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"
Post-modern conservatism is driven purely by corporate profits and religious dogma. Neither of those factions is, understandably, a fan of facts.
AtomicIsBack Nov 08, 2011 9:11 AM
Also, conservatives get a little more judgmental when a report takes an outlandish view for what a normal trip would be. From google maps, a five mile trip would be from the zoo to the Ambassador Hotel, and would take 42 minutes by bike (and 37 by bus). I don't have an extra hour and a half. I would have to think most people's errands involve picking something or dropping something off. Finally, the very first sentence that states "$7Bil in improved air quality." This is right out of the Al Gore play book. There's not a market for air quality. Now the report states this savings is from less mortality and a decrease in health care cost. Completely believable and without the slant of your opening sentence.
The above is my conservative feelings, the cut and dry truth is that biking for means would be realistic for literally 1%, and liberals seem to have a "what about my needs" approach.
ShowMeYourArchambeau Nov 08, 2011 9:47 AM
MilkweedHummingbird Nov 08, 2011 9:53 AM
MilkweedHummingbird Nov 08, 2011 9:53 AM
The facts are clear. As a species (whatever flag you wave) there will be massive repercussions if we don't start thinking about climate change and acknowledging its truth. And we may do ourselves in sooner if we leave to rot an infrastructure that is not only ineffective, costly and antiquated but also promotes inactivity and chronic disease in our children.
MilkweedHummingbird Nov 08, 2011 10:03 AM
Another figure worth thinking about in terms of "time" is how much sooner the significant number completely inactive people will have to live on earth. So you gain 5 minutes driving to and from some place and you lose 10-20 years life expectancy joining an ever-growing obesity and inactivity epidemic. Will you miss your grandchildren's first birthday? Will you be able to retire and be healthy enough to see the world? Will your future generations have a shorter and shorter life expectancy due to the decisions we made today? None of us can answer that yet, but the least we can do is work together to do what's right for future generations no matter what the supposed "economic" cost is in an economic model designed for the elite by the elite.
MilkweedHummingbird Nov 08, 2011 10:13 AM
akpackbrewbadger Nov 08, 2011 10:58 AM
JTBA Nov 08, 2011 11:29 AM
All of these points - at the least the end results - are claimed by the GOP / Tea Party / Koch Brothers as opposite views of the centrist "left". Why have they not claimed them for themselves?
Oh, wait, that's right.....slight, albeit very slight...reduction in revenue for energy companies, the backbone of radical right funding.
And, of course, despite the scientific facts to the contrary, there is no evidence of global warming, so more biking wouldn't have any impact at all on that, either....since it's all a hoax.
Nice work, Tom. It's not a left or right thing...it's the right thing to do for a number of diverse reasons. Can't that just be justification enough these days?
pjfuller Nov 08, 2011 11:32 AM