Spinners advocacy and a call to action

Photo credit: Brad Allen

I have mentioned before that I don’t get the chance to update this blog as often as I would like. Part of the reason for that is that I am not as heavily involved in local bicycle advocacy issues as I once was. I am still an active Bikeville member and volunteer, but due to other commitments, I find it harder to keep up with all the bike related issues in the city and county. The good news though, is that there are other great sources for local bike advocacy news. I have mentioned Biking the Upstate and The PCC’s Palmetto Spokesman blog in previous posts, but today I want to point you toward another source of information that I am excited about- the Greenville Spinners Advocacy page. Frank Mansbach, who recently took over the Spinners advocacy chair position for 2012, plans to post monthly updates on the Advocacy page. His first update outlines his goals as the new chair, covers some advocacy news, and provides links to a few good resources. I am looking forward to his monthly updates, and I encourage all of you to keep an eye out for his future posts as well. 

If you are a League of American Bicyclists or Palmetto Cycling Coalition member, you have seen the urgent messages yesterday and today about The American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act, a House bill that threatens to eliminate federal funding for bicycle and pedestrian projects. I wrote it about it on my Bicycle Design blog this morning, so I won’t repeat all of the same points here. Suffice it to say though that as citizens of a state that ranks 49th for bicycling safety, we should be very concerned about this bill. I hope that you will take a minute and contact your Representative about this today.

A 19th century solution

Last Saturday, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 2776, the Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act of 2007, which will, among other things, defines the bicycle as a form of transportation covered by the qualified transportation fringe benefit. The Bike Commuter Act provision, originally introduced by Congressman Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, calls for a $20 monthly benefit for bike commuters.

Unfortunately, Patrick McHenry, a republican representative from neighboring North Carolina, argued against the plan saying that bicycles are a “19th century solution to a 21st century problem.” You can read additional excerpts from Congressman McHenry’s statement on this post at Bike Portland. You can also watch a video of his statement on YouTube or even on the Congressman’s own website. I understand that Representative McHenry would like to see funding for completely new alternative forms of energy. Fine, but to completely discount the bicycle as a form of transportation is just absurd. Perhaps, instead of his poster featuring a vintage photo of a couple posed on an antique quadcycle, he should have, as one of the Bike Portland commenters suggested, shown a highway congested with gridlocked cars at rush hour. Bicycles may be old technology, but human powered transportation can be a viable component in a comprehensive solution to our energy problems. In addition to saving energy, transportational cycling addresses the growing problem of traffic congestion (a problem that alternative energy sources alone will never solve). Also, it is worth mentioning that Congressman McHenry represents a state that has an adult obesity rate of 24.7 percent; yet another problem that the “antiquated” solution of bicycle commuting can help to solve.

I know that a few people in North Carolina read this blog. If you do live in the 10th district, or anywhere in the state for that matter, I strongly encourage you to write Representative McHenry and let him know that you do not appreciate his complete dismissal of the bicycle as a form of transportation. I realize that bicycles are not the sole solution to all of our transportation problems, but they certainly can play a bigger role in this country than they do now. Most bicycle commuters that I know aren’t trying to get everyone out of their cars and onto bikes. We just want complete streets that are designed for all types of road users so that all citizens can get around safely no matter how they chose to do so. Can someone please explain that to Congressman McHenry, who apparently opposes any funding for pedestian and bicycling enhancements?