Yup, that’s the story flying around on the internet today: bloggers and (maybe) others are pushing Chris Dodd for Senate Majority Leader. Capitol Watch has the story.
And, well, it isn’t that bad of an idea. It’s a role I actually think he might be better suited to than president, given his long Senate experience. And right now, I can’t name many people who are happy with Harry Reid as Majority Leader… so why not?
15 responses so far ↓
Dodd’s fake filibuster on Monday was an empty exercise in self-promotion. How this qualifies him to be Majority Leader, I can’t quite figure out (if the Senate tries to vote on a bill that Markos Moulitsas disapproves of, will Dodd filibuster himself?).
A question for my friends on the left: your votes, your money, and your hard work are the reasons the Democrats retook Congress. Why, then, do you guys continually settle for substance-free “victories” like the Dodd “filibuster”? Why are you such cheap dates?
What? I thought the leftwing bloggers wanted him to be president and that we were watching “Dodd-mania” consume the blogosphere!
Leftwing bloggers want him to be majority leader now. I guess they’re finally giving up on that presidential wet dream they have. Perhaps they are moving on to a more viable presidential candidate… like Lyndon Johnson’s corpse.
Dodd isn’t as big in the progressive blogosphere as you seem to think. For about a month when he was the only candidate outside of Gravel and Kucinich to speak out and act strongly in favor of Dem causes, he caught fire, but he’s since fallen off.
I think he would be a decent majority leader, mostly just because I agree with him on a lot of major issues and trust his liberal cred. The filibuster is sort of irrelevant, but it shows that he’s in the right place on that crucially important issue, in addition to a host of others.
Will_Vernon said:
Iowa?
If Dodd was Senate Majority Leader do you think then Fairfield County’s traffic woes would finally get addressed?
How many billions of dollars of productivity are wasted every year while our Connecticut residents idle in ridiculous traffic jams?
I can believe that the Democrats would want Dodd as the Majority Leader.
They wanted a liberal from Massachusetts as their presidential candidate in 2004. They wanted a liberal from San Francisco as Speaker of the House. And it looks to me like they will want a liberal from Chicago as their presidential candidate in 2008. Reid is a pro-life, previously moderate Democrat from Nevada — they probably view their decision to have him in that role as a mistake. What they need, according to their trends for picking their leaders, is a liberal from the Northeast. Dodd fits perfectly in that picture.
If Dodd was Senate Majority Leader do you think then Fairfield County’s traffic woes would finally get addressed?
No. The traffic in Fairfield County would be just as bad. This is because of the environmental impact statements, NIMBY concerns, public transport advocates, etc. It’s only partly about the money. Even if Shays were chairman of the Transportation Committee and if Dodd were majority leader and Lieberman were Chairman of the Senate Transportation Committee, I-95 would still be three lanes, the Merritt Parkway would still be two lanes, and Super 7 would exist only on paper.
Consider that Super 7 never got built. The state ALREADY OWNS THE LAND, and land acquisition is a huge expense in Fairfield County. Yet for 30 years or so, Super 7 has come up every couple of years, only to be vehemently opposed by Wilton. Republican legislator Toni Boucher is so militantly against the prospect of Super 7 being built that she actually tried to have the state sell the land so the road would be almost impossible to build in the future. Don’t tell me for a minute that wetlands and other environmental concerns wouldn’t nix Super 7 if the money were to be available.
Public transportation is often cited as an alternative. But even there, Fairfield County residents really don’t want more people to take the train, at least from their towns. Darien residents are firmly against any effort to expand the parking lots at Darien train stations, because they fear that doing so would create more traffic for Darien. So we now have a situation where we are against more people taking the train because it would create more road traffic.
The state owns a swath of land on each side of the Merritt Parkway, yet the historical bridges and the fact that it’s on the National Register of Historic Places is going to make expanding that highway nearly impossible. But we can’t even figure out how to build an exit ramp from the Merritt to Route 7! That wasn’t about the money: the money had been allocated. A judge stopped the construction of that interchange at the last minute. I don’t know who’s at fault: the CT DOT or the people who opposed it or both, but in the end, the project got held up. So if we can’t built an interchange betweeen two existing roads, how the heck are we going to be able to widen a highway?
Even when the entrance ramp from North Street in Greenwich to the Merritt Parkway was redone, the Greenwich Time was filled with letters opposing the project. This was a place where you previously had to sit at a stop sign and then floor it into 55 mph traffic and hope you weren’t obliterated in the process. And right now on the Merritt, in Trumbull, there’s a stop sign entrance that’s over the hump of a hill, so you sort of have to pull out in traffic and pray.
Widening I-95 is really not financially feasible: land acquisition costs through Greenwich, Stamford, Darien, Westport, etc. would be prohibitive. I guess if you were to make 95 4 lanes in each direction from the NY border to Route 7, you’d be talking somewhere in the neighborhood of the Big Dig. And even if the money could get approved, there’d be fierce local opposition for various reasons: we should be spending the money on trains, environmental, etc.
newlondoncalling said:
Simple answer - the Senate leadership has been so weak for so long that we welcome any little indication that SOMEONE is willing to step up to the plate.
Believe me, being a Democrat these days is sometimes very discouraging. It would be much easier to be a Republican, where the bar is so low EVERYONE expects you to do the wrong thing.
As for “substance-free victories”, if Dodd didn’t stand up, we’d already have telecom immunity. That’s more substance than we’ve gotten in a long time.
gmr
while I agree with your reasoning I personally think that what we need is leadership with the balls to do what needs to be done for the good of the future of the state. CT has lost something like 150,000 residents between the ages of 18-34 over the last 10 years or so (I can find the exact statistic if it’s important to you) and thank goodness because if they were all still here no one would be able to get anywhere in Fairfield County.
Public transportation is a nice little catch phrase for people who don’t want to widen the highways but who is going to pick me up at the train station and drive me the 5 miles to my job in Westport; or for that matter take me back when my ever varying end of work day time comes? The truth about public transportation is that it is a trade off. Time for money. It may not cost the state as much. It may not cost the commuter as much. But it affects the quality of life greatly. The parent who was home for dinner when he drove his car is now home significantly later because he is taking the train and then waiting for a bus; both of which make numerous stops. He or she sees his or her children less. The hard worker who gives his best to the company when he drives in has less gas at the end of the day because he has to get up 90 minutes earlier to catch a train and a bus and then walk to his job and ends up eating his dinner right before going to bed which means he doesn’t sleep well.
I’m reminded of the old axiom; “One can always make more money but we only have a finite amount of time.”
TBCT brings up the matter of productivity and I agree but what about the environment? All those vehicles sitting there idling for hours and hours wastes gas, wastes time and pollutes the atmosphere.
What about all the tractor trailer sitting in traffic all the time? Do you think the trucking companies want to put hubs or even do business in CT if they know that it takes an extra 3 or 4 hours to cross the state because of the traffic?
I’ve watched this problem go from bad to worse to abysmal over the last 2 decades. The improvements in Bridgeport only made it easier to get through Stratford. Now instead of hitting traffic at the Milford line you pile into it at the RT 8 interchange which goes from 5 lanes to 3 before you even reach Black Rock.
The nights when there are events at Harbor Yard also make for a horrible ride home.
There are so many reasons to widen I-95 and the Parkway and only silly self involved reasons not to. This state loses tax revenue, jobs and promising residents because of traffic. The only way the problem will get better at this point is if Fairfield County loses more jobs, CT loses more residents, there is suddenly affordable housing for working class people in Fairfield County (as if that would ever happen; in fact Bridgeport, pretty much the only place left for the working poor is becoming way more expensive as the city rebuilds itself) or if there are massive infrastructure upgrades to either the public transportation system or the highways.
Now I personally believe that Tolls are the answer. Every state that borders us has tolls on their highways (with the possible exception of RI but I’m not sure as I haven’t driven through in awhile). Why are we so generous? The people who use the highways the most, transportation companies and commuters, should be the ones to foot the largest portion of the costs in maintaining and improving it.
It may take time and prudent investing to raise the money; and having Dodd as majority leader certainly couldn’t hurt; but it is doable.
And widening the highways isn’t the only answer. With improvements to bridges and off ramps I-95 could go Double Decker like pretty much every highway in L.A. and many in NY. It wouldn’t be as pretty but it would make life in CT a lot more appealing to both workers and employers.
Regular readers of this blog know that I have been openly mocking the Dodd Presidential campaign since the first poll numbers came out. To summarize: Dodd should be embarassed that after 20+ years representing CT he polls no better than fourth among his own party members in his own state!
That said, here’s some food for thought. Turn back the clock a few years (fifteen?). Didn’t Dodd loose by one vote to Sen. Daschle (sp?) to be the Dems leader in the Senate? I’ll bet that if he had won that vote his candidacy today would be in much better stead.
Robert,
I agree with you that more needs to be done to get people to and from the train stations. However, I disagree with you that it is more time consuming. I know a gentleman in lower Fairfield country that works in New York. He began taking the train about 2 years ago. He found that on average it saved him 45 minutes getting too work and getting home from work, because he no longer had to sit in traffic. He has used the extra time to work out and has lost a substantial amount of weight.
For 95, DOT has found the structure could not support a double decker design, if we would wish to do so we would have to completely rebuild 95 from scratch. Widening 95 would also be impossible due to the excessive costs. The only way to alleviate traffic on 95 is to increase public transportation.
Hey, I heard the Dem State Central Christmas Party is tonight!
Don’t forget to wear your Anti-Joe Buttons and Pins.
And watch out for DiLardo under the misteltoe.
Frankly I wouldn’t trust our DOT to make me a tuna fish sandwich. That said, prohibitive cost is just another way of saying that sacrifices have to be made for the future of the state.
Can you argue that doubling the capacity from New Haven to the New York line wouldn’t be unbelievably good for the economy and well being of the state?
Additionally I would point out that every single train station pretty much all the way down the coast is at capacity for parking all the time. What parking that there is is expensive and often neither convenient nor safe. I just drove past the Saugatuck station a few minutes ago. They have the cars double parked down there in the commuter lots. Hope nobody in that back row needs to use their car anytime soon.
And comparing New York and anwhere in CT is apples and oranges. Especially in Manhatten but elsewhere as well. In most of lower NY a public transportation system already exists. It has been built up for decades and decisions that have been made by state and local governement have always been tempered by the knowledge that they must allow for extra funds to increase bus lines, build more bus and train stations, hire more city employees, make sure there are safe and useable sidewalks and walkways from the aforementioned stations to major areas of employment, industry and commerce, and so forth.
What you are suggesting is that we invest billions and force towns to invest millions more on a public transportation system. That we buy the buses, create the bus lines, hire the employees, increase the train schedule (maybe even buy new trains?), reactivate old spur lines and activate new ones (dig subway lines?), force towns to massively increase railroad parking, widen roads to and from the train stations, build bus stops, widen and in many cases create sidewalks and walkways and provide the law enforcement and town employees to make this system safe and functional and maintain it. All of this on the hope…yes the hope, that CT residents will leave their cars at home and take a public transportations system that has thus far has proven wildly unpopular. All on the hope that we could decrease the number of cars on the road in fairfield county by anywhere from 10-15% (which is admittedly my own guesstimation but I don’t believe a reduction by any less than that would make a significant enough difference to effect our traffic problems).
And what happens when the population or transportation industry grows to replace those who do take public transport? And what about small businesses and tractor trailers? I see almsot as many of those on the highway as I do commuters. They aren’t going to take public transportation.
I took the train to Brooklyn a few months ago with a friend. The cost of the MTA ride and the subway to our final desitination was double what it would have cost me to just drive in even with the parking fees. Why would I do that again? If you already own a car and are paying insurance and maintenance the lure of public transportation is greatly reduced.
We know the residents of CT will use the highway if capacity is increased. We do not know if they will use public transport.
And regardless of all that, a public transportation system would only patch the problem at this point. Maybe we could go a decade or two before the situation became unbearable and people and job started leaving CT in droves (although some would argue that they already are). Then it would be that much harder, and that much more inconvenient to drivers and taxpayers when we finally have to do what should be done now. Increase the infrastructure.
Public transportation can work for some. I used to work in downtown Bridgeport and lived in downtown Greenwich. I took the train several times a month: but that just happened to be easy. There was a reverse commute express stop in Greenwich, and then the train stopped in Bridgeport. Minimal walking on each end. Then the company moved to Milford, where there weren’t even sidewalks. To get to midtown Manhattan from the New Haven line corridor is almost certainly faster via train than driving, provided you can park your car near the station.
One thing I don’t understand about public transportation systems around the country is the lack of parking. It seems that many commuter rail systems — which can cost hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars to build — don’t have adequate parking. New parking garages aren’t that expensive, especially compared to the cost of laying the rail and buying the railcars. Yet almost every Metro North station severely lacks parking, and in fact there’s severe local opposition to expanding parking.
I like the concept of tolls — in theory. Especially if they employed congestion based pricing. If 95 were free in the middle of the night but expensive during rush hour, that would push more people to avoid rush hour. Either that, or they’d demand a higher salary for rush hour jobs, and employers would shift working times. However, this is really all academic, as 95 has way too many exits and entrances to make tolls really viable, unless a mandatory EZ Pass type system could operate at all entrance and exit ramps. Between Greenwic and Bridgeport there are over 25 exits, or about 1 per mile. People could avoid Garden state style tolls fairly easily.
Maybe we’ll get a leader who will push through necessary transportation infrastructure projects, but I doubt it. These things can be tied up in the courts for years just for environmental reasons…
Well as far as the tolls go the one NY has at our state line (just past Old Greenwich) seems to work just fine for them. What cracks me up about that one is NY isn’t even charging people for using their highways the way the Mass Pike and the NJ Pike do (by distance traveled from entrance point to exit point) or to cross an expensive bridge like many of thier other tolls. The cost is the same whether you drove all the way across NY or if you got on I-95 1 exit before the toll.
They don’t even have a toll where you enter NY. Just exiting, which means they are literally charging people to enter CT. But we don’t. How foolish is that?
I agree there are environmental issues to consider but honestly I don’t think the obstacles are insurmountable for someone who can get the people of CT and the legislature on board. If the people recognize the need for a thing and the value of a thing then it won’t matter what a few NIMBY’s and tree huggers do.
You must log in to post a comment.