Who would have ever thought that April 20th’s tragic accident on the Deepwater Horizon would result in a months-long continuous flow of oil into the Gulf of Mexico? When I wrote down my initial thoughts, the breech at the bottom of the Gulf was an absolute catastrophe in my mind, but no one else seemed to be paying much mind. I’ve lived near and played in the Gulf of Mexico; It’s one of my favorite places on earth. The damage this spill has and will cause is devastating to me personally on so many levels.

Perhaps our lawmakers “get” that, which is why it seems they are taking this disaster as an opportunity to underscore a clean energy policy push (remember, energy production is the #1 producer of greenhouse gas emissions, transportation is #2). The administration is no longer pressured to capitulate to drilling offshore to achieve a “climate change” bill, since there is no one who would be bold enough to push an offshore drilling platform in this context. Also, please note, I doubt you will hear the vernacular “climate change” associated with this effort any longer. It’s going to be “clean energy” all the way.

This still doesn’t tell me exactly what is going to happen with transportation re-authorization, but it bodes well for more sustainable policies. As long as we get there fast enough. Will we?

I am a little confused by these objections, because I recall that the pricing for the HOT Lanes was to be congestion based/variable, which, if managed appropriately should preclude a “back up at the HOT lanes terminus.”  On the other hand, I can absolutely understand Arlington’s desire to access the operational projections so that they can plan accordingly for the traffic which may flow into their streets as a result of the project. (It’s only mildly ironic that a more highly functioning interstate highway might cause inner city traffic engineers some panic.)

As for the perceived competition the Capital Beltway HOT Lanes will present for mass transit (and carpooling) proponents, isn’t one of the requirements of the project that high occupancy vehicles get to ride the HOT lanes at reduced cost (and in the case of transit vehicles, at no cost)? Is roadway P3 really in competition with Mass Transit?  I’d really like to know how much of this controversy is based on valid concerns and how much of this bruhaha is political fear-mongering.  Anyone on the inside care to chime in?