Rich Lawyers Boosting Traffic Jams and Calling It Charity
One thing law firms do is take cases on a pro bono basis. You get some prestige for doing so, and it helps underscore the legal profession’s self-conception as serving the higher calling of the law. The general idea here, of course, is that you’re supposed to be helping out indigent clients or some kind of do-gooder causes.
Meanwhile, in DC’s Maryland suburbs we’re inching ever closer to actually starting work on the Purple Line light rail. This would connect several destinations that are already served by transit and walkable transit-oriented development, provide transit access to the University of Maryland’s main campus, and also create the possibility of new transit-oriented development at additional stops along the way. It’s a good idea that will help reduce congestion on the Beltway, reduce carbon emissions, and enhance the region’s ability to keep growing in a sustainable manner. Every environmental group in the city is for it. But a group of NIMBYs centered around the town of Chevy Chase, MD and the Columbia Country Club are trying to block it in order to keep the riffraff out and are offering some spurious environmental claims to try to block construction.
They’ve engaged the large DC firm of Sidley Austin to help them in their fight. And Sidley’s doing the work pro bono — for free — as charity. No doubt in part this is because Joseph Guerra is both a partner in the firm and the husband of the woman co-chairing the NIMBY effort. Perhaps some of the firms partners are members of the Country Club as well. Who knows? But this is certainly a strange definition of charitable work. They might want to ask some of the people working for the firm on the bottom rungs — the janitors and so forth — if they really appreciate these kind of “charitable” efforts to deny poor people any better commuting options than the bus?
104 Responses to “Rich Lawyers Boosting Traffic Jams and Calling It Charity”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
January 13th, 2009 at 2:34 pm
Sidley Austin
Somebody fire up the Palmieri signal.
January 13th, 2009 at 2:35 pm
…and then they’ll claim the value of the hours an in-kind donations on their taxes.
January 13th, 2009 at 2:36 pm
Sidley’s pro bono work has also included arguing for Colorado’s anti-gay Amendment 2 in Romer v Evans. They lost, thankfully.
January 13th, 2009 at 2:39 pm
Assholes…. The worst part about this is that the purple line will help connect poor people in communities near UMD with job-rich spots like Chevy Chase (which is, of course, the source of the complaints). Way to totally pervert the meaning of pro bono, dickhedz.
January 13th, 2009 at 2:39 pm
You can’t claim in-kind charitable donations for this kind of stuff.
NIMBY’s are as closeted about their motives as racists are: “It’s not that I don’t want mass transit, I think mass transit is a vital and important community asset, it’s just that THIS PROJECT is all wrong . . .”
Always the same. Always, always, always.
January 13th, 2009 at 2:40 pm
Do you know how Til Hazel got his start, with the building of I-66 inside the beltway ?
Pro bono may not be pro bono publico, and cui bono is always a good question. You might check who owns land around the proposed stops.
January 13th, 2009 at 2:44 pm
Seems to me that there is a potential for a conflict of interest in this. I wonder is Sidley got conflict waivers from everyone.
Also, big firms are really really hurting for work right now, so this is a way for them to keep their associates game ready while waiting/hoping for an upturn in paying business.
January 13th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
It seems like Sidley Austin is in the wrong here.
But Matt, sooner or later you’ll have to address the conflict between all these new stimulus projects and the billion environmental impact regulations and concerns that slow up construction.
January 13th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
Thanks for the correction, Barbara.
NIMBY’s are as closeted about their motives as racists are: “It’s not that I don’t want mass transit, I think mass transit is a vital and important community asset, it’s just that THIS PROJECT is all wrong . . .”
I used to be a planner. I went into the field thinking my job was to protect the public against the evil developers.
Screw that. You get these people that show up at meetings; two weeks ago, they wouldn’t care if you poured a gallon of lead paint into a stream, but now that somebody proposed to build a residential subdivision near their, er, residential subdivision, they suddenly discover they were all spotted salamanders in a past life.
January 13th, 2009 at 2:54 pm
I’m not sure the Purple Line is a good idea in terms of people carried vs. cost. Trains are cooler than buses, but buses are way cheaper and more flexible and the suburbs call for flexibility; buses pollute more than trains, I’m sure, but any bus is better than 20 cars both directly and indirectly.
January 13th, 2009 at 2:55 pm
this is incredibly frustrating on multiple levels, and also the sort of thing that makes one reflect on a basic sort of incompatability between the legal profession as a set of practices based on career & economic interests, and as a set of practices that are supposed to, in theory, arrive at a more just society.
January 13th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
pro malo publico . . .
January 13th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
“Pro bono” doesn’t really mean charity — it just means “we’re not getting paid.”
January 13th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
It’s like Caddyshack writ Beltway.
January 13th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
Rich in PA,
You need to consider the local conditions.
First of all, the corridor in question is perhaps the most gridlocked stretch of highway west of LA and north of Atlanta. Just truly awful. Putting more buses on this route would just mean more buses on the eight-lane parking lot.
Secondly, the “flexibility” you need in the suburbs is mainly a result of destinations being sprawled out, but this would connect a number of high-density T.O.D. areas.
Third, each of these stations already has bus service, so linking them together would be an effective way to get people into position to take advantage of the MART buses that are available.
And D, this line would link up with the radial lines that go into the city, increasing the utility of the system for people commuting both ways.
January 13th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
I’m not sure the Purple Line is a good idea in terms of people carried vs. cost. Trains are cooler than buses, but buses are way cheaper and more flexible and the suburbs call for flexibility; buses pollute more than trains, I’m sure, but any bus is better than 20 cars both directly and indirectly.
The basic issue: only poor people take buses. There’s absolutely no political will to increase bus services. Middle class people will take trains. If we want to increase mass transit along that route, a train is basically the only way that would actually be feasible.
January 13th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
Joe from Lowell also has a lot of better points as to why a train line is a good idea.
January 13th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
Sidley being Obama’s old firm.
January 13th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
I know that in California NIMBYism by rich people not wanting light rail to their communities because they fear an influx of poor people has not gone well at all. In Los Angeles, people on the westside opposed building the Metro there. But now that traffic has gotten so bad they can hardly move around they want it. Unfortunately, now it’s more expensive and will be a lot more difficult. But it’s happening now because there simply isn’t any other way to fight the gridlock. And in the Bay area, the folks in Marin fought hard to keep BART from crossing the Golden Gate bridge. But now, as far as I understand, they’re coming to regret that too. Unfortunately, no matter how rich you are, you still have to use the public roads to get around, and even Rolls Royces get stuck in traffic.
January 13th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
Sidley being Obama’s old firm.
He did one summer associate gig there, don’t be such a fucktard.
January 13th, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Isn’t this exactly the same thing that happened with Georgetown way back when Metro was first being planned?
I wonder how the residents and businesses in Georgetown feel about being nowhere near the Metro these days?
January 13th, 2009 at 3:24 pm
I think Matt should probably ask some of the people working for CAP on the bottom rungs — the janitors and so forth — if they really appreciate what he posts to his blog.
January 13th, 2009 at 3:24 pm
The current plan for the purple line rail would also likely eliminate MoCo’s only effective commuter “greenway” bike path, leaving just Cap Cresecent from Bethesda to DC.
I say stick it between the inner & outer loops
January 13th, 2009 at 3:30 pm
Nevermind the fact that if a rail system was truly needed and financially viable it would have been built by a private company a long ago… assuming they environmental paperwork didn’t stop the project for another 20 years.
Because we are helping the “poor” it’s suddenly need number one. As usual, there is copious amounts of hypocrisy on both sides of this issue.
January 13th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
The metro came our mall (Springfield VA) . Its great for commuting into the district. It also brought people who don’t have cars so they can shop. It also brought crime. Call me racist if you want. I don’t mind poor people. I mind being robbed, assaulted and killed. Now all my middle/upper middle class friends take our money to the shops at the Fair Oaks Mall. You can only drive there. As our dollars went, so did the stores. Now the Springfield Mall is slowly dying. NIMBY doesn’t sound so bad anymore.
January 13th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
This is seriously what you have?
January 13th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
this is deplorable. i live a block from the silver spring metro station, and i can’t tell you how awesome this purple line would be. for one, both silver spring and new carrolton have greyhound bus stations. also, it’s insane that it takes 45 min by rail to get to bethesda when it’s a 10min car/bus ride. and it’s just common sense that given dc’s asterisk-shaped system the best way to improve the efficiency of the system would be a ring line, especially since the existence of the beltway is already an implicit acknowledgment that car traffic is benefited by such a set-up.
January 13th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
also, i want to inform nathan that he’s perhaps been reading too much ayn rand and not spending enough time in, you know, reality. i encourage him to go ask anyone who actually payed attention in economics class to explain the difference between public and private goods, and also the tragedy of the commons. then maybe he might realize that everyone, from warren buffet to the guy who cleans his bathroom, would benefit from increased rail efficiency and rail ridership.
January 13th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
Max B, I agree. I’ve lived in the DC area for years (my folks still do) and likewise used the Metro a lot. A circle line, if not two now the exurbs extend so far out, would be a vast improvement.
January 13th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
Why can’t Sidley Austin figure out that environmental laws are only supposed to slow down bad people, like conservative developers, but not nice liberal people who are trying to build stuff that Matt Yglesias wants?
January 13th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
Do you know how Til Hazel got his start, with the building of I-66 inside the beltway ?
Til was a big player long before I-66 broke ground inside the beltway around 1980, but I’m sure it was a profitable gig that helped grow the business
January 13th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
I also wasn’t aware that “pro bono” meant “liberal.” Lawyers aspire to justice, sure, but in a particular way: Not by deciding who’s good and who’s bad and making sure only the good guys get lawyers, but by making sure everyone gets lawyers and a fair process. (Remember the—justified—outcry when conservatives attacked law firms for representing Gitmo detainees? You want a principle that lets me defend them without requiring me to embrace Al Quaeda’s policy agenda.) So, because I’m a small, petty person, I really enjoy watching lefty policies get all tied up in that beautiful process.
I hadn’t been aware of the special rule forbidding lawyers from doing pro bono work for causes their wives support. Those of you who think this is a good rule should try to imagine whether it would apply if the wife here worked for the Coalition to Promote Environmental Justice for Vegan Transgendered Undocumented Immigrants, or something.
January 13th, 2009 at 4:01 pm
To be fair, it is understandable. They want, and currently have, safe neighbourhoods. The rail is likely to make more available those currently safe areas to unsafe elements. They don’t want that to happen – who does?
January 13th, 2009 at 4:01 pm
It should be pointed out that the light rail will probably do through the middle of the golf course and single family houses will be within a 100 feet or so of it. It will definitely change the complection of the neighborhood and houses that people paid huge amounts for in Kensington will probably decline in price due to the train being nearby and the accompanying foot traffic.
January 13th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
C’mon, guys, Matt has an important point.
Progressives didn’t spend 40 years setting up a vast web of environmental and other land use regulations that make it glacially slow to build anything on either coast in order to hurt progressives. Therefore, environmental laws should _not_ apply to progressives. Any law firm that uses environmental laws to frustrate Matt Yglesias’s desires is a traitor and should be dealt with. As Lenin said, the eternal question is always “Who? Whom?”
January 13th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
Bulldoze, baby, bulldoze!
You can’t have a bunch of environmentalist red tape holding back Matt’s Robert Moses-like ambitions to bulldoze anything standing in the way of his vision of a better future. Now that progressives have power, they must deregulate the environment so nobody can slow down their efforts to save the environment.
We have to bulldoze the environment to save it!
January 13th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
I agree with matth.
These NIMBYs would never be able to afford a lawyer if the case wasn’t taken pro bono. They’d be as utterly helpless and without legal representation as an unempoloyed laborer arrested for robbery.
Um..what?
January 13th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
27: You would think he’s faking it, right?
But in that spirit, I propose the government stop building any more roads. If they’re needed, I’m sure a private company will take care of it for us.
January 13th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
“We must bulldoze the environment in order to save it!”
Seriously? Chevy Chase is the environment?
January 13th, 2009 at 4:30 pm
While you’re at it, Matt, in your drive to speed up the completion of huge infrastructure projects that you wnat, as well as demanding environmental deregulation, you should also demand affirmative action deregulation. One of the things that slows down public works projects is the endless search for competent minority contractors to get their share of the quota goodies.
Many of these “minority and female-owned” firms turn out to be fronts for white men anyway. For example, Obama’s close friend Tony Rezko, a white Catholic, used Jabir Muhammad (the son of Elijah Muhammad, founder of the Black Muslims), as his token minority beard to win numerous “minority set-aside” contracts in Chicago.
In contrast, when the Santa Monica Freeway collapsed in the 1994 LA earthquake, affirmative action regulations were suspended and this vital artery was rebuilt.
So, Matt, that should be your next crusade after you deregulate the environment.
January 13th, 2009 at 4:30 pm
Actually, if it meant that Baltimore would be rid of the ignorant blacks in that area (all of them, basically), then perhaps it would be ok.
A concentration camp just off the coast would work perfectly. It would remind them of the good old days when they could blame other people honestly.
January 13th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
Smoke less meth, Steve.
January 13th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
“joe from Lowell,” you can offer pro bono services to a client even if they could pay. Obviously, high-quality representation is very expensive, and would often be burdensome even for the very well-off.
January 13th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
Couldn’t they route the line differently? Chevy Chase is a pretty good course; would hate to see it go to waste. I always spend some time in the area when I am hanging out with DC friends.
January 13th, 2009 at 4:44 pm
I think Matt should probably ask some of the people working for CAP on the bottom rungs — the janitors and so forth — if they really appreciate what he posts to his blog.
My coworker and I have been chatting it up with the custodian who comes by to clean up at the end of the work day here. Turns out he’s a fascinating guy. He’s an immigrant from Oaxaca whose first language was Zapotec. He also works at a restaurant and manages a few rental properties. He owns three houses here in L.A. and has a bunch of land back in Oaxaca where he intends to retire.
January 13th, 2009 at 4:51 pm
What is with all this obsession about trains bringing in bad people? Seriously, Argus switched from a mall close to his house to a mall far away because the close-by mall got a metro stop? And thus Argus was going to get killed? Stephen Myles states, like it’s totally indisputable, that the Purple Line will bring in the bad element?
I drove trucks in Seattle for a few years. When I had a route in Rainier Valley or the CD or some other poor neighborhood, and I had to knock on someone’s door for something, they would answer the door. When I had to do the same in the suburbs, people would peek through peepholes or curtains, pretend they weren’t home, talk to me by shouting through a closed door, etc. When I did strike up a conversation with them they would often marvel that I lived in the dangerous hellhole of Seattle. They lived in gated communities with armed security guards and automatic burglar alarms and triple locks because they were absolutely convinced that the poor people were just about ready to jump in their hoopties and drive out to the rich neighborhoods to start robbing. They would panic at the thought of affordable housing going up anywhere near them, or a mall being built, or anything else that in their minds would attract poor people. Their fears were actually quite Marxist; the poor might not show any signs of rising up and killing the rich, but don’t try and tell that to suburban hypochondriacs cowering behind their many layers of security.
Argus, you will not be killed by the Springfield metro station. Myles, you will not be killed by the purple line.
January 13th, 2009 at 4:57 pm
As you’ll recall, the sainted Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Beverly Hills) emasculated the Los Angeles subway in 1986 by not allowing it to proceed to the sea. Ever since, it dead ends in Koreatown, keeping all the car-less riff-raff out of Waxman’s super-affluent and super-liberal district, and making what portions of the subway that did get built fairly useless.
January 13th, 2009 at 5:04 pm
I Googled “Springfield Mall crime” and got an eyeful, e.g.:
DO NOT SHOP AT SPRINGFIELD MALL!!!! This mall is ghetto, full of gangs, rowdy, obnoxious teenagers, rude younger crows that need to put some clothes on and shot showing 95% of their bodies, nobody wants to see their butts, midriff, cleavage down to their waistline. Too much riffraff in this mall, the riff raff needs to take showers, baths, the smell is awful. The mall is FILTHY just like most of the clientele. There’s no need to go to Mexico, it’s already in Springfield Mall. Springfield Mall is ‘crime city’. For those of you who go to Springfield Mall, enjoy yourselves. I won’t see you there, I don’t shop there, I DON’T GO TO THAT MALL and if you have any brains in your head, you WON’T go there either. Even if the Mall is renovated, it is still Springfield Mall, it’s still FILTH, it is still GHETTO, it is still gang-city, etc. You WON’T see me at Springfield Mall. I give this mall a minus zero rating.
Lots more comments to that effect. But I found none that say it’s the Metro bringing in the Scary Brown People. Apparently the neighborhood (which was always pretty lower-middle-class) has been Hispanicized.
January 13th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
As you’ll recall, the sainted Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Beverly Hills) emasculated the Los Angeles subway in 1986 by not allowing it to proceed to the sea.
This is actually true. The Purple line out to K-Town gets relatively light ridership, but it should be noted that the Red Line, which extends into Hollywood and the Valley, is generally packed to the gills.
Nevertheless, Waxman is a prime example of how being liberal on the national level, or for certain issues, in no way predicts how liberal one will be for local issues. And of course, Waxman is a supporter of the Subway to the Sea today, 20 years too late.
January 13th, 2009 at 5:42 pm
Re: I know that in California NIMBYism by rich people not wanting light rail to their communities because they fear an influx of poor people has not gone well at all.
Why would poor people pay the fare to ride a train and get off just to gawk at McMansions? And if they’re coming to work in those enighborhoods, whether as maids, landscapers or McDonald’s fry cooks then they’ll be showing up anyway, whether by train or by some old beater car.
January 13th, 2009 at 6:07 pm
Why would poor people pay the fare to ride a train and get off just to gawk at McMansions? And if they’re coming to work in those enighborhoods, whether as maids, landscapers or McDonald’s fry cooks then they’ll be showing up anyway, whether by train or by some old beater car.
The Westside of L.A. is either the biggest or second-biggest (I can’t remember which) concentration of jobs in the L.A. area, and it’s also totally unserved by any trains. Traffic gets completely jammed there, which is why they need the trains. Beater cars pollute more and add just as much to an already crazy traffic situation as a new car.
January 13th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
What’s up with the fear and loathing at the Springfield Mall? I work across from the Ballston Mall (Orange Line) and when I have to go to a “real” mall, I go to the Pentagon City Mall/Lifestyle Center/Big Boxes (Blue/Yellow).
My only complaint is how crowded they are with many humans spending real American Dollars at profitable businesses. Oh, the tragedy!
Sure, I have observed Teenageus Americanus at both places, and yeah, the females need to cover themselves and the males need a haircut. Both sexes are loud as hell, obnoxious, and have no self-awareness. But that’s what my dad said about my sisters and me.
What the hell does all that have to do with the Metro?
January 13th, 2009 at 6:17 pm
So only liberal causes can be pro bono?
And BTW, Matthew, only ignoramuses like Al Gore still believe in man-made global warming (if it exists at all).
January 13th, 2009 at 6:26 pm
The bringing in the poor people complaint is dumb in this context – the poor people can get there already – they just have to ride the red line for 45 minutes – it’s just a convenience thing, since it takes 10 minutes by car if there’s no traffic (and 45 when there is).
And the environmental complaints are equally dumb – this is rich part of DC and the suburbs, not some wilderness area. Sidley’s just trying to keep their associates busy since there’s no other work….
January 13th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
NIMBYism _is_ a liberal cause, it is the mother of all liberal causes. There is a perfect and absolute correlation between cities with high per-capita feng shui consultants and big democratic fundraisers and those with “progressive” legislation like minimum 60 acre lot sizes. San Francisco has gotten _less_ dense over the last 50 years (those damn Republicans!) The local progressive movement regards their successful battle to shut down mostly Chinese infill urbanization of the western suburbs as a fouding triumph, and looks back with horror on a brief period 10 years ago when Irish builders managed to refasion disused and decrepit industrial space as attractive lofts before being banned. If you are into urbanization there are simply no conservative dragons to slay, all your opposition is from CAP donor, pro-bono lawyer, historic preservationist, status-quo-forever “progressives.”
January 13th, 2009 at 7:14 pm
Be nice to the Obamas’ former firm. Sidley is routinely recognized for its pro bono efforts, and they are very good about allowing associates to segue into full time pro bono roles (a brillient friend with a very promising career was allowed to move into a parttime position with the firm advocating on behalf of Afghanistan/Iraq vets denied VA benefits).
(I left because of a spousal job move, and not only have I kept in touch with my former colleagues, but they went above and beyond to place calls when I moved jobs a year down the line.)
January 13th, 2009 at 7:15 pm
“Brillient” is how you spell the adjective when used to describe a woman, right? Sort of like comedian/comedienne?
January 13th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
Yea, like such liberal nations as… Spain? Those crazy Spanish and their failed socialism. Funny, the only thing that works well are the highways.
January 13th, 2009 at 7:32 pm
You do realize that New York’s subways were built privately… But I guess that fact wouldn’t fit into your nice little neat world.
Tragedy of the commons SUPPORTS the case for privatization. Why would you cite it as a reason for public rail system?
January 13th, 2009 at 7:34 pm
How about an aerial cable car instead? And yes, I’m serious. Smaller footprint, probably cheaper.
January 13th, 2009 at 7:38 pm
It’s a good idea that will help reduce congestion on the Beltway, reduce carbon emissions, and enhance the region’s ability to keep growing in a sustainable manner.
In what way? The growth that follows the reduction in congestion will increase the density of the urban environment. Considering that every meal that every person in a major city eats travels an average 1500 miles to reach them, how is commuting by train supposed to reduce carbon emissions? It is ridiculous to claim that the region around DC is growing in a sustainable manner and to pretend that your favored project will help keep it that way. Every person that moves to DC is makes the region less sustainable.
January 13th, 2009 at 9:01 pm
I live in Silver Spring and I’m in favor of light rail for the Purple Line. It’s a great idea that will ultimately improve the quality of life of those of us that live near the line. Plus, as country clubs go, the Columbia Country Club is kind of pathetic, and good on Matt for helping to publicly shame Sidley Austin for slavishly helping the Ritchie Rich’s of the world.
January 13th, 2009 at 9:15 pm
What about a big-ass chair lift? You don’t see chair lifts in use for public transportation like you should. I think that’s a shame. You could have chair lifts going all over the city…
January 13th, 2009 at 10:06 pm
The local progressive movement regards their successful battle to shut down mostly Chinese infill urbanization of the western suburbs as a fouding triumph
It is news to me that San Francisco has western suburbs. On the Farallons, that would be?
January 13th, 2009 at 10:16 pm
The Purple Line is needed, but the route is horrible. It would destroy the only viable bicycling trail (Capital Crescent) in the area. It has the potential to decimate still-fragile downtown Silver Spring, too, by routing an aboveground train through the heart of the walkable business district. Areas near aboveground tracks tend to be blighted for a block or so in either direction. It isn’t just NIMBYism to be concerned about those losses.
The real solution that makes everyone happy is simply to put the line underground. If that happens, we aren’t even having this discussion. However, no one wants to pony up the (substantial) amount necessary. Stimulus, anyone?
January 13th, 2009 at 10:26 pm
Heh, Yglesias gets p3wnd by Sailer.
January 13th, 2009 at 11:22 pm
The Purple Line is needed, but the route is horrible. It would destroy the only viable bicycling trail (Capital Crescent) in the area.
I’m not familiar with the territory in question, but can’t a bridge or tunnel be built for cyclists? (I’m assuming it’s a lot cheaper to move the cyclists than move the train).
January 14th, 2009 at 12:17 am
Ha ha. Yglesias (and the like minded) fall victim to Kip’s Law.
January 14th, 2009 at 12:30 am
“… now that somebody proposed to build a residential subdivision near their, er, residential subdivision, they suddenly discover they were all spotted salamanders in a past life.”
Rich suburbanites hardly have a monopoly on selective concern for endangered species. There were about three people on the planet who cared about spotted owls until a few really crafty environmentalists realized that said owls, in conjunction with the Endangered Species Act, would allow them to shut down logging in the Pacific Northwest. It was a political wedge. And a damn effective one.
Unfortunately for litigious environmentalists, rich suburbanites learn quickly. And so do their lawyers.
January 14th, 2009 at 1:06 am
I think matt owes it to his readers to rebut some of sailer’s criticisms…. Love the blog but this demands a response
January 14th, 2009 at 1:27 am
Yglesias has not yet been p3ned by Sailer. When conservatives are in power and urge deregulation for their projects, we can still hope that Yglesias will support some of them and show some consistency. Also, Yglesias might devote a post to Affirmative Action regulation, which does indeed slow development to a crawl by scaring demanding inefficient set-asides and scaring the developers out of the picture with the high possibility that they will be hit by diversity lawsuits in spite of their best efforts to comply with bad laws. Also, Steve’s point that these AA regulations usually result in Set-Asides at highly uncompetitive prices for connected contractors using minority frontmen is right. on. the. money. Steve could be a bit more tactful; but as usual, the facts are on his side.
January 14th, 2009 at 1:58 am
What is there to debate? Affirmative action is stupid. I don’t see the point in legitimising it and elevating it to some sort of respectable policy debate.
It really ought be just laughed out of the public sphere.
January 14th, 2009 at 5:03 am
I don’t believe comment 42 is really by Steve Sailer. It doesn’t sound like something he would write. I suspect someone else is trying to discredit Sailer.
January 14th, 2009 at 5:03 am
Who needs the purple line when you can have the Milky Way Transport Authority ?
January 14th, 2009 at 5:13 am
This is fascinating. I only know DC geography from Fallout 3. Everybody mentions metro stops, and I almost know what they’re talking about.
January 14th, 2009 at 7:14 am
Actually, there is no paved Capital Crescent trail between Bethesda and Silver Spring. There’s a temporary gravel trail that bikers don’t use much compared to the rest of the trail. I think the plan for the Purple Line (at least the light rail v.) is actually to finish paving the Capital Crescent trail and have it alongside the line. I am a runner and sort of hate recreational biking, so I actually prefer the gravel, but bikers hate it.
As for Downtown SS, with the exception of one or two blocks, it’s actually not very walkable at all, unfortunately. The roads are wide in such a way that encourages traffic to move very fast and not heed pedestrians. It’s really built for traffic, not pedestrian, flow. Your point about blight alongside rail tracks is well taken, but I think people are hoping that light rail won’t have the same impact. My experience of light rail is living in Baltimore for 3 years, so I’m skeptical personally of that claim. Though I do miss watching people trying to drive on the light rail tracks, so that should be entertaining.
Personally, the Purple Line will be extremely convenient for me as I live in Silver Spring and work in North Bethesda. I bike to work most days but take the bus when the weather is bad, and it’s not very fun. However, I’m not convinced folks will actually use it. The fact that everyone wants the line as far away from them as possible isn’t very encouraging.
January 14th, 2009 at 9:02 am
This posting got virtually every important fact wrong, and substituted character assassination for analysis. Reasonable minds may come to different conclusions about the Purple Line. But there was nothing reasonable about your critique of the Town of Chevy Chase, which appears to have been lifted from a press release issued by a developer front group.
First, contrary to your claim, the Town does not oppose the Purple Line. The State is studying six versions of the Purple Line, and the Town is championing the alternative that uses bus rapid transit (BRT) and provides service to the NIH campus via Jones Bridge Road. Why? Because this BRT alternative will cost $1 billion less to build, it is the only version that provides direct service to the fastest growing employment center in Bethesda, the NIH campus, and it is by far the least environmentally destructive approach. Contrary to a common misperception, BRT is cleaner than light rail – the State’s own analysis says so. And light rail will destroy up to 17 acres of trees along the Capital Crescent Trail, one of the country’s most popular hiker/biker trails in the country. These trees will be permanently removed from the Rock Creek watershed, an area of ongoing state and federal environmental concern where the State is currently replanting trees.
The Chevy Chase Land Company stands to gain in hundreds of millions of dollars in development rights if the light rail goes through where it wants it. No wonder it is spending for a slick paid media operation to promote its preferences. Spending $1 billion more to advance the interests of a wealthy developer who wants to kill a park isn’t progressive in my book.
January 14th, 2009 at 9:09 am
This was the best line from the review of the Springfield mall:
I give this mall a minus zero rating. Wow, minus zero.
I love self-abnegating comments. Like writing And BTW, Matthew, only ignoramuses like Al Gore still believe in man-made global warming (if it exists at all). at the end of your comment.
It’s a like a small, flashing sign reading “ignore me.”
January 14th, 2009 at 10:20 am
Mr Iglesias:
With all due respect, you do not understand the principle underlying an attorney’s obligation to perform some work pro bono. It’s not prestegious, and there is no “self conception” involved.
The client’s cause need not be “good,” and thus the pro bono appellation does not, or at least should not, imply that the work is that of the “do gooder” variety. The idea is that the playing field in our courts should be as level as possible. If Bernie Madoff can get lawyers to to try to keep him out of prison through lawyerly negotiations or tactics, so should the child of poor parents caught stealing a bicycle. That’s all. There is no implication intended that bicycle-stealing is to be encouraged.
Attacking Sidley Austin for representing the opponents to the plan is an example of the worst form of ad hominim. I’m old enough to remember when ad hominin arguments were recognized for what they are. I’m feeling older every day.
January 14th, 2009 at 10:33 am
Dave should not (especially after wrongly accusing Matt of character assassination, and especially in an anonymous post) make false accusations that a citizen group is a developer front group.
The Action Committee for Transit, of which I am president, is a citizen group with hundreds of dues-paying members that is more than 20 years old. We were in favor of light rail in this corridor when the Chevy Chase Land Company was against it.
To judge the accuracy of Dave’s claim that the town does not oppose the Purple Line, I suggest readers look at this page on our web site and follow the links.
January 14th, 2009 at 10:46 am
Spokeytown – speak for yourself: Here are two stories from the Springfield mall from the last 12 months.
These are both in the last year:
1. Barbara Jean Bosworth, an Alexandria woman who apparently had been abducted from the Springfield shopping mall and forced into her own car by robbers was killed yesterday in Prince William County when the car crashed as the robbers fled from pursuers, authorities said.
2. Fairfax County police are investigating the early morning shooting outside the Springfield Mall that left a 19-year-old Woodbridge man dead.
January 14th, 2009 at 10:48 am
I live in Silver Spring and commute to UMD College Park while completing my graduate degree. While a Purple Line would theoretically be great for the many commuter-students, College Park crime is a very real issue. I get regular email alerts about strong-arm (and occasionally armed) robberies that occur late-night around campus. As there are no real bars or nightlife on the proposed Purple-Line stops, a midnight or earlier cutoff (as opposed to the rest of the Metro’s 3am extension on weekend nights) may alleviate some of the crime fears.
A Purple Line would probably end up making College Park worse off though, as the students, faculty, and employees who serve as a stabilizing buffer against the further ghetto-ization of CP can find better housing options somewhere in Montgomery County.
In response to prior comments, Georgetown seems to be doing pretty fine without Metro access.
January 14th, 2009 at 10:49 am
That’s why, for example, the white-shoe Philadelphia firm of Pepper, Hamilton & Scheetz took on the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists as a pro bono client to fight Pennsylania’s aborton statutes up to the Supreme Court — cuz those poor doctors couldn’t afford to pay for lawyers.
January 14th, 2009 at 10:59 am
No kidding. At the risk of improving the impersonations, I’ll point out that the real Sailer posts with his name linking to his blog and the fake Sailer of comment 42 does not.
January 14th, 2009 at 11:22 am
This same faux-Sailer is also posting over at McArdle’s. He has been in an extended, and hilarious, exchange with some guy who refuses to believe he is a fake even though he keeps coming out and saying so.
January 14th, 2009 at 11:38 am
With regard to Argus at 10:46: As stated, Barbara Bosworth was carjacked and abducted from Springfield Mall by two men, one of whom later crashed the car in Prince William County. Bosworth and the driver were killed; the other perpetrator, who was badly injured, has been indicted for felony murder.
This was a very bad thing, and certainly not a good advertisement for the mall. The suspect, however, is reported to be from Woodbridge, which makes me doubt that he rode out on the Metro from DC. Which was Argus’s thesis.
(In general, I believe that enclosed malls are a dying breed, in the DC area as elsewhere. The one which seems to be thriving, as noted above, is Pentagon City, which does get a lot of business from young black people arriving on the subway. If there is a crime problem there, I haven’t heard about it.)
January 14th, 2009 at 11:40 am
Sorry, but Philly firms aren’t white shoe – only boston and very old new york firms can even facially qualify for that distinction.
As for the true meaning of pro bono, it’s unpaid work undertaken “for the public good.” It can also be work on behalf of a group or individual that would otherwise go unrepresented, as adequate representation is, in itself, a public good. Representation to ensure women’s right to undergo medical procedures without state interference is, by definition, a public good (not that the American College of Obs and Gyns is a deep pocket organization to begin with).
“My wife’s vanity project to keep the criminals (read: blacks and latinos) out of my neigborhood” doesn’t qualify under any reasonable understanding of pro bono. There’s no public good – only gain for rich whiteys. If her organization wanted to get a local trial attorney to take the case she could easily fund it – plenty of these people pay for their hotly contested divorces after all, and her husband certainly made upwards of 1.5 million last year. Instead, she gets a huge firm to represent her for free because she’s married to a partner of said huge firm.
January 14th, 2009 at 11:53 am
The second incident referred to by Argus is evidently the 2007 shooting of Christian Arguleta outside a Mall area restaurant. Two members of the MS-13 gang were indicted last spring. The press release refers to both as “formerly of Fairfax County.” The sum of the evidence that Springfield Mall’s crime problem has anything to do with Metro remains zero.
January 14th, 2009 at 2:36 pm
Obviously, comment #42 is not by me, and thus is fraudulent.
It is, however, representative of the typical inability of Matt’s commenters to offer reasoned responses to my arguments.
January 14th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
Seamus!
Apropos of nothing, I’m also known as “Seamus” to my immediate family.
Anyway, what’s your point? The same point as Mr. Iglesias? I know nothing about the case you cite. If you feel stongly about the case, I think – actually, I know – that you would be better advised to argue your side of the merits of that case. Attacking the firm that presented the case in court because it did or did not charge a fee to its client says nothing about the merits. I know, because, inter alia, having read what you wrote, I was not persuaded for or against.
That’s why ad hominim is probably the most boring type of argument in the blogosphere. If you encountered it only once in a while, it would be no big deal. But it’s so freaking pervasive. Most people seem to have forgotten, or never to have learned, that it’s baloney from word one.
January 15th, 2009 at 9:59 am
Representation to ensure women’s right to undergo medical procedures without state interference is, by definition, a public good
So, by definition, is the prosecution of criminals. It would seem to follow therefore that law firms should be able to lend a free hand to prosecutors’ offices and claim that work as “pro bono publico”?
January 15th, 2009 at 10:10 am
Attacking the firm that presented the case in court because it did or did not charge a fee to its client says nothing about the merits.
I wasn’t talking about the merits of the case. I was talking about the bizarre way we use the term “pro bono” to refer to representation that has nothing to do with providing legal service to those who can’t afford it, but furthers a political agenda favored by the law firms.
Representation to ensure women’s right to undergo medical procedures without state interference is, by definition, a public good
Nice way to put the rabbit into the hat, by the way. It would be just as valid to phrase the issue thus: “providing representation as guardians ad litem for unborn children to prevent their being killed in utero is, by definition, a public good.” Unless, of course, you think that where “the public good” lies is self-evidently on the pro-choice side. The fact that a majority of the Pennsylvania legislature voted the other way suggests either that the question isn’t so clear-cut, or that the legislators just suddenly went wacky.
January 19th, 2009 at 4:56 pm
Steve, maybe no one here answers your posts because they are asinine and not related to the subject at hand. Yglesias never questions the environmental regulations that may hold up the Purple Line, he questions the motivations of those who would use those regulations, perhaps unnecessarily, to hold up a project that they would support anywhere but where they live. Do you understand the point now, doofus, or should I use simpler language?
January 23rd, 2009 at 4:39 pm
Not that you’ll see it at this point, but Seamus:
“So, by definition, is the prosecution of criminals.”
You missed the other part of the “public good” definition, which is that the client (in this case the state) would otherwise go without representation. In this regard, the best course of action would be to raise DA salaries and hire more of them, which I would fully support. No one should have scrape by on 50 grand per year (while trying to repay law school loans, which in my case totaled more than my mortgage on graduation) just to fulfill their dream of being a prosecutor. As for law firms helping out DA’s offices, in most cases they would be conflicted out due to the white-collar work they do. Also, the state is by definition a deep pocket, so we let them allocate resources as they see fit (although, as above we will argue for better allocation of said resources), while we generally donate services to those genuinely in need – indigent folks stuck in jail.
“Unless, of course, you think that where “the public good” lies is self-evidently on the pro-choice side.”
Well, duh…. Stay the fuck out of my wife’s uterus asshole.
January 23rd, 2009 at 4:41 pm
Sorry, that should have been: “uterus, asshole.”
February 27th, 2009 at 3:34 am
cheap wow gold here,
Cheap Wow Gold ,
March 1st, 2009 at 5:49 pm
cialis
Great site. Good info
March 2nd, 2009 at 4:35 am
levitraIf you have to do it, you might as well do it right
March 11th, 2009 at 4:18 am
Great site. Good info
March 12th, 2009 at 10:52 pm
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
March 22nd, 2009 at 5:56 am
tramadol
It is the coolest site,keep so!
April 2nd, 2009 at 4:58 am
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
buy cheap viagra