The Globe took an interesting angle on their coverage of the most recent design for the BU bridge:

"BU bridge plans could spur road rage"

Subtitle: "Some fear closing lane will choke traffic"

Really?  Hold on.  When I bike to campus I use the BU Bridge to cross the Charles, often during the morning or evening rush hour.  How often is traffic backed up just to get on the bridge?  Almost all the time, especially from Comm Ave.  And how many times have I had to contest with slow moving, bumper to bumper traffic on the bridge?  Zero.  Zero times.  Even with two lanes closed for construction, traffic absolutely flies over that thing.  Which is really what makes it frightening experience from a cyclist's perspective -- you're taking up a lane with fast moving trucks bearing down on your rear wheel.

And they're worried about the threat of road rage if they don't designate even more bridge lanes to motorists than they do during construction?  As DCR commish Sullivan says, "It's really the entrance points that are the constraining points that are keeping traffic from flowing." If it's auto commute time you're worried about, fix those and your cars and trucks will move just fine.  In the meantime, it would be nice if you gave the rest of us a little room to breathe.

When two different people who read the blog you write for alert you to the same news item, it's probably something worth posting about.  So it is with Sunday's NY Times article about campus bike sharing programs.

It's (almost) all good news, but I think this passage is particularly astounding (emphasis mine):

The University of New England here in Biddeford had a similar problem — too many cars, not enough space and a desire to make the campus greener. So it copied the Ripon program, handing out 105 bikes in the first week of school. Because of the program, only 25 percent of freshmen brought cars with them this year, officials said, compared with 75 percent last year.

The article's campus sample is by no means exhaustive; my undergrad alma mater just started a bike loan program, too.  Fortunately cars don't seem to be a huge problem on this (Tufts) campus (mind you, I say this as someone who never has to search for parking).  But what campus wouldn't welcome reduced auto traffic?

Now if only municipalities would follow suit; so far DC is the only US city with a similar program available to the general public.

(Thanks Joe and Laurie)

Update (10/24): Adam Knoff notes that Fort Collins has a Bike Library that actually opened before DC's bike share program did.

The topic of earmarks has come up a lot in this presidential campaign.  As we know, federal bills often end up, as John McCain might say, "festooned with Christmas tree ornaments" that have tenuous (if any) relationships to the heart of the bill.  It turns out the recent $700 billion bailout plan -- officially known as the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 -- was no different.  All kinds of stuff, we're learning, was snuck in to that thing at the last minute. 

One earmark in particular has received a lot of attention from some of the blogs and news sources I frequent -- Rep. Earl Blumenauer's (D-OR) Bike Commuter Act, as part of the larger Renewable Energy Tax Credit legislation (which was extended for one more year).  What does the Bike Commuter Act do?  The San Francisco Chronicle summarized it nicely:

"...workers who use two-wheelers as their primary transportation mode to get to and from work will be eligible for a $20-a-month, tax-free reimbursement from their employers for bicycle-related expenses. In return, employers will be able to deduct the expense from their federal taxes."  

Sounds pretty good, right? 

Rep. Blumenauer is a former City Commissioner of Transportation in Portland and long time biking advocate (heck, he's even wearing a bicycle lapel pin in the banner of his website) who's generally lauded by anti-sprawl, pro-transit, clean energy types like myself.  But attempting to look at this objectively, it could spark a potentially interesting debate: What does the Bike Commuter Act really have to do with the credit crisis?  Aren't we always told that tangental earmarks are...bad?  The Renewable Energy Tax Credit seems to have given "a small jolt" to at least the solar industry, perhaps justifying its general inclusion in a financial bailout package.  But paying people to bike?  Honestly, I'm not sure I see the connection.

It all just goes to show one way that policy proposals can, and often do, become enacted at the federal level.  Whether or not you agree with the system largely depends on if the earmarks reflect your passions, which is no guarantee.  I happen to think the Bike Commuter Act is quite good.  It's just disappointing that it was apparently sufficiently unpopular to have had to be pushed through ornamentally.