Kingston on Wheels 4 Wellness

Adam Voiland posted this youtube video of Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA) criticizing the WheelsForWellness program. I think that the program was poorly designed and implemented - but I don't think it's silly for the same reasons Rep. Kingston does. He talks like bikes are only for recreation - something you ride on the weekend (though he's a daily bike commuter) - even belittling the mud flaps, but the program was meant to be a transportation one.  If he really thinks we should get rid of the bikes and staffers "should buy their own bikes with their own money" surely he must feel the same way about parking spaces - staffers and members should have access to a parking space if they buy it with their own money? He says Congress should get rid of it, when what they should do is either improve it (as a better bicycle fleet program) or preferably use the money to add a SmartBike station to the Capitol grounds.
 

Comments

[Tom]

He's not anti bike. He's a bike snob.

BTW I only watched the video, I had the sound off.

[Washcycle]

I wouldn't be surprised if the leadership picked him to run point on this since he's in the bike caucus and is a bike commuter.

[Joe]

He says he paid for his bike but not with tax dollars. He gets paid via tax dollars, there for he paid for his bike with tax dollars!

Maybe he would be willing to cut his and all his colleges salaries :)

[Mike]

I agree that it is a silly program and a waste of tax dollars to provide the bikes. I fail to see how supporting a waste of money could be construed as "anti-bike." The program is a failure and the question is what has been learned and how can we better encourage bicycle use in the future. Hyperbole from either side of a discussion deducts points with this reader.
Mike

[Washcycle]

No one called his position anti-bike. My only complaint is that he takes the position that this program failed, so it was a bad idea - and that he either never bothered to understand or pretended to misunderstand the purpose of the program. I think it was a good idea, poorly executed. If this guy ran NASA, we would have given up on the Moon after Apollo I.

[Richard Layman]

All the reason for the pro-people to not f*** up when they create a program. It's why I hold fellow bloggers to a high standard. (D - you never get "nasty" emails from me, because you categorically write great well articulated and thoughtful stuff -- even if I don't always agree with you).

This was a major f*** up and with the ABSOLUTELY MOST IMPORTANT PEOPLE IN THE U.S. WHO DEAL WITH SETTING U.S. TRANSPORTATION POLICY AND FUNDING TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS.

It gives tremendous ammunition to the same people who are already in bed with the highway builders.

It's one of the reasons I argue for not f****** up when creating policy and programs.

Bike fleets aren't silly. Maybe bikesharing isn't what I want it to be (more on that later in my own blog) but it isn't silly either. Developing and promoting optimal mobility makes sense.

Why would it be silly for a worker to use a bike during the work day, rather than to pay for a cab, or to drive -- assessing a mileage charge for work? (Granted, they could use transit.)

What is silly is not massively increasing the federal excise tax on gasoline.

(Ironically, I did a commercial district revitalization framework study in one of the counties that Rep. Kingston represents, and we did outline an opportunity to create a bike sharing system in the county seat to support tourism, along the lines of the Tulsa program. And bicycle rental and recreational riding is very big on St. Simons Island and Jekyll Island in the same county. Oh, and I pointed out the need for bicycle racks downtown.)