Buck Up. Or Buck Down. But Buck Nonetheless.

This week was pretty exasperating. We had a new administration completely acid firehose the Federal apparatus by executive fiat. We (people who give a shit) don’t expect every Executive Order to stick but a few will. The terrifying part is the stochastic errorism1 by which this administration wants to make a mess.
What is an Executive Order (EO)?
Friend of EI, Katie Economou, sent me an email that sums it up succintly.
“Executive Orders (EOs) are official documents … through which the President of the United States manages the operations of the Federal Government.” The directives cite the President’s authority under the Constitution and statute (sometimes specified). EOs are published in the Federal Register, and they may be revoked by the President at any time. Although executive orders have historically related to routine administrative matters and the internal operations of federal agencies, recent Presidents have used Executive Orders more broadly to carry out policies and programs.”
While EOs have the force of law within the executive branch, they are constrained by existing statutes and constitutional authority.
There are several limitations to EOs. They cannot:
Create new laws
Appropriate funds
Contradict or repeal existing laws
If an EO exceeds presidential authority or conflicts with existing laws, it can be challenged in court and potentially invalidated.
Immediately, this administration issued an EO, called “Unleashing American Energy,”2 effectively and abruptly pausing EVERY project authorized by the IRA and IIJA through the “administrative matters” clause, kinda. I understand—and vehemently disagree with—but I understand the policy “platform” that seeks to roll back environmental goals. Still, the stupid wording written by stupid people (or ChatGPT) could not be stupider. I am unclear whether any of this has been fully or partially walked back as of yet, but fortunately, (?) federal transportation funding works in arrears for contract work, meaning the states—or other sponsors—get reimbursed for the spending on a project approved by the feds. Essentially, all projects funded with federal dollars are built on an IOU basis.
There are pros and cons to this system, but that’s not the point. The problem isn’t the change in policy or even the change in process—we desperately need process change—the problem is the uncertainty that comes with Stupid Federalism. Likely, the process will have smoothed out by the time the bills come due—but where’s the recourse if the states (or MPOs or other eligible Fed-aid recipients) have spent this money expecting a reimbursement and then find out that, no, there’s no money to reimburse them because they didn’t follow the Stupid EO? There simply is none.
We’re at this crossroads now where every single outstanding dollar is being held up by ossified norm: this is how we did things and it takes a few minutes to undo them so for now everything is _trending_ bad, but ultimately okay. Until it’s not. The doubleplus ungood problem I have, as usual, is the clear lack of communication and recourse pathing for how to fix this problem. States left holding the bag is one thing—there are ways to raise money relatively quickly, even if it comes at the expense of future spending (interest rates, municipal bond markets flooding/oversupply, no appetite, bailout cultures, etc.)—but non-State entities? F*cked.
These masochistic fools want chaos. They want our systems in disarray. These ghouls want the following to happen to ratf*ck us out of the dollars we give to fund the necessary systems that keep our country afloat so they can have more for themselves. The goal is to privatize everything and burn the place to the ground.
What is regulatory capture?
“The concept of Regulatory Capture (Reg Capture) typically refers to a phenomenon that occurs when a regulatory agency that is created to act in the public interest, instead advances the commercial or political concerns of special interest groups that dominate an industry or sector the agency is charged with regulating. When regulatory capture occurs, the interests of firms or political groups are given priority or favor over the interests of the public.”
Corruption is the missing word here because the effective extension of regulatory capture is privatization and the nail-scraping of the public good off the chalkboard.
When is enough enough? I truly don’t understand this hoarding and privatization model from a velocity of money perspective. Our brains can’t fathom how much a billion dollars is—and there’s literally no time to spend all that money. It’s not like they’re contributing to noblesse oblige, Carnegie-like public spending. They’re not building libraries or institutions. There’s no indication they’re willing to spend a dime on lifting people out of poverty or working toward curing disease or famine. But really, what’s the point?
Not one of these Executive Orders has been for any sort of Greater Good—even one you and I disagree with—and we desperately need resistance. Here’s the infrastructure hook: we may need to turn away from the Fed for a bit and look to pare down our big ideas to focus on the knots that tie the rope together.
This means: making our streets work for all of us; and investing in sustainable technologies and systems—both environmentally and economically—to make sure that the things we want match the things we can do in perpetuity. This means: building mutual aid wherever possible and building plans based on dignity at their core. This means: not giving up even when the world is on fire.
Solution: we must protect our institutions at all costs. We rely on norms and heuristics to piecemeal our way through the fractured peaks of the hell that we ourselves have built for us. For the next four years, we can assume the Fed will be as unhelpful as possible; but we’re a republic of states and a nation of individuals with, in theory, a birthright to self-determination. Here’s what I do know: mutual aid will be the most important thing you can do with your time. If you can help someone, do it. If you can make someone’s life a little easier, do it. If you can be out in the world, remembering that there’s no reason we’re all here but the sun feels good, go do it. Bring friends.
Also, ride transit so we can convince people that it’s the best.
Articles I liked this week.
Special shoutout to Jeff Wood at The Overhead Wire for continuing to curate the best place to find new articles about _all things cities_. There’s a free trial but the $35/year for a weekly round-up is such a great resource for all your needs.
Time’s up! What wins has Biden notched and what has he left incomplete on transportation?
Benito Pérez, Transportration for America blog
This blog post acts as a post-mortem on specifically Transportation for America’s priorities for a Biden-era DOT. The verdict: extremely mixed results that lean toward ineffective at best. Yes, a few of the discretionary (competitive) grants from 2021’s transportation funding reauthorization were meaningfully deployed (this blog calls out Reconnecting Communities—likely axed literally immediately) and there was movement on greenhouse gas emissions standards. Very little on anything else.
Exasperated: This is terribly deflating because 47’s DOT will certainly not move on any programs and projects T4 cares about. There’s going to be a huge clawback of even the middling funds—electric vehicles—as they relate to mobility, access, sustainability, etc. But expect no dollars to go toward repairing the damage our past selves have done and compounded unto ourselves.
Why Americans Don’t Walk: A Forgotten Centennial by Peter Norton for Streetsblog
Peter Norton is the preeminent transportation historian and this article is another shouldn’t-be-arcane-but-is centanniversary. A hundred years ago, Peter writes, we were a country of pedestrians—even, especially, in Los Angeles. The introduction of the first anti-pedestrian law, one that gave the balance of power over to motorists3 and gave way to a national epidemic of greedy pro-driving, anti-walking ordinances. The people who wrote these laws: car dealership owners.
Exasperated: *Unbelievable!* *Shocking!* The needs of private capital overrule the general welfare of the public space. We must always remember that drivers are also pedestrians for a not-insignificant portion of their journey so we love to see a general public act against its own self-interest. Time continues to be a flat circle, no?
The real takeaway here is the stubborn length of time that our policymakers and rule mavens simply refuse to engage in facts at the behest of private capital, whose interests are not aligned with the collective good. Y’all should really read Karl Marx. In fact, leave this blog and go listen to David Harvey read Marx.
School Dropoff Is Everything That Sucks About Car Culture by Anna Zivarts for Romper
The school pick-up/drop-off line is a perfect example of the fight over physical and mental space and how much effort we spend arguing over disputed points—oh wait they’re not really disputed, but we just assume the needs of drivers are paramount to the needs of literally every other road / space user. Anna argues that there are, in fact, other options besides driving a kid or group of kids to school, including free or reduced-fare/subsidized transit, biking, or a more robust, equitable school bus system. The benefits to investing even a little in a mode other than driving are enormous. Read to find out more.
Exasperated: There’s nothing I like more than seeing a friend of Exasperated Infrastructures in the wild. Anna Zivarts, a fantastic disability-rights activist (among so many other hats she wears, including the author of a fantastic book4 called “When Driving Is Not An Option.”)
Other Things I’m Reading
Pete Buttigieg has a few things to say on his way out by Andrew J. Hawkins for The Verge.
A good Sec. May. Pete exit interview.
How the Trump Presidency Could Impact Urban Planning for Planetizen.
A good overview of Project 2025 and how it will impact the built environment—beyond transportation.
Enacting a Ticket Surcharge to Strengthen New York City’s Parks by John Surico and Eli Dvorkin for The Center for an Urban Future.
I attended an event on the morning of January 23rd with the authors of this paper (which builds off this paper and literally decades of advocacy from hundreds and thousands of people who care about our parks as one of the three cornerstones of NYC living5) and a panel of awesome thinkers, advocates, and elected officials6.
I’ve been thinking about this idea all day—paying for park maintenance (operations) through a modest surcharge on tickets to major league sports, theatre7, etc. and have tried to understand the metaphor for transportation. I’m still ruminating on it. Feels congestion pricing-y.
This is not a typo.
Written by ChatGPT or someone with half a brain cell. Pay very close attention to the wording and the tone with which this administration treats policy—any policy.
Such a pretentious way to refer to drivers, but, as I’ll always maintain, these dainty accelerator-pushers are not a protected class.
Remember to use code EXASPERATED to get 25% off your order at Island Press. Support independent publishers. Support Anna.
Libraries and cultural institutions.
Big fan of State Senator Brad Hoylman-Sigal. Thanks for all your work. You’re not reading this. But you are. And I love you, too, dear reader.
HOTLY CONTESTED POINT.