2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

First of all, thank you Russell for your volunteer work!

I spent years being very angry with Comcast because of issues of connectivity, the cost of service for the speed they offered, and similar other issues with cable television. I spent hours researching ways to attack these issues and talked to many regulators about what could be done about it. Only to find out that there is really nothing much we can do.

Comcast is a regulated monopoly whose first customer is their shareholders. They have to maximize profit (as any good business knows) and so they stretch as far as they can within the confines of what regulations will allow. Unfortunately, very often even sympathetic regulators say their hands are tied by agreements and Federal laws and can't really do much to help.

The municipal network idea is really exciting when you think about how much of your Comcast bill is going to pay shareholder profits, big executive salaries, and a mind numbing amount of advertising.

posted 5 years, 1 month ago
view in context

Governor, I wonder what you think about the possibility of having different tolls based on how you travelled over the bridge. I think it would be interesting to set tolls that are: free on commuter bus or light rail, cheap by HOV lane, and whatever for the rest. Especially interesting since our county commissioners have come out against HOV lanes on both WA and OR side, so much so that Steve Stuart said he couldn't agree to any proposal for the new bridge that didn't get rid of the OREGON carpool lane. What is the state's take on HOV lanes in populated/congested areas?

By demanding that Oregon remove their HOV lane, I'm sure the commissioners are trying to appease folks who have been whining to them about sitting in traffic while the carpoolers are whizzing by. But I believe they have created much of the problem by allowing so many houses to be built while not bringing in enough businesses to keep people working in Vancouver, rather than paying their Oregon State income taxes. I know we are facing a sluggish economy which might reduce the rate of growth in housing, but do you think there is anything the State can do to help Clark County focus their growth in a more healthy direction with a better job to housing mix in the future?

PS - I find the not-American statement funny considering may extremely American cities have long had toll roads, this is nothing new to people who have lived outside the Pacific Northwest. In fact, many of our bridges were originally tolled. Seems like a really good way to finance a bridge so users pay rather than everyone in the tax base area.

posted 5 years, 2 months ago
view in context