I wasn't even in Los Angeles yesterday, and for once I'm glad. Everything from my Facebook feed to the morning headlines told me that traffic on the Westside yesterday afternoon was so awful that only a parade of obscenities accompanied by words like "cluster" and "show" would have sufficed to describe it. Hardened locals were driven nearly to tears behind the wheels of their unmoving cars. The president was in town.
I wasn't even in Los Angeles yesterday, and for once I'm glad. Everything from my Facebook feed to the morning headlines told me that traffic on the Westside yesterday afternoon was so awful that only a parade of obscenities accompanied by words like "cluster" and "show" would have sufficed to describe it. Hardened locals were driven nearly to tears behind the wheels of their unmoving cars.
The president was in town.
This happens every time a president visits, and it doesn't matter which party is in power. The wealthy neighborhoods of the Westside are, understandably, fertile fundraising grounds, whether it's W., Obama, or whomever else is in the White House. So when he visits, the president first does a little business in the city during the day and then, when evening comes, up come the barriers and traffic breaks and the motorcade heads to the hills. This can last for hours.
For what gain, then, does the president tie up a few hundred thousand commuters? ONE. MILLION. DOLLARS.
That's right. Obama raised $1 million at his dinner last night. Most of that money is going to the DNC. But just to put it in perspective, that's about 1/500th of the cost of the average presidential campaign these days.
I'm writing mainly to illustrate the absurdities of American campaign finance and not about urbanism per se, but doing so through the perspective of urbanism is as good a method as any. What we need to realize here is that in the course of following the rules of American campaign finance, President Obama actually cost the city of Los Angeles far more than he reaped. (And obviously Los Angeles is not the only city that bears this burden.)
Let's set aside the surely staggering cost of security, police, Highway Patrol, bomb squads, etc. (which cities are technically obligate to spend in return for receiving federal funds). Conservatively, if 200,000 Westsiders suffered an average of an extra hour of congestion yesterday afternoon, then according to the Texas Transportation Institute's estimate (pdf) that an hour in L.A. traffic is worth $15 per person, then raising Obama's lousy $1 million cost the citizens of Los Angeles a collective $3 million.
Of course, the funding streams that feed into commuters' wallets have nothing to do with those that feed into a president's fundraising account. But, even so, if Obama had stayed home and gotten his $1 million from, say, a federally administered pool of campaign money, then Los Angeles would be $3 million richer and (slightly) less neurotic.
As I said, this piece is more about campaign finance than about urbanism. But if ever you need reason to consider campaign finance reform, all you need to do is imagine all those cars backed up on Wilshire, Sunset, Santa Monica, and the 405 while black limousines speed towards Bel Air.
Planetizen Federal Action Tracker
A weekly monitor of how Trump’s orders and actions are impacting planners and planning in America.
California plans to bury El Niño’s downpour
If the state plays its cards right, it may be able to store a billion acre-feet of El Niño’s water in aquifers.
Desperate measures: Advocates weigh draining Lake Powell to fill Colorado River
Draining the reservoir could reduce evaporation losses by a couple hundred thousand acre-feet.
Los Angeles just elected an urban planner as its mayor
Transportation analysts are optimistic that Raman will be more aggressive in addressing transit issues than Bass.
Mamdani’s pied-à-terre tax survives legal challenge
A panel of judges found that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate injury as a result of New York City's implementation of the tax.
Eastern Nebraska is running out of electricity
Data centers and electrification are straining eastern Nebraska’s grid, throttling economic development.
FREE Course: Walkable City 1: Why Walkability?
After describing his path towards focusing on walkability as the essence of good planning, Jeff Speck marches through his five principal reasons for making more walkable places.
Reinventing Malls: Planning Alchemy—Turning Gray Fields Into Gold
The course focuses on the opportunities and imperatives that shape reinvention of mall sites.
City of Rosemead
Rutgers University, Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy
One Hundred Miles
University of Michigan School for Environment and Sustainability (SEAS)
Hunter College, City University of New York (CUNY)
The Architects Foundation
City of Cambridge
Montrose County
The Pocatello Development Authority