NRDC's depiction of how hard states are hit by gas costs, ranked by percentage of income spent.

An attempt to answer that question was released Tuesday [PDF] by the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC), which has ranked the "oil vulnerability" of the 50 states for three years running.

On its face, the list is unsurprising: Mississippi remains in first place, with the average driver spending more than 9 percent of annual income on gas, while Massachusetts, New York, and Connecticut were rated the least oil-dependent states. Yet NRDC's analysis also offers some instructive tidbits:

• New York is the overwhelming leader in transit -- but not much else. The state dedicated 41 percent of its federal transportation money to transit as opposed to roads in 2007, making it the benchmark by which NRDC measured all others. Yet that was only enough to hit No. 6 on the overall scale of sustainable energy use, thanks to the state's lack of a low-carbon or renewable fuel standard, action on smart growth, and incentives for hybrid vehicles.

• New Jersey's transit spending may not be getting through to some of its drivers. The state ranked second behind New York with 30 percent of transport cash used on transit, but the state's average driver spent $2,286 on gas last year compared with $1,654 in New York. It's not due to a high state gas tax; New Jersey's is one of the lowest in the nation. 

• Capitol Hill can set the pace for reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Only six states have set targets for shrinking their VMT, a goal that Transportation Secretary LaHood has called essential to fighting climate change. Without congressional passage of legislation making VMT reduction a national priority, it's difficult to see a majority of states taking action individually in the near term.

• Reputations may be deceiving. Georgia, where all but 23 of 5,400 DOT employees focus on roads, saw its federal transit grants frozen this month due to financial mismanagement and spends less than 7 percent of its transport budget on transit. But the state ranked 17th on NRDC's list, just ahead of Minnesota -- the progressive-leaning home of House infrastructure committee chairman Jim Oberstar.
  

“We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars…”
-- Barack Obama's inaugural address.

“The last thing this nation needs now is a stimulus plan aimed at the development of non-gasoline-powered automobiles married with extensive rehabilitation of the highway system.”
-- James Howard Kunstler

With the president-elect, Congress and the current White House divided on how or if American taxpayers should save the domestic auto industry, General Motors is taking its case directly to the public with this video and accompanying web site. More threat than appeal, the message, in a nutshell, is "Do it, or else."

On gmfactsandfiction.com, the reeling giant "Tells It Like It Is":

From plants to parks. From dealerships to driveways. From gas stations to grocery stores. What happens in the automotive industry affects each and every one of us. In fact, the collapse of the U.S.-based auto industry wouldn't just impact the more than 239,000 Americans directly employed by the Big Three. One out of every 10 people in America is employed in a service that is related to the U.S. auto industry. If a plant closes, so does its suppliers, the local stores, the hot dog vendors, and the local restaurants. The effect would be devastating in ways of which you never have thought.

Writing your congressperson yet? Well what are you gonna do now that your "suppliers and dealers" can't get credit? Who's gonna keep you supplied, man?

In all seriousness, while its fate is on the minds of many, New Yorkers included, GM may not be helping its case here. Rather than inspiring confidence that the company would put taxpayer dollars to good use, the "Facts and Fiction" campaign reeks of desperation and even paranoia. (See the web site's "Submit a Myth" widget: "If you’ve read or heard something about GM we’d love to know about it so that we can have an opportunity to address it.") Again revealing itself to be two steps behind, GM doesn't seem to have caught on to the fact that Americans are currently more receptive to change than fear mongering.

So that's the problem, huh? Think GM can't change? GM can change, baby. Just give GM another chance.

Union Station, Denver, CO

T4A has set up a page for members of the public to send their own version to Obama via e-mail.

While you're at it, you can also outline your vision for the country, complete with photos and video, for the incoming White House team at change.gov. The T4A vision summary and Obama urban policy platform might be good jumping-off points.

The T4A letter appears in full after the jump.

What will you say to President-elect Obama? 

Dear President-elect Obama:

First of all...Congratulations! Your election, and results from down-ballot votes around the country, represents a resounding call for a new direction.

The Transportation for America campaign, representing more than 100 organizations and thousands of energized citizens around the country, salutes you. And we join you in seeking infrastructure investment that will stimulate the economy now and lay the groundwork for a clean-energy future that is less dependent on oil.

Americans are ready for this bold vision. Even in this tattered economy, citizens in California, Washington, Hawaii, Colorado and at least 10 other states voted themselves a tax increase so they could jumpstart construction of light rail, commuter train service, high-speed rail and other clean transportation options. Now they, and dozens of other communities, need a federal partner that can step up and do its part.

We call on you to follow through on the vision you offered in the campaign by acting rapidly, starting with the transition and during the first 100 days, to urge Congress to pass a smart package of stimulus investments as well as a new national transportation program. Appoint a Secretary of Transportation with a proven record of understanding both urban and rural needs, as well as how transportation, growth and development, the economy and the environment interact.

You have expressed support for building complete streets that “make it easier for us to walk, bicycle and access transportation alternatives,” and for repairing and restoring our troubled highways and bridges - we call on you today to fulfill that promise in your first 100 days.

By fixing our highways, bridges and transit systems, and pushing ahead with ready-to-go rail projects, we can create millions of jobs that can't be outsourced, launch a clean, green economic recovery, and get started on building a 21st century transportation system.

To quote our next president: "Yes, we can!"

Photo: Sandy Leidholdt/Flickr

Mr. Obama is coordinating with Congressional Democrats behind the scenes on the stimulus plans, which would include more jobless benefits, food stamps, aid to financially strapped states and cities, and spending for infrastructure projects that keep people at work. His chief liaison has been Mr. Emanuel.

"You don't ever want a crisis to go to waste; it's an opportunity to do important things that you would otherwise avoid," Mr. Emanuel said in an interview. "In 1974 and 1978 we never dealt with it, and our dependence on foreign oil never changed."

Good stuff, except for that "foreign" part.

Congresswoman-elect Kathy Dahlkemper overcame ridicule for her "wacky" notion that Pennsylvanians should try walking and cycling. But down in western North Carolina, voters returned Rep. Patrick McHenry -- shown here mocking, and misrepresenting, the federal bike commuter tax benefit -- to Washington.

Though his state also went for Barack Obama, the outspoken conservative Republican defeated Democratic challenger Daniel Johnson handily. The Hickory Record reports:

"The morals and values I took with me to Washington — I still have them," he said. "I'm not going to stop fighting for conservative ideals now."

McHenry's values and ideals have earned him a lot of views on YouTube, where his anti-cycling speech has been given special treatment.

Video: GreenMaterialism/YouTube

The National Republican Congressional Committee ran this ad against Democratic challenger Kathy Dahlkemper in the race for Pennsylvania's third congressional district. It hits a few Gingrichian notes on how to address the country's energy problems before the announcer tells us incredulously:

Dahlkemper's wacky solution? She said we should make personal sacrifices, such as walking places and riding bikes. Hmm... Why don't we use dog-sleds, too?

That passage heaps on the fear and loathing with scare quotes, shots of an impossibly crowded sidewalk, and a bike bell sound effect. But guess what? Seven-term incumbent Phil English is heading back to Erie, and Kathy Dahlkemper is going to Washington. The AP breaks down her victory:

Mrs. Dahlkemper's advantage was viewed as being in the more urban areas of the district -- the cities of Erie, Sharon, Meadville and Butler -- where she was expected to benefit from longtime union support and Sen. Barack Obama's presence at the top of the ticket. Her challenge was to sway voters in the suburban and rural regions.

Think Dahlkemper's competition will bank on the same anti-urban message in 2010?

Workplaces have decentralized. Commuting patterns are no longer radial, from suburban residences to central cities. Now they are complex weaves across broad megaregions. Yet the infrastructure system hasn't adapted.

The Times published five letters in response, including this one from Transportation for America's David Goldberg:

David Brooks is spot-on with his call for major investment in transportation infrastructure, both for near-term economic stimulus and for a sustainable recovery. His recommendations of what to build are outdated, however.

As he notes, a way to put people to work would be to repair and maintain our existing highways, bridges and transit systems. But building new highways was the project for an earlier era, the 1950s, when gas was cheap and President Dwight D. Eisenhower created the Interstate System.

Today we urgently need to build the infrastructure for a clean-energy economy and reduced dependency on oil. Soaring gas prices made our vulnerability clear: Americans flocked to public transportation or took to their bicycles only to find the transit systems underfinanced and the roads dangerous and inhospitable. Half of our urban-dwelling citizens found they had no transit at all.

If we're going to go into debt to build for the future, we must do so to complete our transportation network with high-speed rail, modern public transit, streets that support safe biking and walking, and, yes, well-maintained highways.

Dave Alpert at Greater Greater Washington picked up the exchange, noting how cities such as Charleston, South Carolina are already moving beyond the default presumption that transportation investment equals road-building.

And BikePortland's Jonathan Maus, recalling an earlier Brooks column that dismissed cycling as transportation, offered this take on transportation spending priorities:

Should we invest billions into highway projects that cater to "mobility" of single-occupancy vehicles (like we did in the 1950s) and throw scraps to everything else (like we do now)? Or, will we look to create world-class biking cities where possible (because bikes offer the best return on transportation investment of any mode) and then invest in things like passenger rail, streetcars and bus-rapid transit?

It is, after all, a simple sounding solution that appeals to politicians in love with the quick fix, oil companies desperate for access to new sources, and auto-dependent Americans, many of whom now find themselves stranded in far-off suburbs, trapped in expensive car commutes and completely lacking freedom of choice when it comes to transportation. No matter that drilling here and drilling now isn't going to do much of anything to reduce gasoline prices or wean Americans from their crushing oil dependence. 

If you're curious about the masterminds behind the message, head over to Newt Gingrich's "tri-partisan" American Solutions web site. There, you can download "The New Language of Smart Energy," a 42-page talking points memo from Republican pollster Frank Luntz. Luntz handily sums up his findings as "The 10 Communications Commandments for 2008." Not surprising, given the buckets of fossil fuel money behind Gingrich's American Solutions, the Commandments can pretty much be summed up as "Thou Shalt Drill. Thou Shalt Drill Here. Thou Shalt Drill Now."

Here, courtesy of Frank and Newt, is some of the messaging that oil companies are using to maintain their grip on U.S. energy policy and get to those environmentally-sensitive leases. Mock and ignore them at your own peril.

• First off, before even getting into the Ten Commandments, make sure you present yourself as having risen above partisan politics.
• Then frame the issue in terms of national security. Our dependence on oil isn't the problem. It's our dependence on "foreign oil" that's the problem. All that stuff about oil being a globally traded commodity? Too complicated. Skip that. 
  
• Shortages "are unacceptable in our 21st century economy." All that stuff about geology and peak oil? Too wonky. Skip that.
• "It is about American oil and American gas." (Bold and underline formatting courtesy of Frank Luntz.)
• The more you can talk about futuristic "breakthrough technology," the more you'll be embraced by the American public.
  
• "Diversity of supply leads to security of supply." But focus, mainly, on diversity of oil and gas supply not diversity of energy sources.
  
• Do: Talk about new technology and the Chevy Tahoe Hybrid. Don't: Talk about conservation or sacrifice.

Newt, Frank, and the rest of their ilk seem to be in retreat for now. But with some drivers returning to their gas-guzzling ways, how long until the next "crisis" hits -- and the oil-suckers emerge from their crypt?

Happy Halloween.

Graphic: Carly Clark

NOW host David Brancaccio does an interview on the LA Metro. Click through for the full video.

The latest episode of NOW is surely the most effective takedown of car-dependent planning ever broadcast in news magazine format. Adhering to the familiar contours of pocketbook journalism, "Driven to Despair" starts with a sympathetic portrayal of the Schleighs, a family who moved to a southern California exurb seven years ago. With their adjustable rate mortgage about to reset and gas prices already busting the family budget, they need a way out.

What follows can be fairly described as a 25-minute ode to the time- and money-saving benefits of transit, complete with a brief history of the Los Angeles streetcar system and a rueful suggestion that the Presidential candidates should address transportation more forcefully.

Watching the Schleighs and their neighbors react to the idea of riding a train to work -- sneering, in one case -- it's all too apparent why someone running for national office would skirt the issue. But you also realize that if a national pol were to finally go out on that limb, he or she may find voters more receptive to the idea of better trains and buses than feared.

"Driven to Despair" will be broadcast on PBS affiliates tonight (check local listings). It's the first part in a NOW series on infrastructure called "Blueprint America."

Enjoy the weekend, Streetsbloggers. We'll be back on Tuesday.

Here's a disturbing story from the Associated Press on gas shortages in Asheville, North Carolina, where hot-tempered drivers are waiting in long lines to fill up, only to find in some cases that the pumps are tapped. Asks one flustered motorist:

"What's wrong with our government? Why are they letting this happen to us?"

Maybe the saddest thing about that comment is that, months into the current gas price spike and years after Hurricane Katrina caused similar supply interruptions, Washington still isn't talking about how to wean Americans off the stuff. As Atlantans Twitter to find the nearest line and Tennesseans take to the Internet with profanity-laced rants, Senate Republicans this week blocked a spending package that would have boosted funding for overburdened transit systems, while the best US Transportation Secretary Mary Peters can do is a paltry $30 million federal allocation to be split among 15 commuter rail projects.

Video: WorldWide News Today/YouTube

From cartoonist Mark Fiore comes this animation of a hyperactive Ziploc baggy. Before clicking through to see why it's so amped up, here's some suggested reading from the New York Times:

Sex, Drug Use and Graft Cited in Interior Department

Frustration in the South as a Gasoline Shortage Drags On

Enjoy the afternoon and Shana Tovah to everyone ringing in the new year.

What the mainstream is truly missing here en masse is that another tsunami is building right behind the finance fiasco, and that it will render moot the whole reeking cargo of schemes and wishes that comprises the Great Bail-out. I am speaking of the global oil problem. In fact, the problems in banking and money currently roaring in the center ring of the world circus, can be described categorically as a product of the oil problem -- since oil is the primary resource of industrial economies and therefore the motive force behind our ability to generate "wealth." Without reliable and ever-growing supplies of oil, there is no industrial growth, and without industrial growth things like capital investment instruments lose their legitimacy. That is why the Frankenstein family of Ponzi securities was invented in the first place -- to compensate for the demise of industrial growth by creating wealth out of... nothing!

Okay, it's not a cartoon. But this "Daily Show" segment is too good to pass up.

Comedy Central via Grist

On this Election Day, here's animator Mark Fiore on the importance of making your voice heard in uncertain times. Click through for this timely message.

As the Democratic convention convenes in Denver, Matt Davies of the Journal News drills down on the national energy policy debate. Click through for the punchline.

The key word in that title is "relief." The legislation recognizes that financially pinched Americans are turning to public transportation in record numbers, but in too many cities and small towns there's inadequate access to such transit. Even in places like Portland where transit is abundantly available, it still must be kept affordable.

In addition to provisions for struggling transit agencies, the bill includes measures to boost the supply of housing near transit stations, as well as incentives for transit riders, cyclists, telecommuters and carpoolers.

A story in the Hill today looks at the bill and the advocates lining up behind it:

A new coalition, Transportation for America, www.t4america.org, is starting to lobby to boost funding for transit programs like high-speed rail and federal help to communities that pass zoning laws that reduce the need for workers to commute long distances.

“We should be providing support to states and planning organizations to reduce fuel use and greenhouse gas emissions,” said Steven Winkelman, director of the Transportation and Adaptation Programs at the Center for Clean Air Policy.

Now, “with limited travel choices, Americans are left vulnerable to high fuel prices,” Winkelman told the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee last week. The panel examined ways Congress could support the conservation of fuel in response to high fuel costs.

Streetsbloggers may be especially interested in the following provisions of the bill, listed on Blumenauer's website: 

• Equalize the transportation fringe benefit so that those who commute by public transportation get as much as those who commute by driving.
• Allow employees to cash-in their parking benefits to spend on other choices that better meet their needs.
• Extend the same transportation fringe benefits to bike commuters as provided for those who commute by car or transit.

Gasoline tax revenue is falling so fast that the federal government may not be able to meet its commitments to states for road projects already under way, the secretary of transportation said Monday.

The secretary, Mary E. Peters, said the short-term solution would be for the Highway Trust Fund’s highway account to borrow money from the fund’s mass transit account, a step that would balance the accounts as highway travel declines and use of mass transit increases.

Meanwhile, America's historically underfunded transit systems are also struggling with rising fuel prices and record demand. No word yet on how taking money away from transit to pay for highways fits in to George W. Bush's plan to end America's oil addiction but maybe time for Americans to take a good, hard look in the mirror and ask ourselves what kind of nation do we want to be?

Saturday's Times delved into the history of the MTA's mounting debt burden, which, along with rising fuel costs and plummeting revenues from the real estate transactions tax, has severely squeezed the authority's finances:

Debt payments are the system’s largest single cost after payroll, and by 2012 they will account for one of every five dollars the authority spends.

The problems facing the agency now are no surprise. Independent analysts and the agency’s own financial planners have warned of rising debt costs for years -- most loudly and urgently after a huge debt restructuring in 2000.

Called at the time the largest deal in the history of American municipal finance, the refinancing -- taking advantage of lower interest rates -- led to lower debt payments. The agency, facing political resistance to fare increases and new taxes, decided to sell new bonds to finance the system’s first major expansion since the 1930s. In a few short years, the debt burden it had amassed over nearly 20 years had doubled.

Before the debt restructuring, the article notes, state and city contributions to the MTA capital budget fell to historic lows during the 1990s, causing the authority to rely more on borrowing.

When former MTA chairman Richard Ravitch proposed the authority's first bonds, issued in 1982, the cash made possible investments that revived a transit system in crisis. Now all eyes are again fixed on Ravitch, appointed by Governor Paterson to find a way out of the MTA's current funding woes. With the state and city facing budget crunches of their own, where might the money for transit come from?

Graphic: New York Times

It's always a bit of a mind-boggler when some statistics emerge showing how much oil the U.S. military consumes. From yesterday's Politico:

So, you think you've got the gas prices blues. Just consider Al Shaffer, the man in charge of drafting an energy strategy for the gas-­guzzling Pentagon.

With wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and troops spread around the world, the Department of Defense is the nation's biggest oil consumer, burning 395,000 barrels per day -- about as much as Greece.

Rep. Steve Israel, a Democrat from Long Island who formed a Defense Energy Working Group back in 2004 after learning that the the Army's Stryker combat vehicles got only 5 miles per gallon of gas, sums it up as such:

"Here is our current defense posture," Israel said. "We are borrowing money from China to fund our defense budgets to buy oil from the Persian Gulf to fund our military to protect us from China and the Persian Gulf. It is an insidious vulnerability."

And that's not even including the part about destroying the planet.

The U.S. military's insatiable thirst for oil isn't exactly news. Blood and Oil author Michael Klare wrote a nice piece on this same topic last year:

Sixteen gallons of oil. That's how much the average American soldier in Iraq and Afghanistan consumes on a daily basis... Multiply that daily tab by 365 and you get 1.3 billion gallons: the estimated annual oil expenditure for U.S. combat operations in Southwest Asia. That's greater than the total annual oil usage of Bangladesh, population 150 million

The Allied war effort during World War 2 was fueled by six billon barrels of American oil.

Photo: Jacobnbailey / Flickr