May 23, 2008

Today's Leaders Are Sycophantic Oligarchic Plutocratic Pussies

"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty.
...
And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."

Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826)
Founding Father
Author of the Declaration of Independence,
3rd President of the United States of America

Source: November 13, 1787, letter to William S. Smith, quoted in Padover's Jefferson On Democracy, ed., 1939

May 13, 2008

The Presidential Debate Lottery

Our current system of debates between presidential candidates is a contrived joke at best, and pure political theater at worst. The candidates are given the questions beforehand, they are not allowed to really debate each other (only answer a moderators' questions), the process for being selected to debate is corrupt, the process is controlled by a private corporation, etc. I could go on and on about this, but no one really cares.

I got to think about what would happen if I were allowed to be the moderator of the upcoming presidential debates between Obama and McCain. Instead of having a FOX News anchor or some such tool throwing softball, rehearsed questions to the candidates, you'd have me. Of course, I'd be dressed in full Count Smegmus garb, that goes without question. It's not every day you get a black metal overlord such as myself who is quite well versed in the intricacies of American Presidential Politics (I guess all those years studying History are good for something, eh?). My questions would hit hard; I would attack McCain like a pitbull with A.I.D.S., with questions like:

1. Do you agree with Pastor John Hagee that war with Iran is the fulfillment of biblical prophecy?
In February, you shared a stage with Pastor John Hagee and said you were "very proud" to have his endorsement. You also called the Reverend Rod Parsley, a man who said of Islam "America was founded, in part, with the intention of seeing this false religion destroyed", your "spiritual guide." Do you believe America's mission is to destroy Islam? Do you join Pastor Hagee in believing the United States must attack Iran to fulfill the biblical prophecy of Armageddon in Israel in which 144,000 Jews will be converted to Christianity and the rest killed? Is that why you joked about "bomb bomb Iran?" If not, why will you not renounce the support of Hagee and Parsley?

2. Doesn't your legendary temper make you too dangerous to be trusted with the presidency of the United States?
Your anger, even toward friends and allies, is legendary. You purportedly dropped the F-Bomb on your own GOP colleagues John Cornyn and Chuck Grassley. In the book, The Real McCain, author Cliff Schechter claims you got into a fist-fight with your fellow Arizona Republican Rick Renzi. Allegedly, you even publicly used a crude term, one which decorum and the FCC prohibit us from even saying on the air, to describe your own wife. Which if any of these episodes is untrue? Don't your anger management problems make you too dangerously unstable to be president of the United States?

3. Doesn't your confusion regarding basic facts about the war in Iraq, including repeatedly citing a nonexistent Al Qaeda-Iran alliance, make you unfit for command?

On four occasions in one month, you confused friend and foe in Iraq by describing Sunni Al Qaeda as being backed by Shiite Iran. Then you showed a misunderstanding of the U.S. chain of command when you claimed you would not back shifting forces from Iraq to Afghanistan "unless Gen. [David] Petraeus said that he felt that the situation called for that," a decision which Petraeus himself told you and your Senate colleagues only the week before rests not with him but with his superiors. Doesn't your lack of understanding and judgment when it comes to basic facts of America's national security disqualify you as commander-in-chief?

4. Given your past adultery, should Americans consider you a moral exemplar of family values?

You are the nominee of a Republican Party which claims to support so-called "family values." Yet you commenced an adulterous relationship with your current wife Cindy months before the dissolution of your previous marriage to your first wife Carol. Should Americans consider you to be a moral exemplar of family values?

5. Doesn't your flip-flop on Jerry Falwell being an "agent of intolerance" show your opportunistic pandering to the religious right?
In 2000, you famously called the late Jerry Falwell "an agent of intolerance," a statement which may have cost you the decisive South Carolina primary. But as you ramped up your next presidential run in 2006, you embraced Falwell and gave the commencement address at his Liberty University. When Tim Russert asked that spring if you still considered him an agent of intolerance, you said, "'no, I don't." Why shouldn't the American people consider you a flip-flopping opportunist who cynically courted the religious right to further your 2008 presidential ambitions?

6. Given your wealth and privileged upbringing, aren't you - and not Barack Obama - the elitist?

You have called Barack Obama an elitist. Yet you recently returned to your exclusive private high school, one which now costs over 38,000 dollars a year to attend. Your wife is the heiress to a beer distribution company, reputedly owns 8 homes and has a net worth well over $100 million. Your children all attended private schools, academies which also happened to be the primary beneficiaries of funds from your supposed charitable foundation. Shouldn't the American people in fact view you as the elitist, and a hypocritical one at that?

7. What is your religion, really? And has the answer in the past changed as the South Carolina primary approached?
I want to ask about your seemingly ever-changing religious beliefs. In June 2007, McClatchy reported, "McCain still calls himself an Episcopalian." In August 2007, as ABC reported, your campaign staff identified you as "Episcopalian" in a questionnaire prepared for ABC News' August 5 debate. But as the primary in evangelical-rich South Carolina neared, in September 2007 you said of your religious faith, "It plays a role in my life. By the way, I'm not Episcopalian. I'm Baptist." But in March 2008, Pastor Dan Yeary of your North Phoenix Baptist Church refused to comment on why you have refused to finally undergo a baptism ceremony. Congressional directories still list you as an Episcopalian. In the past, you've said, "When I'm asked about it, I'll be glad to discuss it." So what is your religion? And couldn't Americans be forgiven for assuming your changing faith is tied to your changing political needs?

8. Didn't President Bush betray you with his signing statement on the Detainee Treatment Act? You claim to be against torture, but aren't you a hypocrite for voting "no" on the Senate waterboaring ban?

You've said that "we can't torture or treat inhumanely suspected terrorists we have captured". And in December 2005, you famously reached a compromise with President Bush on the Detainee Torture Act banning cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment of detainees. But just two weeks later, President Bush issued a signing statement making it clear he would ignore the compromise you just reached. Then in February 2007, you voted "no" on a Senate bill banning waterboarding. Isn't it fair to say President Bush betrayed you with his December 30, 2005 signing statement? And isn't it fair to say you caved to the right-wing of your party on the issue in order to win the Republican nomination?
.
9. Why did you flip-flop on the Bush tax cuts you twice opposed? Why do you now support making them permanent for the wealthiest Americans who need them least?

You twice voted against the Bush tax cuts. Now you support making them permanent. In 2001, you said, "I cannot in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us at the expense of middle-class Americans who need tax relief." Now, according to the Center for American Progress, your tax plan would cost more than $2 trillion over the next decade and "would predominantly benefit the most fortunate taxpayers, offering two new massive tax cuts for corporations and delivering 58 percent of its benefits to the top 1 percent of taxpayers." Isn't it true that you flip-flopped on the Bush tax cuts? Isn't it fair to say that you now favor a massive expansion of the federal budget deficit in order to fund a tax giveaway to the wealthiest Americans who need it least?

10. With the economy tanking, shouldn't Americans be concerned over your past statements that "the issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should?"

Americans consistently report that the economy is the issue that concerns them most. Yet more than once, you proclaimed your ignorance when it comes to the economy. In November 2005, you told the Wall Street Journal, "I'm going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated." Then in December 2007, you admitted, "The issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should." Shouldn't the American be worried about President McCain's ability to lead the United States out of recession? Given your past statements, shouldn't the American reject out of hand your claim that "I know the economy better than Senator Clinton and Senator Obama do?"


Do NOT. Fuck. With. Me. I pay attention.

May 11, 2008

The Absolute Greatest Post From Craigslist, EVER!!

This should be required reading in every single elementary school reading class. If you still have dry underwear after this, you must be dead, or at the very least Republican.

-------Begin Craigslist Post----------

Very Complicated Request, Please Kindly Read!!! - m4mw - 35

If you are groggy or stoned please do not read this, I need your complete and sober attention, for my request is uniquely detailed. I am a man, 35, white, black hair with brown eyes. Okay, first what I am looking for is a woman primary, but secondary it could be a woman and her man, but the man will have to remain behind the black curtain and only watch through the cut out eyeholes. The black curtain is inside the apartment that I reside in. This apartment is a fashionable studio in the hot part of town, and all my neighbors are graphic artists.

So now please kindly listen to my request: what I require foremost in a woman with bushy eyebrows. And they must be TWO eyebrows, because one eyebrow is an abonination against Gaia. What I want is for the woman to become naked and pose herself before me. I have a carpeted pedestal so her feet will not grow cold. I will present her with a very well preserved Mesopotamian bowl. She will hold it and she must be careful not to drop it as it has to be back at the museum by 8am tomorrow (I am a worker there). Next I will hand her tweezers. Then she will pluck her eyebrows until her forehead is vacant. The eyebrows will drift into the bowl and then I will take the bowl from her and go to my kitchenette. I will then toss a salad into the bowl and mix the eyebrows in it. The woman can decide the dressing, but I have only vinegrette and thousand island. Next I will re-present the bowl to the woman, along with a utensil, and she will then consume the salad while I watch. I may masturbate during this part of the exercise. However, if there is a man behind the black curtain he may not masturbate, and I will know if does because I will hear him. However, he is allowed to fantasize, and then he write an essay on his fantasies before I release him.

After the woman is finished with her salad, I will present her with a Qing dynasty teapot box, which she will open and deficate in. She must be careful with the box as well as it is also from the mueseum and it must be returned or there will be trouble. When she is finished she will return it to me, and I then I will bid her good-evening. That is all. Please send a photo, eyebrows only. I WILL NOT respond to any photos that include anything but eyebrows.

Please, serious inquiries ONLY. THIS IS NOT JOKE. So do not make funny replies to it. I have no patience for impertinence. Good day.

--------End Craigslist Post----------

Today's Thought Of The Day

Benford's Law of Controversy states:

Passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available.
Read that again.

Fever Pitch

A very interesting thing happened to me once. I went to the mall to eat some food-court Chinese food, when i was stopped by a woman asking me if I'd like to participate in a marketing survey for three movies that were coming out on DVD. She offered me some meaningless trinkets for my time, and it being Saturday afternoon with nothing to do, I accepted. I was led into an office that was to the side of the food court, where a middle-aged man named Frank greeted me.


I was shown the DVD covers of three as-yet-unreleased-to-DVD movies: The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, The Longest Yard, and Fever Pitch. I was asked if I had seen any of these movies, to which I replied that I had seen the first two, but not the third. This, of course, was a lie, as I had NOT seen any of the movies...I just wanted to see where this was going. This is where things got interesting.

I was shown the trailer for Fever Pitch three times in a row, after which I was asked some questions about what I thought. For those of you who don't know, Fever Pitch is a worthless romantic comedy starring Drew Barrymore and Jimmy Fallon, about a hardcore Boston Red Sox fan and the girl trying to woo him. Each time Frank played the trailer on the little TV I had to watch, I felt brain cells dying; I could actually hear my brain cells commit suicide as they ran down my ear canal and jumped out of my ear, splatting on my shoulder.

I was asked such insightful questions as:

  • After watching this trailer, would I be inclined to purchase this movie?
  • What are my feelings about Drew Barrymore / Jimmy Fallon ?
  • Am I a Boston Red Sox or baseball fan?
  • How do I feel about Drew Barrymore?
  • Do I own a VCR / DVD player?
Basically, it was an absolute waste of my time. Once I found out what I had gotten myself into, I proceeded to sabotage their survey with untruthful answers. I told them that, as a gay man, I absolutely would buy this movie just for Jimmy Fallon, that he is extremely popular in the gay community. I told them that fans of the New York Yankees were already organizing a boycott against this movie, for picking the Red Sox as the backstory for the movie, since the Red Sox is a totally unworthy team to be featured. I told them that the trailer was "edited too fast" and that I couldn't remember anything about it, and that might not play well to their demographic of completely brain-dead teenage girls who can barely remember who they had sex with last week, much less the contents of this vapid advertisement.

By the end of this excercise in marketing, Frank just wanted me to get the hell out of his office. I told him that he had really nice teeth, and that I wish him luck in conducting his surveys.

In case you were wondering, No, I am not at all gay.

"I Heard Payback's A Muthaf***in' Ni**a", Said Ice Cube in 1990

The US is not at war. We're not. Stop pretending. We invaded and occupied a sovereign nation (in reality, a disobedient client state) , and are currently getting our asses handed to us by guerrillas. Congress did not declare war. The American People (I hate that term) are not doing any kind of war-time sacrifices: no fuel rations, no war bonds, no draft, no rolling blackouts to conserve energy, no nothing. The US is not at war. We may be in a fight, but we are not at War. Please, stop thinking we are.

There is no such thing as the War On Terror. That's a marketing term to get you to accept an expansion of government power and the intrusions it brings. We are no more at war on Terror than we are on Drugs, Poverty, or any of the other ills affecting us a people. We are no more likely to get attacked by a terrorist today than we were in 1988. The tactics being used in the War On Terror (eavesdropping of citizens, secret prisons and interrogations, no-fly lists, gag orders on the investigation of government officials, secret police powers granted to our law enforcement agencies, etc) are no more likely to prevent a terrorist attack than anything else they did before 9/11. Anyone you hear using the term "War on Terror" or "in a post-9/11 world" to justify their non-kosher activities is trying to sell you something, and it's most likely not going to be good for you. There is no war on terror. There is only a war on you.

Terrorists are not crazed madmen bent on destroying the West. Well, mostly not, there might be a few. Remember that Terrorism is a reactionary tactic. Terrorism (or as the CIA calls it when the US does it, Low Intensity Conflict) is an antagonistic military response that is not meant to win or lose a conflict, but to inflame the passions on either side in order to mobilize support for a cause. That said, the "terrorists" that want to attack the US are doing so for very good reasons; namely that the US supports murderous regimes around the world that oppress their own people, the US forces it's economy, culture, religion, and value systems on the world at large regardless of the opinions of the local populace, and the US pursuit of profit over people has led to the deaths (directly and indirectly) of hundreds of millions of people in the last 50 years.

Terrorists don't hate us because we love freedom. Terrorists don't hate us because we're secular. Terrorists hate us because we've caused them nothing but grief for the last half century. I heard payback's a muthaf***in' ni**a.

I'm expecting a knock on my door any day now. See you in Gitmo, citizen.

If you aren't doing anything wrong, what do you have to hide?

The most common retort against privacy advocates -- by those in favor of ID checks, cameras, databases, data mining and other wholesale surveillance measures -- is this line: "If you aren't doing anything wrong, what do you have to hide?"

Some clever answers: "If I'm not doing anything wrong, then you have no cause to watch me." "Because the government gets to define what's wrong, and they keep changing the definition." "Because you might do something wrong with my information." My problem with quips like these -- as right as they are -- is that they accept the premise that privacy is about hiding a wrong. It's not. Privacy is an inherent human right, and a requirement for maintaining the human condition with dignity and respect.


Cardinal Richelieu understood the value of surveillance when he famously said, "If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged." Watch someone long enough, and you'll find something to arrest -- or just blackmail -- with. Privacy is important because without it, surveillance information will be abused: to peep, to sell to marketers and to spy on political enemies -- whoever they happen to be at the time.


Privacy protects us from abuses by those in power, even if we're doing nothing wrong at the time of surveillance.


We do nothing wrong when we make love or go to the bathroom. We are not deliberately hiding anything when we seek out private places for reflection or conversation. We keep private journals, sing in the privacy of the shower, and write letters to secret lovers and then burn them. Privacy is a basic human need.


A future in which privacy would face constant assault was so alien to the framers of the Constitution that it never occurred to them to call out privacy as an explicit right. Privacy was inherent to the nobility of their being and their cause. Of course being watched in your own home was unreasonable. Watching at all was an act so unseemly as to be inconceivable among gentlemen in their day. You watched convicted criminals, not free citizens. You ruled your own home. It's intrinsic to the concept of liberty.


For if we are observed in all matters, we are constantly under threat of correction, judgment, criticism, even plagiarism of our own uniqueness. We become children, fettered under watchful eyes, constantly fearful that -- either now or in the uncertain future -- patterns we leave behind will be brought back to implicate us, by whatever authority has now become focused upon our once-private and innocent acts. We lose our individuality, because everything we do is observable and recordable.


How many of us have paused during conversation in the past seven-and-a-half years, suddenly aware that we might be eavesdropped on? Probably it was a phone conversation, although maybe it was an e-mail or instant-message exchange or a conversation in a public place. Maybe the topic was terrorism, or politics, or Islam. We stop suddenly, momentarily afraid that our words might be taken out of context, then we laugh at our paranoia and go on. But our demeanor has changed, and our words are subtly altered.


This is the loss of freedom we face when our privacy is taken from us. This is life in former East Germany, or life in Soviet Russia. And it's our future here, in America, as we allow an ever-intrusive eye into our personal, private lives.


Too many wrongly characterize the debate as "security versus privacy." The real choice is liberty versus control. Tyranny, whether it arises under threat of foreign physical attack or under constant domestic authoritative scrutiny, is still tyranny. Liberty requires security without intrusion, security plus privacy. Widespread police surveillance is the very definition of a police state. And that's why we should champion privacy even when we have nothing to hide.

Ford = Anal?

Those of you who know me know that I've had a running a joke going wherein I replace the word "anal" for the word "Ford" when talking about that company's cars. The reason why I started doing this is lost in time, but the results are always amusing.

For this post, I'll be replacing the brands "Ford", "Lincoln", and "Mercury" (all brands under the Ford Motor Company) with the word "Anal" (followed by appropriately inappropriate commentary).

Anal Focus
Not that funny, granted. But could be the title for a series of gay porn flicks ("Anal Focus 16: Meat Monocles").

Anal Ranger
Definitely anal-sex oriented. Actually, when I was in high school, I had a friend who got his girlfriend to take it in the ass. That girl's best friend was also my girlfriend at the time, and was the one who relayed the news to me. I was told, "Yeah, {girl's_name_deleted} took it in the ass; she's a real rump ranger now". So, associating "Anal" with "Ranger" is not without precedent. And no, I don't have any more details about my friends anal experience. Pervs!

Anal Fusion
Ah, nothing says "Alternative Energy" like ass-oriented power generation. It is believed that cold fusion, once achieved, will provide humanity with all the energy it needs, forever. I say we start with Anal Fusion; maybe all the power we need is already here, hidden in the recesses of our rectal power plants. Or something....Yeah....

Anal Escape
The Ford Escape is a hideous car to begin with. Associating it with anuses may actually HELP it's image!

Anal Mustang
Now here's a genuine "Brokeback"-style term for mustachioed gay cowboys. I'd elaborate, but you can already picture it. Or maybe you can't, but know what I'm getting at.

Anal Explorer
See "Anal Mustang".

Anal Expedition
Wow. An SUV that, proctologically speaking" would be quite a tough sell. Not eve Goatse man could take it!

Anal Navigator
One can navigate it with their "joystick".

Anal Aviator
This one doesn't quite work.

Anal Zephyr
Neither does this one, though it does sounds like a position straight out of the Kama Sutra.

Anal Mariner
It sure does get lonely on those long Naval deployments, eh?

Anal Grand Marquis
Not quite funny, but could be if it were a title bestowed upon the leader of an Anal club (though I'm not quite sure what an "anal club" is, where you'd find one, or what they do there).

Anal Mountaineer
For hemorrhoid lovers.


Armour Potted Meat Food Product

You know, I used to think that Spam was the worlds scariest "food". Then one day, when I was walking through the supermarket, I saw a can of "food" that sat next to Spam on the shelf. It was labeled "Armour Potted Meat Food Product". That alone is enough to make your asshole pucker, but check out the ingredients list:


Mechanically Separated Chicken, Beef Tripe, Partially Defatted Cooked Beef Fatty Tissue, Beef Hearts, Water, Partially Defatted Cooked Pork Fatty Tissue, Pork Brain, Salt. Less than 2 percent: Mustard, Natural Flavorings, Dried Garlic, Dextrose, Sodium Erythorbate, Sodium Nitrite


Ok, seriously. Who the hell would eat this? I wouldn't feed this to a DOG! Read it again. READ IT!! Just look at the shit they put in a can and sell to people. They wouldn't stock this shit on shelves if people didn't buy it. Armour Potted Meat Food Product makes Spam look like fucking Health Food!

Just a thought...

May 6, 2008

H. CON. RES. 305

110th CONGRESS
2d Session

H. CON. RES. 305

Recognizing the importance of bicycling in transportation and recreation.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

February 28, 2008

Mr. BLUMENAUER (for himself and Mr. OBERSTAR) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure


CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Recognizing the importance of bicycling in transportation and recreation.

Whereas a national transportation system conducive to bicycling produces enriched health, reduced traffic congestion and air pollution, economic vitality, and an overall improved quality of living is valuable for the Nation;

Whereas by dramatically increasing levels of bicycling in United States cities tangible and intangible benefits to the quality of life for cities and towns across the country will be realized;

Whereas we now live in a Nation with 300 million people, and that number is expected to grow to 365 million by 2030 and to 420 million by 2050 with the vast majority of that growth occurring in urban areas with limited ability to accommodate increased motor vehicle travel;

Whereas since 1980, the number of miles Americans drive has grown 3 times faster than the United States population, and almost twice as fast as vehicle registrations;

Whereas one-third of the current population does not drive due to age, disability, ineligibility, economic circumstances, or personal choice;

Whereas the United States is challenged by an obesity epidemic, 65 percent of United States adults are either overweight or obese, and 13 percent of children and adolescents are overweight, due in large part to a lack of regular activity;

Whereas the Center for Disease Control estimates that if all physically inactive Americans became active, we would save $77 billion in annual medical costs;

Whereas over 753 of our Nation's Mayors have signed onto the climate protection agreement of the United States Conference of Mayors urging the Federal Government to enact policies and programs to meet or exceed a greenhouse gas emission reduction target of a 7 percent reduction from 1990 levels by 2012;

Whereas the transportation sector contributes one-third of the greenhouse gas emissions in the United States and passenger automobiles and light trucks alone contribute 21 percent;

Whereas bicycle commuters annually save on average $1,825 in auto-related costs, reduce their carbon emissions by 128 pounds, conserve 145 gallons of gasoline, and avoid 50 hours of gridlock traffic;

Whereas the greatest potential for increased bicycle usage is in our major urban areas where 40 percent of trips are 2 miles or less and 28 percent are less than one mile;

Whereas in 1969 approximately 50 percent of children in the United States got to school by walking or bicycling, but in 2001 only 15 percent of students were walking or bicycling to school;

Whereas as much as 20 to 30 percent of morning traffic is often generated by parents driving their children to schools, and in the United States, motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death for children ages 3 to 14;

Whereas many public agencies in cities are using bicycles to deliver critical municipal services, for example, more than 80 percent of police departments serving populations of 50,000 to 249,999 and 96 percent of those serving more than 250,000 residents now have routine patrols by bicycle;

Whereas surveys show that a majority of people want to ride and walk more but are dissuaded by concern over traffic danger and other barriers, and case studies have shown that when those barriers to bicycling are removed, people start riding;

Whereas investment used for improvements for bicyclists and promoting bicycle use resulted in the quadrupling of bicycle use in Portland, Oregon, since 1994 and a recent report to Congress on the nonmotorized transportation pilot program reveals that 19.6 percent of trips in Minneapolis, Minnesota, are made by biking and walking, reflecting the benefit of initial investments in nonmotorized infrastructure;

Whereas the American bicyclist generates enormous economic returns, in 2006, the national bicycling economy contributed $133 billion to the United States economy, supported nearly 1.1 million jobs across the United States, generated $17.7 billion in annual Federal and State tax revenue, produced $53.1 billion annually in retail sales and services, and provided sustainable growth in rural communities;

Whereas a national network of interconnected urban and rural bikeways can provide valuable community benefits, including low or no-cost recreation and alternative transportation options for people of all ages and abilities;

Whereas mountain biking is an environmentally friendly, healthy nonmotorized outdoor recreation activity that encourages young people to experience our natural world, and engenders community support for preservation of open space;

Whereas each year major charity bike rides in communities across the country raise in excess of $100 million for critical medical research to find cures for life-threatening diseases;

Whereas 57 million adults in the United States bicycle each year, and bicycling and walking currently account for nearly 10 percent of trips and 13 percent of traffic fatalities, yet less than 2 percent of Federal transportation safety funding is currently spent to make bicycling and walking safer; and

Whereas communities across the United States are seeking ways to reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, increase the safety of their neighborhoods, and decrease petroleum dependence, bicycles offer a simple, healthy, energy-saving alternative to driving: Now, therefore, be it

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That the Congress--
      (1) recognizes that increased and safe bicycle use for transportation and recreation is in the national interest;
      (2) supports policies that--
        (A) establish national target levels for increased bicycle use, reduce the number of motor vehicle miles traveled (VMT), improve bicycle safety to be achieved within a specific timeframe, and collect data needed to monitor progress;
        (B) increase intermodal travel between public transportation and bicycles;
        (C) provide incentives for State and local governments to adopt and implement complete street policies designed to accommodate all users, including motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, and people of all ages and abilities;
        (D) encourage bicycle use in communities where significant segments of the population do not drive and where short trips are most common;
        (E) expand funding for core Federal transportation programs that support non-motorized infrastructure, education, and encouragement programs by--
          (i) safeguarding existing funding sources for nonmotorized transportation from inequitable treatment in the Federal transportation funds rescission process;
          (ii) supporting funding for core Federal transportation programs that support nonmotorized travel, including transportation enhancements, safe routes to school, and recreational trails; and
          (iii) ensuring that highway safety improvement program funds are spent in proportion to the percentage of bicyclist and pedestrian fatalities in each State;
        (F) facilitate the development of a coordinated system of United States bicycle routes across the country that cross state borders and connect metropolitan regions;
        (G) create bicycle-friendly Federal land protection legislation, such as national recreation areas, to encourage regulations and management practices for mountain biking as an environmentally friendly nonmotorized use of natural surface trails;
        (H) provide flexibility in Federal transportation law that would speed up the delivery of nonmotorized infrastructure without sacrificing necessary environmental protections;
        (I) provide Federal tax or funding incentives to--
          (i) States that adopt motor vehicle laws that protect the rights of bicyclists to share the road;
          (ii) businesses that expand bicycle-friendly programs for their employees;
          (iii) the health care industry to develop more member discount programs, that target increased physical activity such as bicycling and walking; and
          (iv) provide bicycle commuters the transportation fringe benefits currently provided to people who commute by car or mass transit; and
        (J) build upon the `Green the Capitol Initiative' as a model, create and provide an environmentally sustainable and healthy working environment for employees that includes the promotion of bicycling as a transportation alternative;
      (3) encourages the Department of Transportation to provide leadership and coordination by reestablishing the Federal bicycle task force to include representatives from all relevant Federal agencies.
END