I LOVE NY ... AND CALIFORNIA

The Average Man shouldn't like Arnold Schwarzenegger. He's arrogant, he can be kind of a doofus (see the movie Pumping Iron), and he pimped for Bush at the Republican National Convention (calling Democrats girly-men). More than that, however, I was angry -- and still am -- at the whole recall election fiasco. To me, it was just another example of conservatives gaining power by cheating the system (e.g. Texas gerrymandering). Does anyone really think Mr. Schwarzenegger would have won so easily had he been forced to run an actual campaign for more than a couple of months? The only consolation I received was that Darrell Issa lost after funding the thing.

Anyway, despite my strong feelings in this matter, I must give credit where credit is due. Aanold may not be perfect, but he's certainly done more for the environment and the global warming cause than any politician I can think of ... save Al Gore. I was inspired to write about this after reading a New York Times Editorial on Saturday that faults the federal government for moving too slowly on this important issue. In the article, it is stated that "Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California has warned that he will sue the Environmental Protection Agency unless it gives him the power to regulate automobile emissions." Certainly no girly-man behavior in that.

This then got me thinking about Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York. If you haven't heard, he just put forth a bold new plan to make NYC the greenest big U.S. city by reducing the city's global warming emissions 30 percent by 2030. As stated in the commentary, he plans to do this by implementing these items ...

All of New York's power plants and all the city's contaminated brownfields would be cleaned up, helping create vast new areas for an added 250,000 housing units. To put recreation space within reach of all New Yorkers, the city will open 290 schoolyards as public playgrounds and create public plazas in every community.

Roadways would be landscaped and 1 million trees planted. "Green" building standards would be required for all new structures and an array of financial incentives would be created to spark broad-scale energy rehabbing of buildings.

... Bloomberg's first (and toughest) sell may be congestion pricing for Manhattan, which he reluctantly embraced out of fear the economy of the city could be paralyzed by a projected 20 percent increase, by 2030, of traffic on the already clogged island ... The $8-a-day fee for cars and $21 for trucks ... would pay for vast subway improvements and expansion, plus increased commuter connections into the city.

So, there you go: two of the most (arguably) influential politicians on global warming are making things happen, and they are both ... oy ... Republicans. In a rare case for me, I was opposed to both of them, and I'm glad I lost.

Bringing it a little closer to home, I was saddened to read in the Los Angeles Times this weekend that the MTA is thinking about raising bus fairs to $2 from $1.25. As Queen Whackamole has suggested, a great way to reduce greenhouse gasses would be to make public transportation free. I agree, and L.A. certainly has some stinkin' thinkin' here. It is suggested that every 10% rise in fares drops ridership by 3%. And that is why San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom has ordered a study of eliminating bus and streetcar fares all together. Santa Barbara should do the same.

I'm in line with Bill Maher's assessment that some problems only government can fix, and global warming is one of them. That thought depressed me considering Bush's denial of science and Congress's "glacial" pace. But the recent actions of California and New York give me hope.