The basic problem is that a lot of these politicians don’t take transportation seriously unless it is done using a car. And we lost a few good ones that knew better, like Jim Oberstar.

Certainly there are plenty of situations where a bicycle will not work–if you live thirty miles from work, for example. But there are just as many places where a bike, bus, or shoe leather (or some combination) would work. One has to have a toolbox of transportation tools, not a single tool. A car is a single tool.

But bicycling advocates need to be careful not to shoot themselves in the foot. Uncritically demanding special facilities is not entirely the most helpful way to start the dialog in these austere times. Start with the health (better health profiles) and financial (less money sent offshore for oil, lower VMD travel demand, lower health care costs) benefits and the fact that a bicycle puts zero wear and tear on roads. It reduces one’s heathcare costs for the diseases caused by sedentary behavior.

Follow up with education. A competent bicyclist can usually make do on existing facilities. When we have more bicyclists on the road it is easier to argue for a bigger piece of the pie.

Don’t start with environmental benefits or with one’s hand out. Remember, most of the new Congressmen/women were elected by asserting that foreign oil dependence can be cured by domestic drilling, and that there are no such things as anthropogenic drivers to climate change. As if digging up all the organic carbon sequestered since the Devonian and burning it will not affect atmospheric chemistry or thermal blanketing due to infrared heat trapping. Or, that we can continue to burn a hundred million years or more accumulation of fossil fuels per century and not run out. Sigh.

The new Congress will have to be slowly brought around to reality. Hopefully, not too slowly. We have our work cut out for us. But riding our bikes, or having a successful LAB, is not entirely dependent on changing the mind of every butthead inside the beltway. Thankfully.