LaHood Is The Wrong Choice
December 17, 2008 by Joshua Davis
What was Obama thinking when he picked Ray LaHood as transportation secretary? This man is one of the least qualified to head a department with such an integral role in reducing global warming. Barack Obama has already been under criticism for his roads heavy stimulus package, but the appointment of this man shows the government agency for transportation will be looking towards 1950s solutions to fix the transportation crisis.
Obama recognizes that transportation planning is directly related to global warming and other pollution, so why would he put a man in office that seems to lack such understanding? LaHood has received over 100,000 dollars in donations from energy and automobile interests, such as the Petroleum Marketers Association. A search on Wikipedia has no political experience on any subcommittees related to transit. It is as if Obama has said “Nobody cares about the DOT so lets give the GOP a bone.”
However LaHood has sponsored some legislation that at least shows a minimal effort to look at alternative forms of transit. He cosponsored a bill to recognize the importance of bicycling for health and recreation but it fails to acknowledge a link to cleaner air, plus that’s about the only positive transportation bill he’s sponsored in the past two congresses. However those are outweighed as he also cosponsored a bill supporting using forests for bio fuel, investing in liquid coal (which has been found to be the biggest global warming contributor), and lastly he voted for June 30th to be “National Corvette Day.”
One of the main reasons I was so excited about an Obama administration was that I felt he would change America from an auto-dependent country to one that rivaled Europe in terms of alternatives. While certaintly better than what Bush adminstration has done for alternative transit, this vision is hardly visionary.






At lease in NY (I don’t know about the rest of the nation) the transportation department has the job of bringing in capital for the city, not to reduce global warming. I think there is a separate department for that.
Reply
health IT and major health care reforms is probably more important than infrastructure.
Reply
Health is defiantly more important, but environmental conservation is important too. A poor environment leads to poor health so the two are really tied together.
Reply