Daniel Convissor's Web Site (is in the midst of reconstruction):

Thoughts on Mr DuHaime's Comments

Dan's Thoughts on the Social Order:

Mr DuHaime feels environmentalists working to stop roadway capacity enhancements are extremists. Is it an extremist position to want your children to be able to walk to the library? Is hoping to see members of your community as you walk to the movie theater something radical? Are elderly people being too demanding by wanting to walk to the grocery store? Is riding your bike on an arterial road an outrageous desire? Is it an extremist position to want forested areas and farmlands to remain in tact? Do only commie pinkos want to breathe clean air and drink clean water? I don't think so. These values are eroded by the continual stream of road expansion projects, whether the project is small or large, adding more pavement or just Transportation Systems Management adjustments.

While Mr DuHaime accuses environmental transportation advocates of being socialists working to change the social order, he is pushing his own social order, in which our current environment and communities are further degraded.

The social order created by continual roadway expansion isn't social at all. The resulting society is a bunch of isolated people living in their homes and driving in their cars, rarely interacting with other people. We are creatures which require interpersonal contact to remain normal. In this autocentric age, there is less and less socializing available. It's not that we need town meetings, just communities where people can meet and chat.

The NJ Section of the 19 May 96 New York Times reports that Mr DuHaime held a fundraiser with racist talk show host Bob Grant and that Mr DuHaime is strongly supported by opponents of abortion. It seems Richard DuHaime is really the one looking to change the social order of the United States... back into the one we had during the dark ages of the '50's... where racism was fine, women were submissive and the dream of unlimited automobility wooed the nation.

  • (back to the interview)

  • (back to the letter to the editor)

    Dan's Thoughts on the Jobs:

    While Mr DuHaime says the transportation vision proposed by environmental transportation activists will cut jobs, the fact of the matter is economic competitiveness will be enhanced. Getting more people to walk, cycle and ride transit reduces out of pocket expenses and governmental outlays. Reducing automobile trips will make it easier for trucks to get around.

  • (back to the leter to the editor)

    Dan's Thoughts on Balance:

    Mr DuHaime claims to be seeking balance. It must be noted that for many years the funds poured into motoring facilities were so massive and the spending on other modes of transport was so small, it caused the scale to break. In order to create balance, roadway improvements must come to a stop.

  • (back to the interview)

  • (back to the letter to the editor)

    Dan's Thoughts on Helping Motorists:

    Drivers have been getting major help for the last 40 years and they're still stuck in traffic! More roadway capacity just isn't a solution.

    Driving, for many, is the easy way to get somewhere because we've continually improved the roadways. If this policy continues, there will be little, if any incentive to try walking, bicycling and mass transit.

  • (back to the interview)

    Dan's Thoughts on the Majority:

    He says he is representing "the vast majority" by pushing for more roadway improvements. The vehicle/person ratio in his county is .55, so not everyone has a car. In addition, a public opinion poll shows 75% of Americans feel there are too many people driving to work, while over 72% support increased investment in and incentives for a wide range of public transit options.

  • (back to the interview)

    Dan's Thoughts on Transit Expansion Resulting in Diminished Auto Use:

    The idea that just increasing transit availablility will get enough people to use it is just incorrect. A combined approach, entitled push/pull, in which transit is improved while automobile access is reduced. If immediately reducing automobile capacity is undesireable, it is possible just to freeze it so new demand will be more likely to use transit in the long term.

  • (back to the leter to the editor)


    Are you having a hard time printing this page? Read the Printing FAQ.

    This page is hosted by Daniel Convissor
    Home Page: http://www.panix.com/~danielc/
    Email: danielc@panix.com

    This URL: http://www.panix.com/~danielc/nj/duh-fol.htm
    Last updated: 4 April 1999