Conservatives call bull on UW bicycling study
Last week, a local financial executive called me a “stooge.”
I was somewhat insulted, but mostly curious.
There was no question what I had done to inspire the vitriol. It was my reporting on research that projected the physical and environmental benefits to be gained if Midwesterners turned to biking or walking for 50% of their trips under five miles. (The report can be found here).
For that, I was deemed a “pawn of the left.”
The criticism mirrored that of other self-described conservatives and made me wonder again why advocating for bicycling is deemed a liberal pursuit.
In an email to the critic, I posed the question this way: “It would seem that cycling, as a cheaper alternative to driving, would be a transportation option embraced by conservatives. It's cheaper for the individual and the required public investment, compared to road-building. In most debates, though, it seems conservatives view cycling as a liberal enterprise. I realize you're probably busy, but your insights into that divide would be welcome.”
He did respond, at some length, but later asked that I not share his dissertation on the blog. He explained that it might cost him clients, who hold an opposing view.
Fortunately, conservative blogger James Wigderson posted a somewhat similar critique on the MacIver Institute web site. Another post, in the Manhattan Institute's City Journal, argues bike lanes add to traffic congestion.
Wigderson has previously ridiculed investments in cycling infrastructure, and he followed a similar path in critiquing the study published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.
For a number of reasons, Wigderson found absurd the idea that Midwestern residents would bike or walk upwards of five miles to run errands.
“If I took a bicycle everywhere I went, I wouldn’t be able to use my cell phone,” he wrote. “The gasping for air would get me arrested for making obscene phone calls.”
His larger point was more practical than physical:
“My wife’s trips today to the grocery store, Menards hardware store and for take-out pizza all should have been on her bicycle. But of course that wouldn’t work. It’s hard to carry the latest Christmas outdoor decorations from the hardware store on the back of a Schwinn, even with a basket. Two gallons of milk, cereal for a week, bacon, eggs, bread, and light bulbs weren’t going to fit on the back of the bike, either. As for the carry out pizza, that might have worked. Just leave the two-liter of soda and the breadsticks behind.”
Wigderson ably expressed his view that the study’s preposition – that 50% of trips under five miles could be managed in non-motorized fashion – was unattainable.
But his post, and my financial friend’s response, failed to answer my larger question about conservatives and their opposition to investments in cycling.
I think it’s worthy of discussion, preferably in a thoughtful, fact-based, non-insulting manner.
74 Comments for "Conservatives call bull on UW bicycling study"
ShowMeYourArchambeau Nov 08, 2011 11:37 AM
One literal definition of conservatism is the inclination to maintain an existing or traditional order. While bikes have been around longer, there is no denying that automobiles became the existing and traditional order in the U.S. It's understandable that conservatives would want to protect this order. They honestly enjoy the use of cars for transportation and transit. And why not? For less than the cost of a large, specialty Starbucks coffee you can transport a fully loaded Hummer 6 to 8 miles. Gas is cheap and it is a truly amazing source of power.
My big question is should gas be as cheap as it is? Are we as a nation subsidizing gasoline and automobile transportation? This area may strike most people as a gray area of economics to measure, but I personally think we are subsizing these costs. I don't think we pay for the true environmental costs of our current transportation system. I think these costs are being passed on to our descendants. I don't think the users of roads pay the true costs of roads. Much of our road funding comes from the federal government, meaning non-users pay for our roads and vice versa, and while gas taxes cover a large amount, they don't cover the whole cost.
To me, this adds up to a subsidy, which is simply a form of welfare to the general populace. If we want to be fiscally conservative, we need to pay our true costs for our lifestyles. I think if we paid our true transportation costs, things like infrastructure layout would move more in favor of biking, etc. With all that said, my feeling is that the true cost of gas is still probably cheaper for the power that you get from it than many bike or alternative energy advocates would like to admit. Biking is a viable alternative in some situations, but it's hard to overcome cheap, plentiful power and there is nothing wrong with cheap power. We just need to be responsible in how we use it
nass713 Nov 08, 2011 11:42 AM
Either one is a conservative or one is not.
Are you suggesting that all who think your "report" on research was "bull" were actually conservatives or are you suggesting that no "self-described" liberal would consider your "report" as "bull".
Latenlife Nov 08, 2011 11:49 AM
Either one is a conservative or one is not.
Are you suggesting that all who think your "report" on research was "bull" were actually conservatives or are you suggesting that no "self-described" liberal would consider your "report" as "bull".
Latenlife Nov 08, 2011 11:49 AM
moriarity Nov 08, 2011 11:50 AM
I feel that conservatives prefer bike paths in the style of the Hank Aaron State Trail. It’s been built slowly as money is available through public aid and the Hank Aaron State Trail 5k Run and in a frugal fashion, uses current infrastructure for the most part, including an old railroad bed that is separate from traffic.
What conservatives don’t appreciate is guys like Chris Larson demanding a Hoan Bridge lane, which will cost a lot of money, while at the same time deliberately failing to mention the current construction of an on/off street path connecting Bay View & Downtown. This route uses the brand new Bay Street bike path and the off-street path scheduled to be built on an old railroad bed next to Barclay Street and will cost much less money.
JTBA Nov 08, 2011 11:51 AM
On average, it only takes me about 10 minutes longer riding my bike to work than driving my car. It's about a 6 mile commute and the route would be the same with either mode of transportation.
I agree that not every scenario is worthy of using a bike, but how many times have you driven to the store/gas station on a Sunday morning to pick up a newspaper?
yesman1000 Nov 08, 2011 12:01 PM
ShowMeYourArchambeau Nov 08, 2011 12:01 PM
I don't see biking as a conservative or a liberal issue. I myself love biking and when I was younger and living in Chicago, I often biked 10 miles one way to work. Recovering now from knee replacement -- I look forward to being able to bike again -- especially like to take the trail down to the lake and back up Lincoln Dr to Lakeshore Dr to Shorewood.
I read the article when you first printed it --- and I am sorry to say this --- but I thought it was one of the dumbest articles I had ever read.
As a journalist, I would have hoped that you would have vetted this article for having ANY practicality whatsoever !!! Who in the world would ever believe that folks would make half their trips of 5 miles or less on a bike -- in Wisconsin's winters? The too young? The too old? The infirm?
Why didn't the authors of the study make the hypothesis of everyone WALKING for 5 miles or less???
As another poster asked -- where do the groceries go?
As a journalist when you print something like this non-sensical study, you add validity to it. That is NOT good journalism.
I am thinking of doing a study of how much gas and pollution can be saved if everyone going to the state of Michigan were to swim there --- and added benefit would be a tremendous lessening of our older population --- and actually most of the younger ones too --- but as the first can't get health care in this country and the latter can't get jobs --- what a great idea !!!
dtatarowicz Nov 08, 2011 12:07 PM
As for the research I reported - I presented the findings as projections built on mathematical models, not as incontrovertible facts. It's a starting point for a discussion.
And on that note, my thanks to those who have offered their viewpoints. It's been informative and enjoyable reading.
T. Held Nov 08, 2011 12:20 PM
Goodgulf Nov 08, 2011 12:31 PM