MTP understands that the terrorists hate us for our freedom to move about the country and is committed to keeping America safe from their dastardly deeds. Therefore, Americans can rest assured that terrorists are most decidedly not welcome on the nation’s buses and trolleys.
Also, just as mass transit will be delivered to the people, wherever they might be, our military forces will be delivered to where the evil-doers are. Though Saddam Hussein was probably a train-hater, the MTP will not send our troops into future boondoggles like Iraq. And the party will try to avoid conflicts by talking to our foreign enemies, just as it will talk to enemies here at home — such as John McCain, who wants to eliminate Amtrak.
Although the election is less than three weeks away, there is still time for the American people to make a mass transit from the Republicans and Democrats to this new third-party sensation. The Mass Transit Party will provide economic recovery, energy independence and true bipartisanship, and it will even dust off that old Quad City DJ’s “C’Mon and Ride It (The Train)” song as its theme song. There is no doubt the Mass Transit Party truly is “Trains We Can Believe In.”
Zachary Schuster ([email protected]) is a graduate student studying water resources engineering. He would like to give a SO to the original mass transit guru Drew.
IP hash: ff3fb8bd
Are you serious or is this a joke?
Mass transit is already offered. Mopeds/motorcycles get 75-100 MPG. Fuel Cells and electric cars are the way of the future.
I like mass transit, but American cities are too spread out for it to be effective.
IP hash: 890859b2
Finally, someone else who gets it!
Laying 100s of 1000s of miles of railroad track is the best way to put people back to work, building infrastructure that will solve this country’s greatest problem: energy.
All roads lead to energy and all problems stem from it in one way or another. Every problem this country has from crime to taxes, terrorists to unemployment, can be connected - directly or indirectly - to our nation’s terrible waste of extremely expensive imported oil-based energy.
Unlike many things that the socialists and communists, uhm, I mean, Democrats have come up with, this is actually something that might benefit everyone. Energy independence - if we can get past all the partisan bull to achieve it - is the greatest gift we could leave our offspring.
Many of The New Deal policies worked out to be failures. Socialist insecurity, healthcare, etc. They are all wealth redistribution, based on the premise that people who contribute nothing to society have the right to take something out just because they are alive. But laying rail and ramping up our national rail infrastructure for conversion to rail could be The New Deal that actually works.
IP hash: b43eab93
There will be responses to your article claiming all mass transit is a boondoggle for the taxpayer. They should STFU and realize that this country has a 1960s infrastructure, government’s role is to take on unprofitable and necessary mega-projects, and that cheap-o republicans will probably be the first to ride on said transit.
(Have you yet to see a Republican return their Social Security check?)
IP hash: 440cebb2
The Mass Transit Party lives!
IP hash: 6fabc93d
“… the premise that people who contribute nothing to society have the right to take something out just because they are alive.”
Isn’t that the downside of being “pro-life”? With the good comes the bad; deal with it and don’t expect to have it both ways.
IP hash: 2ac6cc9b
I think the Onion sums it up best:
“Report: 98% of US commuters favor public transportation for others”
IP hash: 655ec754
Don’t you have to work and put money into the Social Security pool in order to receive its benefits when you are old or no longer able to work? This isn’t just taking something out of society because you are alive, then, is it? And, perhaps more people will work if they have an easy way to get to their jobs (if there are any jobs to be had…).
IP hash: bd2f9acd
“I like mass transit, but American cities are too spread out for it to be effective.”
That’s a result of sprawl, which is the result of cities and towns being allowed to “annex” additional territory into its limits (very similar to the way a king seeks t constantly expand his kingdom, and more I think about it, done for many if not all of the same reasons, too), not the ineffectiveness of public transportation.
You go to an area that has relatively decent public transportation (like Los Angles or San Francisco) and then visit a place that doesn’t (like Columbus, Ohio or Dallas/Fort Worth, Texas) and you’ll see the difference. California is spread out (just try driving around the San Francisco or Los Angles and you’ll appreciate just how much so) and public transit there works.
—
Those who work put money into Socialist Security. Not like they have any choice in the matter. The government puts a gun to your head (and your boss’ head for the other half of the “contribution”) and forces you to “save” for your retirement. And if you think that’s being over dramatic, stop making your Socialist Security contributions and soon enough men with first with papers then with badges and later guns will show up.
Socialist Security is a scam, pure and simple. I have a grandfather who died 3 weeks before he would have drawn his first check. Like most from his bygone era, he worked every day of his life first as a truck driver (until the company he worked for got screwed by the boys up top when they embezzled all the money and ran the company into the ground) and later as a dock worker at a terminal.
My grandmother now gets a surviving spouse benefit of less than $200. Those were my grandfather’s wages, money he earned and he had the right to enjoy them while he was alive. He was a wise man and undoubtedly would have chosen to save most of it, just like he did with his wages. And had he been able to do that - instead of being forced give it to the government - that money could have been my grandmother’s inheritance. My mothers inheritance. And someday mine. But instead, it was a free donation to the United States Government. And what did they do with it? Who the hell knows. They probably don’t even know.
The conservatives proposed a wonderful compromise that could have given everybody what they wanted: privatizing Socialist Security - if the person desired to do so. I can make better investments than the government ever could. Warren Buffet and I are making money in the stock market right now, while everyone else sits around saying “What happened?” But special interests, most if not all of them from the liberal side - came together to snowball the public and defeat the proposal. The key play of the day was to scare old people and make them think the government was going to cut off social security. It was nothing of the sort. The program would have allowed those that wanted to (yes, participation WAS voluntary) invest their own money to do so, in place of having the government do it for them. Its so that people like me don’t have to be reduced to the lowest common denominator by yet another wealth redistribution system.
Then there are those who don’t work (for whatever reason, including they just don’t really feel like it) get welfare/foodstamps/section 8, etc. Those were the New Deal programs I was referring to and the people who think they are entitled to something just because they were hatched.
Also, I am pro-Choice. So don’t try to peg me for one of those nutty conservatives who is always trying to give away everything to rich friends so fast. I don’t fit any of the molds because I think for myself. All of the parties have a good idea every once in a while. The liberals have championed public transportation for some time and conservatives have mostly dumped on it. Conservatives, on the other hand, dared to try and make a positive adjustment to liberal-created Socialist Security and they got hung out to dry for it.
In fact, I’ll take the above a step further and state that I am Pro-Population Control. Hey, there is another issue no one wants to touch. Maybe if we addressed the population control issue, then we wouldn’t need to worry about the transportation issue. Now that is something to think about. What if there were no people needing transportation…