What’s the Matter With WMATA?
• January 29, 2015

Time and time again, Metrorail – once a state-of-the-art transit system – has failed the city and its commuters. In June 2009, a Red Line collision during the afternoon rush killed nine people and injured 80, with some survivors trapped for hours in damaged cars. Two weeks ago, on Jan. 12, a woman was killed and 84 people were injured when smoke filled the L’Enfant Plaza station.

Then, on Jan. 20, there were reports of smoke in both the Rosslyn and Union Station Metro stations. What caused the smoke? Burning rubber from a train’s brakes. This should be no surprise to anyone who rides Metro in the warmer months, when it is rare for stations not to reek of burning rubber.

Other deficiencies abound, such as Metro’s constantly broken escalators (also known, when running, to injure riders by throwing them down), extended wait times (looking at you, Red Line), inexplicable service outages at certain stations (if yours, you know the ones) and deteriorating orange fabric floor covering in the cars (the often disgusting antithesis of a red carpet).
Metro service is so notoriously bad that there’s a Twitter account (@unsuckdcmetro) committed to documenting its flaws. The account churns out hundreds of tweets a week, with its 28,400 followers chiming in to report stories about bad personal experiences, sometimes with photo and video proof.

In the wake of the recent incidents, the agency in charge of Metrorail, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA), is proposing to – what else? – raise fares and reduce service.
This proposal is a slap in the face, not only for regular Metro riders but for all Washington residents. A Metrorail ride can cost up to $6.90, an absurdly high price for the subpar service the system provides. (For comparison, a ride on the far more extensive New York City subway costs a flat $2.50).

If our metropolitan area hopes to continue to attract millennials, and the tax money and urban revitalization that come with them, Metrorail needs to be turned around. The bodies in charge – the governments of D.C., Maryland and Virginia, in addition to Congress – should use the Jan. 12 tragedy to spur large-scale improvements in the system. These may well require not only better management and funding, but a complete reorganization of this unresponsive agency.

It’s a Snow Day, Not Judgment Day
•

Every winter, with the prospect of imminent snow – not to mention wind, cold and ice – people who go to school, run our schools and work in our schools go a little crazy.

Gone are the days when hardy kids (according to our grandparents in Idaho) walked at least five miles to school carrying their books and homework across the tundra. Nowadays, school officials avidly watch weather forecasts for the data they need to decide whether to close schools, call a two-hour delay or stay open.

As far as we can tell, it’s a crapshoot.

The last big brouhaha came several weeks ago, when local weather folks predicted the possibility of an inch of snow (maybe) or a little more at worst. We got three inches. Some schools and parents were blindsided and buses had a heck of a bad time on slippery roads. Officials who opted for their schools to open were roundly criticized and weather forecasters had egg – or snow – on their faces.

Later, when another storm was predicted, some school districts erred on the side of caution. They closed, but very little snow showed up (down?). They, too, were roundly criticized.

Weather forecasting remains an imprecise science. And on television it is as much a show as a vital source of information. Weather people on television love a certain amount of drama. They get excited about snow. It’s like a 50-car pileup for traffic reporters.

The TV talk hypes “possible” snow accumulation and plays on our memories of blizzards past, such as 2010’s Snowmageddon (or was it Snowpocalypse?).

That little note of anxiety coming from the various “Storm Centers” can panic school officials and make them jump the gun – or wait until the last minute, which means teachers have to get up early to find out if they’re going in late.

The decision to close or not to close, to open on time, late or not at all, isn’t an easy one. There’s more to it than trusting your favorite meteorologist. It’s not just about the commute to work for teachers, but also about whether it’s safe for buses on the rarely plowed back roads to get to freezing children waiting at bus stops. There are issues of black ice and extreme cold to consider.

Plus, schools are sometimes in the middle of testing periods, which are difficult to reschedule. And a heavy accumulation of snow days can lead to a backlog at the end of the school year.

But not every storm is a crisis, or a Perfect Storm. In the end, for both weather forecasters and school officials, it’s a judgment call. Let’s not make it sound so much like the Last Judgment. [gallery ids="118277,118290,118283" nav="thumbs"]

Veep Power: Romney Clears a Future Ryan Presidential Run
• January 16, 2015

Mitt Romney was right when he introduced Paul Ryan as the “next President of the United States” in Norfolk, Va., Aug. 11.

Ryan is not the “next” president, but Romney handed him the keys to the White House in the future. At the very least, Romney likely handed Ryan the Republican nomination for the presidency — unless Ryan doesn’t want it or something totally unpredictable happens. Not all vice presidents become president, but they have the best shot.

Almost one-third – 14 out of 43 U.S. presidents – were vice presidents before they became president.
Vice presidential candidates make little difference in the outcome of an election, but they do make a difference in future elections. For that reason alone, the vice presidential selection is among the most important decisions that all presidential candidates make.

George Washington’s vice president was John Adams, who became the nation’s second president. Adams’ vice president was Thomas Jefferson, the third president. The presidency is like an Olympic relay race.

President Barack Obama, number 44, is the 12th president during my lifetime. There have been 43 individuals who have held the office; the non-consecutive, two-term Grover Cleveland is counted twice. I wasn’t there when Adams and Jefferson rose from vice president to president, but here’s what happened during my life.

1948: Harry Truman, President Franklin Roosevelt’s vice president, was president when I was born. In fact, in 1948, the year before I was born, another of Roosevelt’s former vice presidents, Henry Wallace, ran for president against Truman.

1952: President Dwight Eisenhower’s vice president, Richard Nixon, later became President.

1956: Candidates appear to feign interest in being a vice presidential nominee. John Kennedy understood the importance, was unapologetic and made no secret of his desire to be Adlai Stevenson’s running mate, even while he knew that Eisenhower was going to crush Adlai Stevenson. Kennedy didn’t get the nomination, but his effort catapulted him onto the national stage. Four years later, he won the nomination and the presidency.

1960: Kennedy’s veep, Lyndon Johnson, became president.

1964: Johnson’s vice-president, Hubert Humphrey, became the Democratic nominee in 1968.

1968: Though Humphrey lost his bid for the presidency, his vice presidential running mate, Ed Muskie, was the original front runner for the Democratic nomination in 1972. President Nixon, a former vice president who lost in the 1960 election, won in 1968.

1972: Nixon’s second vice president, Gerald Ford, became president.

1976: Ford’s running mate, Bob Dole, became the Republican nominee two decades later. Jimmy Carter won in 1976 but lost to Ronald Reagan in 1980.

1980: President Reagan selected George H. W. Bush as his vice president. Bush 41 was elected president in 1988.

1984: Carter’s vice president Mondale was the Democratic nominee.

1988: Like Kennedy, Bill Clinton made known his vice presidential interest known in 1988. He didn’t get it, but also like Kennedy, he won the nomination and the presidency four years later. Lloyd Bentsen, the Democratic vice presidential nominee in 1988, ran and lost in 1992, but did become Treasury Secretary.

1992: President Clinton’s vice president, Al Gore, was the Democratic Party’s nominee in 2000.

1996: Bob Dole, Ford’s running mate, ran against President Clinton and lost.

2000: President Bush’s vice president, Dan Qualye, ran for president though he could not overcome his legacy as a tongue-tripping vice president. George W. Bush (number 43), never a VP, but the son of a president, defeated Al Gore who had been vice president for eight years. Gore’s running mate, Joe Lieberman, ran for president in 2004.

2004: The Democrats’ losing nominee, John Kerry, tapped John Edwards who became a leading candidate in 2008 until his personal life imploded.

2008: John McCain’s vice presidential pick, Sarah Palin, energized the McCain campaign, electrified the nation and breathed life into the Tea Party. Had she run this year, she may have won the nomination. Palin is still drawing larger crowds and has raised more money for statewide races than Romney has. She may continue to do so.

The vice presidency or vice presidential nominee is undoubtedly the best platform from which to launch a presidential campaign.

Ryan is serious, smart, and young. By tapping him, Romney put him on the front row of the national stage. Within the next decade, Ryan will run for president. He will begin that race as the frontrunner, and the presidency will be Ryan’s to win or lose.

Walter Nicholls
•

In every issue of The Georgetowner, Walter Nicholls, who passed away last Sunday, wrote a column called “What’s Cooking, Neighbor?” In the last of these, in this issue, we seem to be part of his conversation with Ruth Poupon.

This column and others over the past year make it clear that he was a real writer, a one-of-a-kind kind of person who breathed in and breathed out curiosity as if it were a rarefied ingredient in the atmosphere.

The former Washington Post staff writer was a Magellan of eateries and food shops. “He knew places nobody knew about and people who were not big culinary stars, but were special,” said Nancy McKeon, a former Washington Post editor who worked with him beginning in the 1990s.

He liked to go on expeditions where he would make discoveries – roots, vegetables, gardens, people who grew things or made them or cooked them – and the places where the process happened – barns, farms, country inns, out of the way bakeries and markets.

When you read his writing, you immediately get the idea that perhaps the most important ingredients of a meal are people: those who set the table, who serve the food, who cook and make and invent the food, and those who dine as opposed to just eat and digest. In this way, a dinner, a breakfast, a table can be a place where the imagination, in conjunction with educated and experienced taste buds, empathy, humor – and taste in the sense of appropriateness – can roam.

“We sent him to Alaska once for the Copper River Salmon Run, a fishing event, and he came back with detailed descriptions of the salmons, the fishing, the clothes people wore,” recalled McKeon. “He had so much energy, and he approached everything with intense excitement. He was almost like a toddler in his interests. He was always learning something new: a food, an ingredient.”

Walter Nicholls was 64. He had been diagnosed with liver cancer less than three weeks before he died.

Funeral arrangements are pending.

The Drama of Smoke and Mirrors on Marijuana
•

It has been pretty good theater. The drama of the last few days over the signing of the spending bill has been used to great effect by Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.) and his allies. The last-minute hijinks have given them solid TV time to portray themselves to their constituents back home as the true protectors of the misguided souls in the District, the ones seeking to legalize marijuana for purely recreational purposes.

Clearly, Article I, Section 8, of the constitution says that Congress has the power to knock the bill off the rails in any manner it sees fit. But in actuality it (that is, they) didn’t. The House left a gaping hole in the legislation. While the omnibus spending bill states that the District is barred from spending any funds to “enact” the legislation, there is nothing that specifically precludes the District from moving forward as originally planned. The District considers legalization to be “self-executing,” not requiring federal approval.

It is unlikely that the omission of the key words was an accident. By not including “carry out” after “enact,” a door was left open by the Republican-led House Appropriations Committee allowing D.C. to retain its home-rule autonomy. As an added benefit, the charade gives Rep. Harris the chance to run victory laps around the Beltway for his hard stance against the demon weed. He has the perfect cover when legalization finally occurs: claiming that D.C. thwarted the will of Congress, using fancy, big-city lawyers to exploit a technicality.

All the parties may ultimately get what they want, but it isn’t without cost. D.C. residents have been rudely reminded in what little regard they are held by the federal government, which can, on a whim, trample the wishes of 600,000 citizens. It is yet another blow to the body politic, fostering an environment of “them” against “us.”

It seems the Feds have failed to learn what Machiavelli expressed so memorably five centuries ago: “Never do any enemy a small injury for they are like a snake which is wounded and it will strike back the first chance it gets.”

The Gray Years
•

If there was ever a government administration that got off to a worse start than that of Mayor Vincent Gray, it’s difficult to find anywhere.

Elected by a wide margin over incumbent Adrian Fenty in 2010, Gray, who had run on a campaign slogan of “One City,” proceeded almost from the get-go to become embroiled in a campaign finance scandal and an investigation into his campaign by the District’s federal prosecutor which has been a part of his term like an unwanted stepchild knocking on the door loudly periodically.

Gray ran for re-election, because he felt that he had done a good job and deserved another term. In some ways that’s entirely true: the budget is stable; education reform is moving ahead apace, although not without sporadic controversies; crime on the whole is down; the city is a sea of building projects, with downtown especially transforming itself; Job prospects are better than they have been.

The burst of development throughout the city’s neighborhoods has put a damper on Gray’s signature “One City” initiative. It’s seen as gentrification in many parts of the city, widening the gap between rich and poor, and making it difficult for middle class residents to afford to stay in the city as rental and real estate prices rise and towers of condo buildings rise along with them.

Gray’s problem was and remains the ongoing federal investigation and its possible resolution in charges for him. Only days before the Democratic primary, businessman Jeffrey Thompson, who allegedly ran a shadow campaign, as part of Gray’s campaign, made a deal by which he implicated Gray. Gray lost the primary election.

It’s difficult to judge a mayoral term in which the mayor was the constant focus of an ongoing investigation. But the stewardship of the economy, the relative stability of the city is, all things considered, an achievement that Gray can take some credit for. As he leaves office by Jan. 2, he can take some solace in that, because the city is what it is at least in part because of his role as mayor, not in spite of his political and legal problems.

At Dunbar High School, the mayor gives his farewell speech Dec. 17.

Year End Accomplishments and Thanks
•

Every year, the holiday season seems to start a little earlier and glow a little brighter. This year was no different with holiday items in stores as early as September and more tree lightings and public holiday events this year than ever before. But, as we begin the holiday season in earnest, I think it’s important to reflect on the past year and to give thanks for all the blessings we enjoy.

Even though I’m elected to be a legislator, I always say half my job is working in the neighborhoods—perhaps the more important half and often the most rewarding. We were able to make some great improvements across the ward this year with renovations to Rose Park in Georgetown, Stead Park in Dupont Circle and Mitchell Park in Kalorama. We saw the beginning of renovations at Hyde-Addison School and the School Without Walls at Francis-Stevens, and the plan to renovate the Stevens School building for use by a school that helps students with developmental disabilities has finally been given approval by the Council. And just this week, we broke ground on Monday for the West End Library. I want to say thank you to all the committed community members who helped make these projects possible.

On the legislative side, we rewrote our tax code to lower taxes for nearly every resident and to expand the Earned Income Tax Credit to help those at the lower end of the income spectrum, and we increased the minimum wage in the District to $11.50 in three annual step increases. These two measures will help promote affordability, diversity and accessibility within the District. Also, of particular importance in Ward 2, my bill to incentivize businesses to buy trash compactors (and prevent rats) passed the Council earlier this month. It has been an honor to work with my colleagues on the Council and Mayor Gray to accomplish these efforts.

I say it often, but I really do have the best staff here at the Council. My office participated in the Council’s food drive again this year, and we appreciated the ability to give directly to families in need. Beyond this, throughout the year, my staff and I are out in the community at neighborhood civic associations, meetings with neighbors and agencies to address problems in the ward and attending community events. I have to say thank you to my dedicated staffers for making their support of our neighbors and residents a 24/7 commitment.

In closing, my family and I, as well as my staff, would like to wish you and yours a happy holiday season. This is always a wonderful time to spend with friends and family—and enjoy a little reflection. Happy New Year, and we will see you again in January!

Letters to the Editor, June 16
• January 14, 2015

 

-To the editor:

I read with considerable interest your June 2 editorial “Single Sales Ban: We’re Over It.” And I must say that I share your view when you question the need for the law in the first place.

But there are two important facts which your editorial overlooks. First, that resolution, drafted by Commissioner Bill Starrels (“he likes to cook,” according to the resolution) was adopted by the slimmest possible majority: 3-2-0, with Commissioner Golds and myself in opposition, and Commissioners Birch and Solomon in absentia. Further, I’d think as a matter of policy you would mention that the author of the “venomous” tract is a regular contributor to your paper.

Charles F. Eason, Jr.
Commissioner, ANC 2E07

To the editor:

As a longtime resident of Papermill Court in west Georgetown, I am writing out of concern that my fellow Georgetown residents may have developed a negative attitude about our neighborhood after reading an article in last issue of The Georgetowner about rodent control (“Georgetown to City Rats: Look Out,” June 2). The article described our lovely neighborhood as “claustrophobic,” “forgotten,” long-shuttered,” “defunct” and “ripe for infestation.” At least we don’t have any more rats. After reading this article even they won’t come here any more.

Charles Pinck
Georgetown

Letters to the Editor:
•

Park Service Pushback

I have had two recent and direct experiences with the National Park Service (Constitution Gardens and P Street Beach) which contradict the position expressed by Charles Pinck in the Georgetowner’s last issue. The National Park Service is not fulfilling its mission of maintenance of the pockets of land unjustifiably owned by them. The Georgetown waterfront receives more NPS attention than the vast majority of their holdings but the pocket areas we all pass every day are miserable … trash, tree limbs, duck detritus, unpruned bushes, etc. … and are testimony to the fact NPS is not doing its job. When that occurs in any other area in the economic system under which we operate, action is taken. And the action required is to turn over all those pocket parks to the city.

To assert that the city will not be a good steward of this land is to cite past history and fail to acknowledge the present good record of our Departments of Parks and Recreation and Public Works. To excuse the National Park Service based on their stewardship of the Georgetown waterfront or Yellowstone National Park is irrelevant to the quality of life in the Nation’s Capital. This issue is not related to private developers swooping in to take over Juarez Circle on Virginia Avenue; it is an issue of inadequate stewardship by NPS.

Linda Frees

Uber Stalled?
I had to chuckle about Jack Evans column on Uber. It’s funny how the District government, which can’t manage its own affairs, seems to be so intent on telling a private business how to run theirs. This is an entity that can’t issue business licenses in a timely manner. The Dmv? I would love to go one time, as I stand in the never ending line, and not see somebody in tears due to frustration. Ease of traffic is a major factor in creating a livable city. Uber gets people through town for a reasonable price. The district government does not know how to create a traffic circle (if the traffic engineers took a freshman class in design they might discover you don’t put a light every 40 feet), time traffic lights or just turn the damn things off at times. How many people have gone to the train station early in the morning with nobody around and sit at a traffic light every block?

We would be better off if Jack Evans would focus on getting his own house in order and keep out of private businesses. I’ll put my faith in Uber over DC government any day.

Sincerely,
Boyd Lewis

Send Your Letters to editorial@georgetowner.com

Nous Sommes Charlie. Where Were We?
•

The world seemed to show up in Paris last Sunday, after the terrorist attack at the offices of French magazine Charlie Hebdo. Ten staffers at the satirical (some would say wildly offensive) publication and two police officers were gunned down Jan. 7.
The next day, a police officer was slain, and on the following day – just before the Jewish sabbath – the same person killed four persons at a kosher grocery in the French capital.

Three days of terror left 17 persons dead, excluding three Islamists killed by police.

On Jan. 11, world leaders – along with almost four million others – came together in Paris to rally for freedom of expression and the ideals of the Enlightenment. The biggest assembly ever in France, it was not so much a protest march as a proclamation of unity and support for the values of Western civilization. Whether you were there or just watched it on television, it took your breath away.

Yes, this time it seemed different . . . a new chapter in our new normal, a struggle that may come to define the 21st century. France called the attacks their 9/11 and declared the country at “war against terrorism, against jihadism, against radical Islamism, against everything that is intended to break fraternity, liberty, solidarity.”

In D.C., the first night after the attack, people rallied at the Newseum for free expression and to honor the memory of the Charlie Hebdo victims. On Sunday, there was a march from the Newseum to the Law Enforcement Officers Memorial. Christine Lagarde, head of the International Monetary Fund, who has held ministerial posts in the French government, was at both events.
No one representing the federal government attended either event.

By now, everyone is aware that the Obama administration sent no one to Sunday’s rally in Paris – save Jane Hartley, the U.S. Ambassador to France. The omission revealed a lack of emotional intelligence and lack of leadership by the White House. It moved the New York Daily News to write a striking headline to the administration: “You let the world down.”

We missed the moment. Shame on the administration. Shame on us.

Aside from a renewed sense of cooperation in fighting terrorism, what do we take away from this moment? How steadfast are we in defending the right of free expression for everyone and every opinion – which includes the right to offend? Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes called it the “freedom for the thought that we hate.”

Our citizens should follow that lead; the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects both freedom of the press and freedom of speech.

Let’s keep talking freely. It is one of our greatest weapons against terrorism and extremism.