[I publish tom Revay’s comments here with his permission. My own comments here are in italics, like this one — John Allen]
On June 10, 2010, someone posted on the BostonAreaCycling e-mail list:
There is a new pro-bike website organized by the Bikes Belong Campaign that is collecting one million names in support of a better biking (100,000 by end of summer).
Boston Area cyclist Tom Revay replied in his usual colorful style –sorry, I didn’t get around to posting this till now, but Bikes Belong has drawn my attention, as I just attended the Interbike trade show, where it made its presence well-known:
Bikes Belong isn’t a campaign. It is the bicycle industry public lobby. It is not a non-profit.
And Bikes Belong isn’t a public membership organization. To join, you must be part of the bike industry at some level — retailer, distributor, manufacturer, etc — paying annual dues proportional to the size of your business. Bikes Belong’s purpose is to tap the Federal gravy train to build facilities that the bicycle manufacturers believe will help them sell bicycles.
I have no doubt they’re right — they have smart people who figure out demand models for bicycles in areas with and without certain facilities, I’m sure — but basically what they want is to use taxpayer money to make themselves wealthier, just like energy lobbies, tobacco lobbies, drug company lobbies, insurance lobbies, and so on, do.
Is there anything wrong with that? Nope. But that doesn’t mean I want to support them in doing it, either.
And their definition of “better biking” is “anything that helps the bike industry get more money, without spending their own capital.”
[“Tom quotes again from the other person’s e-mail. “Peopleforbikes” is the name of Bikes Belong’s campaign to collect signatures.]
While millions of Americans like us ride for their health, for the environment, etc. until now, only a tiny fraction of riders have stood up to help improve bicycling in America. Peopleforbikes.org hopes to change all that. They’re building a national movement with the clout and influence to get things done.
No, it’s not a “national movement” — this isn’t about civil rights, don’t be confused.
What they want is to be able to walk into your own Congressman Bilbo’s office and say, “Hmmm, says here we got 2231 people in your district who want you to support the Great Swamp Boggity Bog Trail amendment to the current transportation bill … say, didn’t you win by less than 2000 votes a couple years ago?”.
It’s revealing, I think, that the “Who we are” page on that website doesn’t really tell you who they are. If you knew, maybe you’d figure that they should chop their own wood, rather than having you pay someone to it for them … ya think?
But by all means, sign the pledge, if you want to. Just understand, this isn’t some kind of “grassroots campaign.” It’s an industry lobbying effort. And claiming it’s anything else is just political obfuscation. (And I wrote that instead of using the term “bull****,” since this is a family oriented group.)
— Tom Revay
[The asterisks are mine, as Tom appears to have trampled a bit on his own family orientation, intentionally, I’m sure — the man has a fine sense of irony.]
Mr. Revay says Peopleforbikes is an industry lobby like that is a bad thing…
All sarcasm aside, I concur with Tom that Bikes Belong’s primary loyalty is to itself and like most of corporate America, it will belly up to the Government trough when greenbacks can be harvested; transportation budgets are certainly a convenient feeding trough but I really wonder if this mouse can roar as loudly as the auto and trucking lobbies.
If signatories to PFB are to wield any power, they have to work through bicycling advocacy organizations to get something useful out of Bikes Belong. That, of course, leads to the next question: what do all these bicyclists want? I would surmise that those who are not experienced and savvy cyclists probably want what they are told is good for them…by Bikes Belong.
Frankly, I could never get excited about that petition effort. So you are “for bikes”? (Is it significant they don’t say “for bicycling” or “for bicyclists”?) So what? Who’s against them? It’s like being against apple pie and motherhood. Even your average paving contractor who doesn’t think bikes should be on the road and doesn’t want his tax money going to bike paths probably has one in his basement and thinks about riding it occasionally, even if he hasn’t for the last 20 years. And of course he will allow as how they are great “for children”.
The question is so general, you do have to wonder what’s the point. But then, whatever is done with the results, most people who sign this will not have a problem with it anyway.
I don’t know much about your background John, but this sounds like an armchair commentary to me. Sometimes I’m a little frustrated with Bikes Belong, but they have funded projects close to my home, including the NorCal High School Mountain Bike League, and many others around the country. Other organizations haven’t funded these projects, so I reckon that we can overlook the splitting of hairs about how holy they really are.
As for the purpose of their petitions, this is a very effective way to get the support they need to lobby effectively. When I was pounding on the UCI to standardize conditions for media at world cup events, they wouldn’t listen to me as I was a solitary voice. After I’d formed an international association of journalists, the UCI acted on my suggestions.
You’re not always going to agree with everything Bikes Belong does, and you may not love the corporations that make up its membership. But the point is they’re the best organization we have to promote cycling at the national level. If you think you can do better, then do it and I wish you every success and will support your efforts. But in the meantime, I urge you to support rather than question what is basically a very sound initiative. It’s way too easy to stand on the sidelines and be a contrarian.
Pingback: Some Commie Kitsch | John S. Allen's Bicycle Blog