By Jim Schutze
By Rachel Watts
By Lauren Drewes Daniels
By Anna Merlan
By Lee Escobedo
By Eric Nicholson
To build the rail system envisioned for this thriving economic metroplex will be enormously expensive. But without it, fewer and fewer companies will want to move downtown or to this region.
If Wendell Cox puts L.A.'s highway system on his résumé as a positive accomplishment ("Highwaymen," July 20), he is a truly disillusioned man. The highway system there looks like spaghetti, and the traffic reports in the morning are astounding. Imagine a commute from Plano to downtown Dallas taking 2 1/2 hours every day, with or without accidents. Nice legacy, Wendell. Is that his view of how all cities should be?
I do not need to mention L.A. pollution here.
The funding of anti-rail propaganda by General Motors is stunningly reminiscent of the General Motors-Firestone-Standard Oil conspiracy to take U.S. rail service off the map in the 1930s. The legacy of their self-serving accomplishment is the agony millions of commuters go through every day.
This must not devolve into a conservative-vs.-liberal issue. This isn't a black-and-white issue. It is a difficult social issue for this country to grapple with because of our 50-year love affair with the automobile and total commitment to the highway system.
I'm not suggesting complete abandonment of the highway system, just that we have the opportunity for alternative transportation if we want to use it. It really is about choices for the individual. For the society, the issues loom larger: economic survival, clean air, more quality time with family, and the protection of natural areas from suburban sprawl to name a few.
Name withheld by request