Farheen Hakeem's Political Courage

Voters in south Minneapolis district have the right to know where their candidates stand on the issues. Only Farheen Hakeem has the audacity to stand up for what she believes in and how she will fight for her constituents. This is taken from her Political Courage Test at VoteSmart.org:

Abortion Issues

Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding abortion.
	a) Abortions should always be illegal.
X	b) Abortions should always be legal.
	c) Abortions should be legal only within the first trimester of pregnancy.
	d) Abortions should be legal when the pregnancy resulted from incest or rape.
	e) Abortions should be legal when the life of the woman is endangered.
	f) Abortions should be subject to a mandatory waiting period.
	g) Require clinics to give parental notification before performing abortions on minors.
	h) Other or expanded principles

Budget and Tax Issues

State Budget: Indicate what state funding levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one level per category, you can use a number more than once.
Slightly Increase	a) Education (Higher)
Greatly Increase	b) Education (K-12)
Maintain Status	c) Emergency preparedness
Greatly Increase	d) Environment
Maintain Status	e) Health care
Slightly Decrease	f) Law enforcement
Maintain Status	g) Transportation and highway infrastructure
Greatly Increase	h) Welfare
Greatly Increase	i) Other or expanded categories
For Health care, I would like to join with other legislators to bring Single Payer Universal Health care to Minnesota.
State Taxes: Indicate what state tax levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one level per category, you can use a number more than once.
Greatly Increase	a) Alcohol taxes
Slightly Increase	b) Cigarette taxes
Greatly Increase	c) Corporate taxes
Slightly Increase	d) Gasoline taxes
Maintain Status	e) Income taxes (incomes below $75,000)
Slightly Increase	f) Income taxes (incomes above $75,000)
Greatly Decrease	g) Property taxes
Maintain Status	h) Sales taxes
Slightly Increase	i) Vehicle taxes
	j) Other or expanded categories
Undecided	1) Should state sales taxes be extended to Internet sales?
Yes	2) Should accounts such as a "rainy day" fund be used to balance the state budget?
No	3) Should fee increases be used to balance the state budget?
	4) Other or expanded principles

Campaign Finance and Government Reform Issues

Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding campaign finance and government reform.
Yes	a) Do you support limiting the number of terms for Minnesota governors?
Yes	b) Do you support limiting the number of terms for Minnesota state senators and representatives?
c) Do you support limiting the following types of contributions to state legislative candidates?
Yes	1) Individual
Yes	2) PAC
Yes	3) Corporate
Yes	4) Political Parties
Yes	d) Do you support requiring full and timely disclosure of campaign finance information?
Yes	e) Do you support imposing spending limits on state-level political campaigns?
No	f) Should Minnesota participate in the federal REAL ID program?
Yes	g) Should Minnesota allow homeowners whose mortgage is in foreclosure a one-year deferment on their primary residence?
h) Other or expanded principles
No Answer

Crime Issues

Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding crime.
	a) Increase state funds for construction of state prisons and hiring of additional prison staff.
	b) Establish the death penalty in Minnesota.
X	c) Support programs to provide prison inmates with vocational and job-related skills and job-placement assistance when released.
X	d) Implement penalties other than incarceration for certain non-violent offenders.
X	e) Decriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana.
	f) Minors accused of a violent crime should be prosecuted as adults.
	g) Support state and local law enforcement officials enforcing federal immigration laws.
X	h) Support hate crime legislation.
	i) Other or expanded principles

Education Issues

Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding education.
X	a) Support state funding of universal pre-K programs.
	b) Support federal education standards and testing requirements for K-12 students (No Child Left Behind).
X	c) Support state education standards and testing requirements for K-12 students.
	d) Support requiring public schools to administer high school exit exams.
	e) Allow parents to use vouchers to send their children to any public school.
	f) Allow parents to use vouchers to send their children to any private or religious school.
X	g) Provide state funding to increase teacher salaries.
	h) Support using a merit pay system for teachers.
X	i) Provide state funding for tax incentives and financial aid to help make college more affordable.
	j) Support allowing illegal immigrant high school graduates of Minnesota to pay in-state tuition at public universities.
	k) Other or expanded principles
I support J, but I would term it to be "Support allowing undocumented high school graduates of Minnesota to pay in-state tuition at public universities.

Employment Issues

Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding employment.
X	a) Increase funding for state job-training programs that re-train displaced workers and teach skills needed in today's job market.
	b) Reduce state government regulations on the private sector.
	c) Provide low interest loans and tax credits for starting, expanding, or relocating businesses.
	d) Provide tax credits for businesses that provide child care for children in low-income working families.
X	e) Increase state funds to provide child care for children in low-income working families.
X	f) Increase the state minimum wage.
X	g) Support laws that prevent employers from dismissing employees at will.
	h) Support financial punishments for those who knowingly employ illegal immigrants.
	i) Support increased work requirements for able-bodied welfare recipients.
	j) Increase funding for employment and job training programs for welfare recipients.
	k) Other or expanded principles

Environment and Energy Issues

Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding the environment and energy.
X	a) Promote increased use of alternative fuel technology.
	b) Support increased production of traditional domestic energy sources (e.g. coal, natural gas, oil, etc).
	c) Support providing financial incentives to farms that produce biofuel crops.
X	d) Use state funds to clean up former industrial and commercial sites that are contaminated, unused, or abandoned.
	e) Support funding for improvements to Minnesota's power generating and transmission facilities.
X	f) Support funding for open space preservation.
X	g) Limit carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases linked to global warming.
X	h) Enact environmental regulations even if they are stricter than federal law.
	i) Other or expanded principles
I would support increased production of renewable energy sources such as wind and solar. I would also support funding for improvements to Minnesota's power generating and transmission facilities if it was to reduce our carbon footprint on the planet.

Gun Issues

Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding guns.
Yes	a) Should background checks be required on gun sales between private citizens at gun shows?
No	b) Should citizens be allowed to carry concealed guns?
Yes	c) Should a license be required for gun possession?
Undecided	d) Do you support current levels of enforcement of existing state restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns?
Undecided	e) Do you support current state restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns?
	f) Other or expanded principles

Health Issues

Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding health.
	a) Ensure that citizens have access to basic health care through managed care, insurance reforms, or state-funded care where necessary.
	b) Guaranteed medical care to all citizens is not a responsibility of state government.
	c) Limit the amount of damages that can be awarded in medical malpractice lawsuits.
	d) Allow patients to sue their HMOs.
	e) Require hospitals and labs to release reports on infections that are a risk to public health, while not compromising patient confidentiality.
	f) Legalize physician assisted suicide in Minnesota.
	g) Support allowing doctors to prescribe marijuana to their patients for medicinal purposes.
	h) Other or expanded principles
I support single payer universal health care.

Social Issues

Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding social issues.
Yes	a) Should Minnesota recognize civil unions between same-sex couples?
Yes	b) Should same-sex couples be allowed to marry?
Yes	c) Should Minnesota provide state-level spousal rights to same-sex couples?
No	d) Do you support a moment of silence in public schools?
Undecided	e) Do you support voluntary prayer in public schools?
Yes	f) Do you support sexual education programs that include information on abstinence, contraceptives, and HIV/STD prevention methods?
No	g) Do you support abstinence-only sexual education programs?
Yes	h) Should the state government consider race and gender in state government contracting and hiring decisions?
Yes	i) Do you support affirmative action in public college admissions?
Yes	j) Should Minnesota continue affirmative action programs?
Yes	k) Do you support state funding of stem cell research?
Yes	l) Do you support state funding of embryonic stem cell research?
No	m) Do you support allowing pharmacists who conscientiously object to emergency contraception to refuse to dispense it?
n) Other or expanded principles
I am confused to what "e) Do you support voluntary prayer in public schools?" Students should have the right to pray in schools if they choose, but the school administrators should not require students to attend prayer. For example, is a student wished to do Friday Prayers, which happen at lunch time, the school should not stop the student, and meet their needs. Yet, a teacher can not require all of the students in the class to pray along with the student.
Legislative Priorities
Please explain in a total of 100 words or less, your top two or three priorities if elected. If they require additional funding for implementation, please explain how you would obtain this funding.
The big challenge that I see in the Legislature is to balance the 2 billion dollar deficit without cutting programs and services to the poor. As your State Representative, I would advocate that housing, jobs, youth programming, and programs to end poverty are an investment, not an expense. I will fight to secure general funds to sustain programs for education and social services, and work beyond party lines to create solutions to balance the budget, find funding for community programs, and bring landmark legislation to law. [ These taken from VoteSmart.org Farheen's primary opponent has this listed on their site: Mr. Hayden repeatedly refused to provide any responses to citizens on the issues through the 2008 Political Courage Test when asked to do so by national leaders of the political parties, prominent members of the media, Project Vote Smart President Richard Kimball, and Project Vote Smart staff. I consider Mr. Hayden's inaction to be yet another sign of local DFL corruption, ineptitude, and not truly standing for anything but getting elected. - KC ]

Tube envy

With higher fuel prices, an effective public transportation system is a must.

By John Sharkey

your humble correspondent here, checking in from beautiful (and, yes, rainy) London. The sites are nice and all, but the real attention-grabber so far has been the public transportation. Especially as we continue to haggle over new light-rail lines, it's important to keep some bigger perspective on what exactly makes a public transportation useful.

Of course, we're faced now with a greater need for decent transportation than ever before. Oil left $100 per gallon behind long ago, and the gas pump dishes out some serious damage. We aren't likely to see the return of $2 gas - worldwide demand probably isn't going to be plummeting any time soon. With that reality in mind, we desperately need to start re-evaluating how we deal with transportation and city planning issues in this country.

The United States has the least-dense cities in the world. New York, our most packed city, checks in at a fairly modest 40 people per hectare. European cities often crack 60 or 70, and major Asian cities like Hong Kong blow past 300. This default system of more sprawling cities makes our reliance on cars a necessity. When gas is cheap, that might not be much of a problem (environmental issues aside). Traffic is the worst of your worries. But with five-dollar gas, the problem is much more severe.

With an expensive-fuel future on the horizon, now is the time to re-evaluate how we utilize public transportation. The idea is a simple one: make public transportation more attractive than using a car. The methods, of course, can vary - part of the solution is to use concepts like congestion pricing that charge motorists who use busy roads during peak times. But just as important are the ways by which we improve the public transportation.

Ease of use is the most important factor. The Go-To system now in use on the Twin Cities' busses, and trains is an important step. (London uses an analogous system called Oyster cards.) But there is more to ease of use than just streamlining the payment system. The busses and trains need to run relatively frequently, and it needs to be easy to tell when the next one arrives.

One of the biggest hassles of using busses, as we all know, is the uncertainty. There's the scheduled time the bus is supposed to arrive, but there's always the chance it could be a few minutes early. That means, to ensure you don't miss your ride, you need to get to the stop far too early. The solution here is to increase frequency, lessening the penalty for missing a bus. If the next one is showing up five minutes later, you don't have to worry as much about being late for work. Again, the Twin Cities are doing a decent job on this front with Hi-Frequency lines, but more can be done.

The expansion of a rail system can, if executed correctly, be the biggest asset of a public transportation system. They're efficient, can be run on relatively exact schedules, and can run frequently. But they require extensive planning. At first glance, a map of London's tube system can be overwhelming, but after a trip or two it feels fairly intuitive. You can't design something like that piecemeal. It requires a long-term strategy to craft a rail system to adequately cover a major metropolitan area. The proposed light-rail line to St. Paul is a start, but if we're ever going to seriously create a system that can replace cars, it's going to take much more. It might seem expensive, but at this point there are no cheap options.

John Sharkey welcomes comments at jsharkey@mndaily.com.

Counterpoint: Dangers of Focusing Solely on Climate Change

No one with any scientific sense now disagrees about the severity of the climate crisis. But some people — and some magazines — believe that climate change trumps every other problem. If we take this argument to its extreme, we should ignore any environmental concern that gets in the way of reducing emissions. And that's just plain wrong.

Make no mistake: Tackling climate change is vital. But to see everything through the lens of short-term CO₂ reductions, letting our obsession with carbon blind us to the bigger picture, is to court catastrophe.

Climate change is not a discrete issue; it's a symptom of larger problems. Fundamentally, our society as currently designed has no future. We're chewing up the planet so fast, in so many different ways, that we could solve the climate problem tomorrow and still find that environmental collapse is imminent. Myopic responses will only hasten its arrival.

Take the proposal that we cut down old trees in favor of new ones. First, I don't buy the carbon accounting presented to advance this procrustean plan: Older trees can absorb CO₂ for centuries after reaching maturity, while replanted forests can emit more CO₂ than they sequester until the new trees are as much as 20 years old.

But even if wired's math were correct, this would still be a crap fix for climate change. Chopping down forests causes massive soil erosion and leads to desertification, making repeated tree plantings a dodgy prospect. As monocultures, tree farms are far more vulnerable to pest infestations. And batches of trees planted at the same time are more susceptible to wildfires, causing the carbon they're supposed to be sequestering to go up in smoke.

Old-growth forests, coupled with a broad program of woodlands restoration and sustainable forestry, can provide not only climate relief and ecologically responsible wood and biomass harvests but a slew of other essential ecological services, from salmon habitats to flood prevention. It's a heck of a lot more costly — in both money and emissions — to build massive dams and fish farms than to simply protect the forests we already have.

Another example of how carbon blindness leads to counterproductive policies: embracing nuclear power as a clean energy source. This argument assumes that other clean alternatives will not improve in efficiency or affordability during the 10 years it would take to implement a nuclear program. That's short-term thinking. If we invested the money that we would spend on new nuclear facilities more wisely (and eliminated subsidies on fossil fuels), alternatives like wind, solar, hydroelectric, and wave power could deliver a clean-energy future more cheaply and probably sooner, without any of the security or health risks of nuclear plants. Nuclear power may have a role to play, but it would be far better to create a flexible energy system that draws on many clean sources, instead of on a single panacea. Again, a cut-carbon-at-all-costs approach blinds us to more-sustainable, and ultimately more-promising, solutions.

To have any hope of staving off collapse, we need to move forward with measures that address many interrelated problems at once. We're not going to persuade people in the developing world to go without, but neither can we afford a planet on which everyone lives like an American. Billions more people living in suburbs and driving SUVs to shopping malls is a recipe for planetary suicide. We can't even afford to continue that way of life ourselves.

We don't need a War on Carbon. We need a new prosperity that can be shared by all while still respecting a multitude of real ecological limits — not just atmospheric gas concentrations, but topsoil depth, water supplies, toxic chemical concentrations, and the health of ecosystems, including the diversity of life they depend upon.

We can build a future in which technology, design, smart incentives, and wise policies make it possible to deliver a high quality of life at lower ecological cost. But that brighter, greener future is attainable only if we embrace the problems we face in all their complexity. To do otherwise is tantamount to clear-cutting the very future we're trying to secure.

Alex Steffen (editor AT worldchanging.com) is the editor of the green futurism site Worldchanging.com and of the book Worldchanging: A User's Guide for the 21st Century.

Source

You can't take car envy to the bank

By Douglas R. Sease

Here's the question: How many people do you admire or respect because of the car they drive?

Note I said "admire or respect," not "envy."

No one, huh?

So now that we've established that you don't care what someone else drives and that no one else cares what you drive, let's get serious. The fact is that for most of us after our houses and maybe college educations for the kids (at a really, really good college) cars will take more of our money than anything else. And Detroit (and Nagoya and Stuttgart) want as much of that money as they can possibly get.

Hence all the expensive advertising trying to convince you that you'll feel better about yourself -- and others will feel better about you, too -- if only you drive a particular car.

What hogwash! Get past the marketing and advertising and when you buy a car you're buying something very simple: a steel box with wheels that contains about 150,000 miles. You can buy an expensive box of miles, a mid-priced box of miles or a really cheap box of miles (read "used cars") and you'll generally get the same thing: 150,000 miles (less, of course, the number of miles a previous owner put on a used car). The only difference is how much you pay to go each one of those miles.

Hidden Cost

But here's the real catch: any one of those cars winds up costing you a lot more than you think. Sure, there's sales tax and operating costs and insurance, all of which take an additional toll on your wallet. But what I'm really talking about here is opportunity cost: every additional buck you spend on that box of miles is a buck that you no longer have to invest and watch grow in value for years to come.

If you save $10,000 by buying a Toyota Camry instead of a BMW and invest that $10,000 in stocks with an average annual return of 10%, at the end of 10 years (about when your Toyota is coming up on that 150,000-mile mark) you'll have $25,937.

At that point, save another $10,000 by buying a less expensive car, invest it, and the combined savings on those two cars will, 10 years from that second purchase, be worth more than $93,000. (That's $67,275 from your initial $10,000 investment 20 years ago and another $25,937 from your latest $10,000 savings.) Can driving a car that is $10,000 more expensive than another really be worth nearly $100,000 to you?

More Than Money

Now there are certain criteria that a car has to meet if you're going to drive it 150,000 miles. Over the years I've found that the things that are important to me, in descending order, are reliability, safety, efficiency and comfort. Reliability might not seem that important in the overall scheme of things -- most people would initially choose safety -- but the fact is you won't keep a car that's unreliable for 10 years.

The real point, though, is that all four criteria are important, and you'll have to make some trade-offs. You can't have the most efficient car while still having the right balance of safety and comfort. That's why over the past 30 years I've invariably wound up driving a Honda or a Toyota. Cars from those manufacturers consistently get high ratings for reliability, safety and efficiency.

When I was working in The Wall Street Journal's Detroit bureau many years ago, a very, very high-ranking Ford executive told me off the record that the challenge facing his company was to be able to build a car as good as Honda's Accord. From everything I read today, Ford still hasn't accomplished that goal, nor have Chrysler, GM or various other global manufacturers.

Sure, the car freaks may find Toyotas and Hondas boring, but for $100,000 in savings over time I'm willing to be really bored, as long as I have reliability, safety, efficiency and comfort.

Replace That Box?

Having said all this, I acknowledge that there may be circumstances in which you shouldn't keep a car for 150,000 miles. The advent of antilock brakes and air bags were such significant strides forward in safety that they made it almost imperative that you get out of a car without those features and into one that had them.

We may be approaching another such threshold in terms of efficiency when the major auto makers begin offering plug-in electric vehicles a few years from now. We'll have to wait to see how reliable, comfortable and safe they are. But plug-ins will be a significant step beyond today's popular hybrids, which so far seem to be more expensive than they're worth in terms of overall fuel savings.

Still, the bottom line remains this: Every dollar you spend on a car (or anything else that costs more than a few hundred dollars) is a dollar that you're not saving and investing for tomorrow.

Article from the Wall Street Journal.

* * *

EDITOR'S NOTE

Hundreds of you wrote to tell us you'll miss Jonathan Clements and the "Getting Going" column. I'm with you. I'll miss him, too. Jonathan's counsel and unique voice spoke to me not only as a fellow journalist, but as a reader, like you, trying to manage my family's money.

You'll notice, however, "Getting Going" remains, even if Jonathan doesn't. That's because the column really is the heart of The Wall Street Journal Sunday. It's what we are about -- prudent saving, spending and investing.

That's certainly the message I get from this morning's column by Douglas R. Sease, a longtime Wall Street Journal writer. And it's a message that will be further explored in coming weeks by other "Getting Going" writers.

I hope you'll keep reading. And tell me what you think. Write: david.crook AT wsj DOT com.

Transportation bill got my vote because ...

By NEIL PETERSON

I supported the transportation bill for several reasons:

• I supported the bill not because I believe in more taxation but because I believe in less.

A gas tax is a user fee, plain and simple, and for 20 years it has not been increased. This additional user fee will cost each of us less than a cup of coffee each month.

But the user fee for gas is just one part of the bill. In the bill is municipal state aid, with $11 million for Bloomington, $4.8 million for Edina and $150 million for Hennepin County. This money will be available for street repair and improvements over the next 10 years.

If these dollars do not come to our county and cities through this allocation, residents in my district will eventually pay for the improvements through increased real-estate taxes. That is the bottom line. The cities and the county will have no other choice but to go to their primary source of funding, our real estate taxes, to get transportation needs met. With this bill, I voted to avoid higher property taxes.

• I supported the bill because we have a slowing economy in our state.

People have suggested that an economic downturn is not the time for a bill like this. I believe it is the time. This bill will support thousands of jobs -- jobs with salary dollars that will stay in Minnesota.

What is the remedy for a slowing economy? Jobs. We need these dollars in Minnesota. Our way of life here and our future depend on a strong economic base. We bemoan the loss of 900 jobs at Macy's downtown, but we are losing many times that number in our construction industry alone. Think of the positive effect of thousands of Minnesota jobs in the next decade. With this bill, I voted for a stronger economy.

• I supported the bill because of the recently released legislative auditor's report.

Legislative Auditor James Nobel used the words "downright grim" when looking at the current status of roads and bridges. In his testimony, he gave me no reason to question the talented men and women who are engineers and planners in the Department of Transportation (MnDOT).

He did give me the reason MnDOT is in such a mess. Follow the money. We are asking MnDOT to do more and more with less and less. It is a shell game with horrific outcomes. Maintenance deferred, construction postponed -- it is all part of the MnDOT mantra.

A MnDOT employee I know well said that it is hard when you can't be proud of the place you work. Without funding. MnDOT's hands are tied. With this bill, I voted as a legislator to accept my part of the transportation problems in this state.

• I supported the bill because as a solo business owner, I know the reality of inflation.

Over the last three years, we have lost two opportunities to adequately fund road maintenance and construction. This is the third time that a transportation bill has been passed and vetoed. Over this same period, according to the auditor's report, the cost of construction has gone up almost 40 percent. It will continue to escalate, and a transportation bill will keep coming back, each time with a higher price tag, not to do more, but to do less. The reality is the old adage "pay now or pay more later." With this bill, I voted against inflationary increases for transportation.

• • •

I supported the bill even though I wasn't crazy about the quarter-cent sales tax for transit. I believe in public transit, and I know it is necessary with more than a million more people coming into the Twin Cities in the next decade. Except for the occasional trip on light rail, I don't use public transit on a daily basis, so I don't think about it as much. However, as a user of the freeways, roads and bridges, I need transit to exist and expand if I want to continue to drive without additional gridlock and wasted time. We need public transit to exist for persons who are aging and no longer drive. We need mass transit for cleaner air. With this bill, I supported transportation and the environment of our future.

I supported the bill and was encouraged to do so by the endorsement of the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce, the Minnesota League of Cities, the Environmental Partnership and the president of the University of Minnesota, plus countless other organizations and, believe it or not, constituents.

I supported the transportation bill in spite of the pain that it personally causes me. It pains me to be at odds with the governor, a man I personally like. It pains me to hit a bump in my relationships with some caucus members. But it pains me even more to consider the consequences of doing nothing again this year.

With this bill I voted to represent what I believe to be in the best interest of my cities, my constituents and, ultimately, my conscience.

Neil Peterson, R-Bloomington, represents District 41B in the Minnesota House.

Source: http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentary/16001922.html

The Effect of $100 Oil Price on African Economies

By Esi Ejumabone

During the past week, the price of crude oil eventually and finally reached the $100 record mark per barrel thanks to the unrest in Nigeria's Niger Delta, the locked production in Iraq, surging demand in growing Asian economiesand the cold winter months. This forebodes many things for different groups. Ordinarily, when the price of any commodity goes up, it means good news for the seller or producer.

African nations make up 6 of the 23 top oil-producing countries and this ought to mean good news for these African nations. These nations would be awash with cash, never mind that the oil companies too would also go away with large profits. The windfall these nations would experience could not have been dreamt possible some 5 years ago. The question is what does this translate to for the African nations and by extension the people of Africa?

Nigeria, Angola, Gabon, Libya, Egypt, Algeria - to a lesser extent Cameroon, Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Tunisia and Cote d’Ivoire - all have significant production and income generation from the sale of crude oil and natural gas. Nothing stops these countries from deploying the windfall into laying a solid foundation and investment in infrastructure. The UAE, Kuwait, and Qatar -not to mention the oil rich Saudi Arabia- are but few examples of what a purposeful government can do with accumulated wealth- transform the landscape and by extension the living conditions of your people.

Africans for decades have complained of poor development and blamed poverty and thin financial capacity as the excuse for not being able to grow their economies, but with this unprecedented gold-mine in high oil prices, one wonders why there is yet so much despair and so little progress being seen in changing the fortunes of the African people. At least, for a start, let these nations set the example for the rest of Africa to follow.

Corruption and blatant mismanagement of resources has been a recurring malaise in most African nations. Governments and politicians sit tight and amass the wealth meant for the people and instead of building the social infrastructure that will galvanise growth and generate employment opportunities to the average person, they feather their own nests, and steal stupendous mind bogging sums.

The high technology dependent world of oil business makes it difficult for the small scale investor to be a player in the business. Big multinationals and government corporations like the NNPC, are the ones that can provide the financial muscle and skill to play in this big game.

In Nigeria, insecurity and unrest in the Niger Delta has become the natural fall out, as the local communities allege years of neglect while bearing the brunt of social and environmental degradation occasioned by the activities of exploring and drilling for crude oil. Corporate Social Responsibility and partnering with the communities are attempts being made to douse the angst and raging insecurity in the region. These efforts have been described as too little too late.
African governments have to formulate policies and muster the discipline to execute programmes that will develop the continent, provide adequate infrastructure including education and health care to the suffering people that have become victims of this blessing turned curse.

Oil being a depleting resource needs significant investment to ensure new reserves are found and developed. The IOCs are therefore not in this for charity. They also have to compete among themselves and ensure they keep their shareholders happy. It behoves on these lucky African governments to ensure that revenues including taxes and royalties, they generate in these auspicious times, are judiciously deployed in the best interest of the people.

Overdependence on oil, as a mono-cultural economy, is a bane of most of these African economies.
There should be an effort to diversify away from oil to other sectors where the ordinary medium scale business person can participate, such as in local home-grown industries and the services sector.

KLM

source: http://www.anjnews.com/?q=node/419

Bridge Collapse underscores poor transit and road funding

Dear Blog Reader,

Those of us working with Transit for Livable Communities are thinking about the transportation system all the time. Can everyone in our community get where they need to go? Can the system handle the upcoming population growth in the next decades? Does transportation make our communities healthier, safer, and more prosperous? The 35W bridge collapse is a dark time for transportation in our state, but it has also been a reminder of how heroic things can happen when we face a crisis together. We believe this crisis is an opportunity to bring Minnesotans together for a long-term, balanced solution for our transportation problems.

The bridge collapse has shaken us, as we assume it did all Minnesotans. It has raised many questions about how so much destruction, disruption, and personal loss could be caused by flaws in a system so many of us take for granted. In the last week, we've talked a lot about how to honor the losses caused by the bridge collapse, and to also move forward with our commitment to a safer, more reliable, more effective transportation system. As our state begins to look to the future, there will be decisions about the redesign of the bridge and the possibility of passing a transportation funding bill this fall. These issues naturally raise questions about balance and whether our responses will be focused on the short term or a long term solution.

We believe we can, as a community, learn from this tragedy. At TLC, we also know we need to recommit to the values on which our organization was founded:

• We must invest in our communities, including transportation, to preserve our economic, environmental, and human health and our quality of life;
• We must commit to maintain the transportation investments we make and to provide reliable service and maintenance for transit, roads, and bridges, even during economic downturns;
• We must provide transportation choices throughout our communities, so that everyone can get where they need to go, and no one part of the system becomes overburdened;
• We must recognize our regional connections and plan for the future health of our transportation system, which will look different than it does today;
• We must focus our priorities on people, not just cars, and the personal impacts of the transportation system - our safety, time with our families, the air we breathe.

Transit for Livable Communities was founded to refocus transportation priorities toward people by helping more people participate in transportation and development decisions. We hope you'll continue to work with us to increase transportation choices, bring balance to the system, and increase transit, bike, and pedestrian investments.

We look forward to working together toward this shared future. Let us know if you want to know more about our work or want to get more involved.

Lea Schuster
Executive Director, Transit for Livable Communities

P.S. We join Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak in encouraging people across the metro to bike, walk, or take transit to destinations in or near the city. While alternatives to driving are crucial to keeping our metropolitan region functioning at any time, the bridge collapse reminds us how they can be particularly important in times of crisis.

Metro Transit: www.metrotransit.org

City of Minneapolis: www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us

Downtown Minneapolis Transportation Management Organization: www.mplstmo.org

Minnesota Green Party Response to I-35W Bridge Tragedy

The Green Party of Minnesota offers its condolences and shares in the grief of the many personally affected by the I-35W bridge collapse tragedy on August 1st. We are especially grateful for the heroic efforts made by fellow citizens and rescue workers who assisted those directly affected.

It is unfortunate that it takes a tragedy such as this to generate a reaction to our failing infrastructure in this country. Ralph Nader, the 2000 presidential candidate for the Green Party, has been addressing this concern for more than a decade. On July 27, 1999 he wrote an article in the Los Angeles Times entitled "Perspective on Federal Spending." In it he stated: "The debate over how to allocate funds must include how best to improve our great shared assets." His proactive opinions on protecting our country and its infrastructure along with our democracy have continuously been shut out from the mainstream debate, while the majority of our federal taxes are spent on an illegal and severely destructive war.

Hopefully, out of the tears and grief will come the appropriate investigations and necessary funds to prevent future infrastructure tragedies. We also hope that replacement, where needed, will include building along more environmentally friendly lines.

The roadblock wins another round

Two decades of transportation failure continues.

In basketball, a score of 137-60 is a blowout victory. In Minnesota politics, it's a loss.

The transportation bill got 137 votes in the Legislature this session. That's a solid 70 percent majority and, if you believe in representative government, pretty good evidence that Minnesotans are willing to pay for fixing their crumbling roads and expanding their skimpy transit systems.

But Tim Pawlenty isn't willing. And so, for the second time in three years, a veto, wielded by a governor who has never been elected by a majority of Minnesotans, has prevented substantial progress against the state's most gnawing problem: the 20-year failure to adequately build and maintain its transportation system.

That means that drivers stuck in Brooklyn Park's "Devil's Triangle," or in Eden Prairie's nightmarish tangle of Hwys. 494, 212 and 5, or on any number of outdated and dangerous roadways outstate will have to wait years, perhaps decades, before the state has the money to respond. It means that commuters in the southwestern suburbs, eager for a light-rail line, will have to wait until after 2025, and that other transit projects, hoping to build on the popularity of the Hiawatha line and an advantageous moment in Congress, will have to wait even longer than that. It means higher property taxes as road costs are pushed increasingly to local governments. It means that employers looking to add quality jobs will skip over the Twin Cities in favor of rival markets that are moving well ahead on transportation and land-use innovations that anticipate a new era of high energy costs and environmental concerns. It means a smoggy bumper-to-bumper future and a declining quality of life.

Pawlenty will be blamed for leaving Minnesota behind on all of these fronts. He has placed ideology and national political ambition ahead of his state's best interest.

Rather than raise the taxes and fees required to face head-on the annual $1.7 billion transportation shortfall, the governor has stuck to his incrementalist policy: Borrow about one-tenth of that amount, force our children to pay it back and nibble away at the edges. That's like attacking an iceberg with an icepick.

Business is also to blame. While the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce supported a nickel gas tax increase for roads, it opposed giving counties the authority to raise sales taxes for transit, the financial tool that has allowed other markets to push far ahead of the Twin Cities. It's a mystery why a sales tax for transit can be acceptable to business leaders in Denver, Dallas, Phoenix and San Diego, but not here. All of those cities have considerably higher rates than Minneapolis-St. Paul yet seem to be flourishing.

The bottom line is that a few people short on vision and courage are still blocking the road for everyone else. It may take another election and even higher gas prices for enough people to realize that there's no going back to the days of cheap driving and that the future belongs to those places with the foresight to invest in the efficiency and variety of their transportation systems.

Your Car + Your Commute = A Visit to Your Doctor

Worried About the Toll Your Workday Drive Is Taking on Your Car? The Wear on Your Body Might Be Even Worse.

By Eric M. Weiss
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, April 9, 2007; B01

For seven years, Gail Ennis has been spending up to three hours a day behind the wheel of her Subaru, commuting between her law office in Washington and her home on Gibson Island in Anne Arundel County. What she's gotten out of the 100-mile daily round trip is sciatica -- a shooting pain down one leg -- and a lack of time for exercise.

"It's just too much and getting worse every year," Ennis said.

Besides being a daily grind that takes time away from family, a long commute can be harmful to your health. Researchers have found that hours spent behind the wheel raise blood pressure and cause workers to get sick and stay home more often. Commuters have lower thresholds for frustration at work, suffer more headaches and chest pains, and more often display negative moods at home in the evenings.

It's not just the drivers who suffer. Carpool passengers have to deal with what they call "Mustang neck" or "Beetle neck" -- the contortions they must make to wedge themselves into the back seats of certain cars.

Such ailments have long plagued drivers in California and other parts of the country where grueling commutes have been a way of life for decades. But Washington commuters, who are increasingly making the long hauls that cause the most problems, are catching up fast, researchers said. The region's drivers have the nation's second-longest commutes, behind New York, according to Census Bureau figures, and in outer suburbs, drives are as much as an hour each way on a good day -- and there aren't many good days.

As a consequence, more drivers will probably suffer the health effects of a commuter lifestyle, researchers and doctors said. "You tell someone they need to exercise or go to physical therapy, but how can they? They leave at 5 a.m. and get home at 7 or 8 p.m. at night," said Robert G. Squillante, an orthopedic surgeon in Fredericksburg who has treated patients for back pain and other commuting-related issues.

He said constant road vibrations and sitting in the same position for a long time is bad for the neck and spine and puts special pressure on the bottom disc in the lower back, the one most likely to deteriorate over the years.

There are other long-term concerns. Raymond W. Novaco, a professor at the University of California at Irvine's Institute of Transportation Studies who has researched commuting for three decades, found a correlation between traffic congestion and negative health effects such as higher blood pressure and stress.

Novaco's research team measures the blood pressure and heart rate of commuters shortly after they arrive at work and again two hours later. Commuters also fill out detailed questionnaires on their home and work lives. "The longer the commute, the more illness" and more illness-related work absences occur, he said.

"If you're driving an hour-and-a-half each way twice a day for 30 years, the consequences don't catch up with you at 32, they catch up in your 50s ," said Jerry L. Deffenbacher, a professor of psychology at Colorado State University, who uses a computerized driving simulator to test the connection between traffic congestion and anger. "Like smoking, it wouldn't be immediately obvious."

Drivers with multiple route changes are at greater risk, Novaco found after plotting out the commutes of his study subjects. "It's a physical strain as well as psychological one," he said. "It's frustrative and activates negative emotional states, and that generally has an effect on physical well-being."

Long solo commutes are especially tough on women, Novaco said his research found. Women, he said, generally "had more responsibility for getting family up and running and were significantly more likely to report being rushed to get to work."

Spending hours sitting in your car can also cause back and other muscle problems and takes time away from more active, healthier pursuits such as walking or going to the gym.

The ill effects of commuting are increasingly showing up in local doctors' offices. Squillante, the Fredericksburg orthopedic surgeon, said he has had surgery patients say that the best thing about a back operation was the forced hiatus from their daily commute during recovery.

Patients are desperate to find solutions and swear by certain types of car-seat pillows or jury-rigged lumbar supports, Squillante said. "There are people who feel they've discovered the miracle pillow," he said, though he said he doesn't know of any sure-fire solution.

Robert Cervero, chairman of the department of city and urban planning at the University of California at Berkeley, has studied the relationship between the design of communities and physical activity. He said rising rates of obesity and some types of diabetes contribute to the problems facing commuters. But so, too, do the lifestyle choices -- and land-use decisions -- that result in long commutes.

Caryn Hutson works for a property firm in the District but lives in her "dream home" in Haymarket, some 40 miles away. She leaves the house at 5:30 in the morning and gets back at 6:30 p.m. -- if traffic on Interstate 66 cooperates.

"It's just tiring," Hutson said of her daily drill. Someone who was never much for caffeine, she now bolsters herself with coffee in the morning and soda for the evening rush. But by midweek, "I'm running on fumes. That's the biggest toll. It's not enough sleep."

One of the reasons her family moved to Haymarket was for their children. But the tough commute also takes away family time. And year after year, as traffic gets worse and worse, the time in the car gets longer and longer.

"It's tough as a parent," she said. "You want to give your children everything they want, but there are limitations to that because of the time it takes."

Hutson used to have a 10-minute commute when she lived and worked in Tysons Corner. She recalls that time as "living in la-la land."

"I was able to find time and energy to work out regularly," she said. "And I don't now. I would have to wake up at 3 a.m. to get a workout."

source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/08/AR2007040801177_pf.html

Bottineau Light-rail Transit

The wheels on the bus rapid transit (BRT) may not go round, depending on the results of a study requested by the Bottineau Boulevard Partnership.

At its March 23 meeting, the partnership decided to stop looking solely at BRT for Bottineau Boulevard (County Road 81), which is now being reconstructed.

A resolution was passed to take a look at light rail transit (LRT) and other alternatives for two years.

“I think we deserve the best new transportation alternative that’s available,” said Hennepin County District 1 Commissioner Mike Opat. “If that means we have to press the pause button and take a new look, then I think that’s what we should do.”

A number of changes have occurred, causing local officials, many of whom serve as partnership members, to look at the corridor differently.

“With BRT you can be more specific about how you move people around; with LRT you’re really moving people over greater distances,” Crystal Mayor ReNae Bowman said.

Opat said when looking at BRT lines around the country, there is no clear definition of what BRT means. In some cities, BRT lines are included within normal traffic, as opposed to the buses having their own lanes, he said.

On a trip to Los Angeles to review their BRT system, where there is no separate lane for the buses, it took 90 minutes to go 15 miles, Opat said.

“That’s not ‘rapid’ to me,” he said.

In comparison, “light rail is on its own right of way, faster, cleaner, more aesthetically pleasing, quieter,” Opat said.

The proposed Target Corporation campus is another factor to consider when looking at the option of LRT, said Brooklyn Park Mayor Steve Lampi.

The Target campus would require moving 20,000 to 30,000 employees in and out of Brooklyn Park every day, Lampi said, adding that LRT has the ability to move more people.

Development and redevelopment are other goals of the partnership, Lampi said.

“Development along the LRT line is significantly greater than along a BRT line,” Lampi said.

The Hiawatha Line, which connects downtown Minneapolis, the VA Medical Center, Fort Snelling, Minneapolis International Airport and the Mall of America, has also caused a lot of attention to be turn to LRT.

“It has been so successful and the ridership far exceeds what they thought it would be,” said Robbinsdale Mayor Mike Holtz.

Since 2000, the partnership has been working on “promoting commuting solutions” and “strategic redevelopment supported by transit,” according to their website, www.bottineaupartnership.org.

$20M from the Legislature

In 2002, $20 million was bonded by the Legislature to help fund “a complete stand-alone busway” along Bottineau Boulevard, said partnership counsel Louis Smith.

“We need to ask … our legislators to help us earmark some of that money to help us with the alternative analysis,” Opat said.

The partnership has suggested the Legislature dedicate $1 million in funding for an alternative analysis.

Because the bonds were not made available until 2005, the Legislature extended the bonding authorization until 2010, Smith said, “but it’s specifically for the busway purposes.”

The $20 million would be available for other uses, “only if the Legislature does something further to change that authorization,” Smith said.

Early streetcars: Memorable and uncomfortable

By John McIntyre, Star Tribune

Last update: June 14, 2004 – 11:00 PM

On cold, muddy Washington Avenue, in the late 1870s, a Minneapolis commuter stands with a nickel in his hand. Off toward the east he can the tinkling of a bell - the sound of a horse-drawn streetcar.

The car pulls up. The weary driver nods sourly.

The commuter, if he's been in one of these contraptions before, hesitates before he climbs aboard.

The ride home is going to be no fun.

Twin Cities' streetcar service came a long way from its early horsecar days until it ended in the early 1950s, with then state-of-the-art high-speed electric cars.

The original horsecars -- the ancestors of today's light-rail cars -- were about 12 feet long and weighed about 1,000 pounds. They were called "crackerboxes on wheels." Riders could, for their 5-cent fare, get where they were going at a brisk 6 miles per hour, much faster than slogging through
the mud and manure-filled streets.

But that ride could be brutal. Passengers could be called on to put a derailed car back on track or to negotiate with a balky mule.

The ordeal started at the pay box at the front of the car, writes Stephen Kieffer, in "Transit and the Twins."

"Many an early patron of the cars will remember how the driver reminded him, by the ringing of a bell, that he had not placed his fare in the box."

Inside, the amenities were primitive. Passengers sat on hard benches that ran the length of the car. A foul-smelling oil lamp provided a dim light, says a history of the Minneapolis Street Railway Company.

"In winter, heat was supplied by a small sheet-iron stove in the middle of the car. The floor of the car was covered with hay to a depth of about one foot to assist the stove in keeping the passengers' feet warm. It was a common occurrence for passengers to alight from the cars with hay clinging to their feet and garments."

In the 1870s, the streetcar tracks were laid -- some might say floated -- on the muddy streets. Minnesota's rain, snow and ice knocked them out of alignment, says Goodrich Lowry in "Streetcar Man."

"Passengers were often asked to assist the driver in putting the half-ton car back on the track, or pushing it up a slippery hill."

Riders also could be asked to convince mule to get work. Sam Brinker, a horsecar driver from in the 1890s, recalled in a 1942 Minneapolis Sunday Tribune interview:

"Sometimes we'd use mules, and sometimes the mules would balk. But no one got upset, even though the mules were stubborn as long as an hour. Everyone would contribute ideas on how to get them started again. Pulling the tails slowly but steadily was the most popular suggestion."

Still, the riders had it easy compared with the drivers.

During the first 20 years of service, the typical driver, "unprotected alike from snow and rain, possessed a weather-beaten face, almost as rough and brown as the buffalo coat he wore," E.W. Tuckey writes in "An Historical Account of the Street Railways of Minneapolis and St. Paul" in the Minneapolis Historical Society's collection.

Drivers worked from six a.m. until 11 p.m. and were paid about $45 a month. Says Tuckey:

"During the winter season frozen ears, nose and fingers were expected, and it was not an unheard of thing that some poor driver had to be lifted from his platform frozen too stiff to care for himself.''

In the 1890s when electric streetcars replaced the horse cars, conditions worsened for the drivers, Tuckey writes.

"The swift motion of the (electric) car caused a constant current of air across the front of the platform, which in the depths of winter became almost unendurable. The people were not slow to appreciate the inhumanities of the situation and joined with the employees in demanding protection."

The transit companies refused. But in 1893, the Legislature passed a law requiring the cars to be enclosed between November and April.

Riders didn't exactly have a smorgasbord of alternatives to the horsecars, but there were some - including steam-powered trains and cablecars.

The "Steam Motors" of the Minneapolis, Lyndale and Minnetonka Railway served routes from downtown Minneapolis, along Lake Calhoun and out to Excelsior in the 1880s. They were noisy, smoky, slow and unpopular with riders and residents along the routes, Kieffer writes.

"The coal-fired, steam-powered motors that were enclosed to be less objectionable when running through the streets of the city and less likely to frighten horses."

"In case a stop had to be made part way uphill, say in the neighborhood of Franklin Avenue, the 'Motors' were not powerful to start the trains again. They had to be backed down to the foot of the hill and a fresh start made in order to get sufficient momentum to run to the top."

The solution was finally to reduce the grade of the hill.

In St. Paul, the steep and troublesome Selby Avenue hill was conquered first by cable cars and later by electric cars and a tunnel with a more gradual grade.

The cable car line used a cable that was drawn in an endless loop under the street by a stationary steam engine. When it was time to move, the motorman used a lever to grip the cable. When it was time to stop, he released the cable. The cars moved at a stately 8 miles per hour. Similar cars are still running in San Francisco.

Cable cars were an improvement over horsecars, especially on hills. But Minnesota's weather made them unreliable, Goodrich Lowry writes.

"The slot in the center rail, which had to be just the right size, was apt to shrink in cold weather and expand in hot weather. When it shrank, the gripping lever got stuck, and when it expanded, the wheels of passing drays and carriages were trapped."

And the cable itself wasn't 100 percent reliable, Lowry says.

"Although the entire cable seldom parted, a broken strand could entangle the gripping mechanism, converting an orderly ride in to a wild runaway. When this happened, the entire system had to be shut down - usually in the rush hour!"

Electric streetcars glided onto the scene in about 1890. They were faster, quieter and more reliable. And as the years passed they became ever more sophisticated.

The first line was built along 4th Avenue S. in Minneapolis. It captivated the public from the start. People visited the construction every day until service began at 4 p.m. on Dec. 24, 1889, says "A History of the Minneapolis Street Railway Company - 1873-1908."

"Crowds of spectators lined both sides of the route. Others at the terminus at the Post Office waited for their chance to take a ride. The drivers and conductors, with long ulster coats, buttoned all the way with brass buttons, filled out their breasts, looked straight ahead and felt even more dignified than the passengers aboard who looked out upon their friends standing on the pavement. Ding, Ding, Ding, round the corner and straight out 4th Avenue. The cars swept majestically while the hundreds of onlookers pronounced them 'just the thing.'''

Even so, electricity remained a mysterious and dangerous force, the history says.

"Many watched with alarm the operation of the Electric Cars as they observed fire flying from the wheels and from the trolley wires as the cars ran along. Predictions were freely made that the first heavy snowstorm would settle the Electric Railway and put it out of business. Drivers were afraid their horses would be killed if horses stepped on the street Car Tracks, and a great many persons were afraid of the effect of the first lightning storm on the cars with their loads of passengers."

For the next 50 years Twin City Rapid Transit streetcars carried thousands of people every day. And they did it with remarkable safety, especially as the number of streetcars and their speed increased, says Kieffer.

"This was all the more remarkable when one considers the unfavorable weather conditions under which this transit company operated through most of the year," he writes.

He recalls a near disaster in 1890 when a loaded streetcar nearly fell off the Washington Avenue bridge and into the Mississippi River.

"The car left the track -- and when it stopped, the wheels were within six inches of the bridge. The rear platform was out beyond the edge. Panicky passengers had raced for the exit (there was only one) and without a doubt, some would have been hurled into the river if the conductor had not barred their way."

But James Linsley, a streetcar operator in the 1930s, had a different take on safety. His regular letters to his family, preserved in a 1995 article in Hennepin History, "Streetcarring in the 1930s: A Personal Account," describes the hard life of a driver and numerous accidents, though few injuries.

"Saturday was a tough day for Lake Street Station. We had three streetcars smashed by skidding into stuff. Benetti was driving one of them and smashed into an interurban bus at Washington Square and it in turn hit another streetcar. He got his hand cut by broken glass. All three cars had their whole front end caved in.''

By 1907, streetcar riding had become a daily routine, judging by the observation one young woman. Thora Thoresen, an 18-year-old Minneapolis seamstress, writes in her 1907 diary, preserved by the Hennepin County Historical Society, about going to work every day, running errands and even going to the YWCA for exercise classes.

Riding the streetcar was just a part of her day: Nothing remarkable, but worth noting all the same.

Jan. 17, 1907: (After dinner at a friend's house.) "Litta followed me to the car. I reached home safely, or I would not be writing this.''

"Jan. 23, 1907: This evening, Litta came up to the shop to call for me and Rug and Litta and I went to her YWCA reception. I also joyned (sic) it and so did Litta. So now we are members. Took the Central Car home because Litta did not feel well and didn't like to transfer."

"Jan. 28, 1907: Then we ran over to the car and got on the first car. When we were well seated, he told us it was a short line, so we got off at the next corner, which was Chicago Avenue and 25th Street. We took the next car and transferred on Selby and Lake and got off at the tailor's and fitted my coat."

Another rider, Elizabeth Boyer, told the Linden Hills Oral History Project in the Minneapolis Public Library collection, that when she was a child in the 1920s her parents let her ride the streetcar to a doctor's appointment in St. Paul.

"They gave me a nickel and a penny to get on the streetcar to go downtown. I had a map of what you do downtown... I was six or seven. It was very safe in those days. We were to talk to a policeman if I forgot what I was supposed to be doing."

By the early 1950s, the streetcars were gone - replaced by buses. Various writers expressed their feelings - and opinions about the streetcar system -- in letters to the Minneapolis Tribune.

The owners of the Twin City Rapid Transit Co., seemed elated, which was understandable considering they'd engineered the conversion to buses.

"In less than 25 months we have transformed a confused, sprawling system of 392 miles of rail and overhead cable, 724 streetcars and 354 older type buses into an engineered, modern network served by the world's largest fleet of new 51-passenger air ride Diesel buses. Today the noise of the streetcar is a memory!"

But others found more in the streetcar experience than just iron, steel and copper.

A Minneapolis Tribune editorial writer, on the 25th anniversary of the ending of streetcar service, described the ride south of Lake Street on the Como-Harriet and Oak-Harriet lines.

"We don't know that it was the world's loveliest streetcar ride, but on a June day it surely was a close contender for that honor. It began at the right-of-way at Thirty-first Street. The tracks curved between pleasant backyard gardens, came into full view of lake Calhoun and the 36th St. viaduct, skirted the green lawns and gentle slopes of Lakewood Cemetery with its miniature lake, passed along gracefully wooded areas of William Berry park, and shout into sight of lovely Lake Harriet near the bandstand. Well, that trolley ride is gone forever."

And an anonymous writer remembered the good times.

"Although the streetcars are leaving us forever, we shall not forget them...most of the big, yellow cars were things of beauty, speed, power and adventure ...The glamour and wonder of our streetcars will be remembered long after the discomforts are forgotten."

source: http://www.startribune.com/368/v-print/story/64737.html