Comic book readers have a saying that no character is actually dead until/unless their body is shown. I don't think the world has seen the last of Bill O'Reilly, and I'm not particularly convinced he's done on cable news, either.
No man who commanded the airwaves as much as he has over the last two decades will go that gently into the good night. Don't forget that his former Fox compatriot Glenn Beck went and started his own network. I wouldn't be surprised to see O'Reilly either land there or follow suit and create an "America News Network" or something.
Granted, it's a particularly hard time to be a conservative pundit, because it seems like any excuse is reason for dismissal. Tomi Lahren, who achieved viral fame for her firebrand monologues (or caustic race-baiting, depending on your point of view), was fired from her show on Beck's network for being openly pro-choice. Breitbart editor/alt-right hero Milo Yiannopoulos has lost his book deal for saying gross things about underage boys. Alex Jones has apologized for Pizzagate, and is under new scrutiny for claiming in court (in a custody battle with his ex-wife) that it's all just an act. On the other hand, the spotlight of fame can work both ways, and perhaps these cases are all just coincidental.
But O'Reilly's also a special case, because as the foremost pundit of all, he had both the brightest spotlight and the most forgiveness from his network. The accusations surrounding O'Reilly were not new. In fact, you'd be forgiven if you asked why this was the tipping point behind O'Reilly's ouster. Yes, the network has paid five women more than $13 million in settlements related to him, but there were enough news and stories out there over the years that it wasn't exactly shocking. I don't even think the recent Maxine Waters comments made a bit of difference. I do think the ouster of Roger Ailes from the network did — as did the departure of three high-profile women from the network in the shadow of Ailes' sexual harassment complaints.
In 2004, a producer on his show sued O'Reilly on sexual harassment grounds, including a kind of accidentally funny line about falafels. That was very public at the time. But it was not enough for O'Reilly to lose his job. In 2015, his daughter testified that she'd seen O'Reilly physically beat and put his hands around the throat of his wife/her mom. That was not enough for O'Reilly to lose his job. Last year, during the Ailes fallout, the network settled two suits (see how this isn't all that new?) and extended O'Reilly's contract. O'Reilly even got to interview the President before the Super Bowl for the second time — a high-profile assignment if there ever was one.
While I'm not sure what it was about this news/situation that prompted Fox News to let go of its biggest attraction (though the rise of Tucker Carlson may have something to do with O'Reilly becoming expendable), O'Reilly is not the only high-profile sexual harasser. The other sits in the Oval Office. But there are three differences between O'Reilly and Trump that explain why one is no longer in power and the other is in the highest position in the land.
1) Bosses
Bill O'Reilly had bosses at Fox News. There were people above him who decided the network came first. Who was Donald Trump's boss? Who was there to say "No, this is shameful?" There's no "Buck Stops Here" with Donald Trump, but there was with Bill O'Reilly.
2) Advertisers
Bill O'Reilly's show was losing its advertisers. Some estimates put it at close to 2/3 or 1/2 of his advertisers were gone in the fallout of the sexual harassment details (there are also rumors that more suits are pending, which made it a story that could have legs). But Trump was the opposite: Without a show, he can be the important guest. An interview with Trump is must-see television, and therefore must-advertise television. Trump had no advertisers to lose — and therefore no accountability.
3) Campaign inertia
This is a big one that I don't think gets enough credit. When the Access Hollywood tapes came out, there was one month left in the campaign. Staffers and the GOP had staked their livelihoods on Donald Trump. They'd spent more than a year working with him and building up the party in his image. With a month left to go in the campaign, it would have meant starting over and admitting (temporary) defeat. If the tapes had come out in the spring or summer, I don't think we're talking about President Trump today.
Potholes Ahead for Missouri Transportation
One of my favorite old newspaper beats was Kansas Department of Transportation. I loved reading about it, I loved talking about progress, and I loved covering it. Now that I'm across the state line, almost all of my knowledge base went right out the window.
However, I've been reading some stories in the Kansas City Star about the transportation situation in Missouri, and it's prompted me to look into it a little. Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) is not in great shape, but I think they've been put behind the proverbial 8 ball by the Legislature. I'll explain why.
Like any state, funding the incredibly high transportation construction costs are always an issue in Missouri. A good rule of thumb I heard is that any major construction is about $10 million per mile. While that sounds like a lot, it is. The biggest projects, like upgrading a four-lane road or building a new bridge/off-ramp/interchange, can make that number rise higher. The more of those other "grade changes" — DOT term for "we have to move a lot of dirt" — the higher the cost.
Missouri also has another problem: the backbone of the state, Interstate 70, is kind of old. I use "kind of" to be nice, because its feelings might get hurt. I-70 from Independence (KC area) to Wentzville (St. Louis) was built between 1956 and 1965. It was designed to carry 12-18,000 cars a day, and the highway averages 28,000 cars a day now. On either end, it's closer to 98,000/day (Independence at I-470 junction) and 75,000/day (Wentzville near I-64). That's really bad. MoDOT's own projections say that by 2030, most of the corridor will be stop-go. "The corridor is beyond its designed capacity and needs to be expanded..." they said in a recent study.
So what's stopping them? Well, there are two legal hurdles that could be solved by the Legislature, but probably won't be any time soon. They're both politically unpopular, but entirely necessary for the success of MoDOT. In effect, the Missouri General Assembly is tying MoDOT's hands behind its back. To say that MoDOT is cash-strapped is... generous, actually. Since 2011, MoDOT has cut its staff by 20 percent, sold more than 750 pieces of equipment, and sold 124 facilities saving $605 million... "But the department cannot cut its way to an improvedtransportation system and a solution to its funding constraints."
Hurdle No. 1) Gas Tax
Missouri is not, despite what people say, the lowest gas tax in the country. That honor goes to Alaska. Nor is Missouri the second-, third-, or even fourth-lowest gas tax in the country. New Jersey, South Carolina and Oklahoma get those honors. But I'd make the argument that they're actually the second-lowest. Alaska, New Jersey and Oklahoma all have oil refineries that bring down the cost of gas. The presence of those refineries also generates other taxes that help bring the overall gas tax down. Missouri and South Carolina have none of those refineries. But Missouri's super-low gas tax, especially in comparison to its neighbors, hurts the state's transportation dollars. At 17.3 cents/gallon, Missouri's gas tax is lower than every neighbor but Oklahoma. Not counting the outlier of Oklahoma, the average of our neighbors gas tax rates is 26.6 cents/gallon. A modest increase of, say, 4 cents/gallon to the Missouri gas tax would keep us lower or as low as every neighboring state but Oklahoma (though in line with Arkansas) and raise MoDOT revenue by about 5 percent. That's helpful! But I imagine every politician who lives in a border district with another state (particularly the Oklahoma, Kansas and Arkansas borders) will be rabidly against it, as they think this would make the state less competitive for gas dollars. By my count, there are 23 border districts in the state Senate out of 34. If you only count those on the OK-KS-AR border, that's still 10 of 34. The Missouri House is more complicated, but just the border districts count for 26 out of 163 seats. Further, with new Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens being fiercely against tax increases for any reason, this seems off the board.
Hurdle No. 2) No tolls
The most reasonable place for a toll road is on I-70. Between Independence/Blue Springs and Wentzville, a toll road could basically pay for its own improvements, according to a MoDOT study. This wouldn't raise money for improvements in other parts of the state, but for such a vital road, it would take care of itself. In fact, former Gov. Jay Nixon called for a study to see about toll viability. The state got tentative federal approval if they wanted to make a toll road. But state law requires state legislature approval to make a new toll road. All bills for such a plan have failed to even be assigned to committee — they're not happening. Kansas has tolling on I-70. Oklahoma has tolling on several of its interstates. Illinois, too. MoDOT director Patrick McKenna said that "certainly, there is a tremendous amount of opposition in Missouri to tolling."
The best hope for MoDOT is that the proposed Trump infrastructure plan would include prioritization for I-70 and the two international airports in the state, which is a wholly different subject for another time. But that's like hoping to feed yourself with leftovers from someone else's fast food -- it may be too little, it may not happen when needed, and it may not be good in the long run.
Summary Judgments
Rube Goldberg machines are awesome. Rube Goldberg machines that tell a story are [series of heart emoji]. • • • Update from Foxtrot Alpha: Modern aircraft carriers are not sitting ducks to attack, and here's why. I found it fascinating and hung on every word. • • • I don't think Roland has been informed that he has a fever of 104 all week. I've been home with him every one of those days. He doesn't act sick. But he's got a nasty fever. If I had a fever of 104, I'd be flat on my butt in bed. • • • I haven't been able to run like I want to for practice this week, either (see: sick Roland). I'm doing a mud run/obstacle course 5K on Saturday. I've got a 4-miler the following Sunday. Saturday's forecast: rain and 55-ish degrees. The very early forecast for the next Sunday is 60 and showers. So the weather for my first three races of the year could be snow, rain, rain. BLERGH. • • • No good Roland stories lately, because we've been sick.
No comments:
Post a Comment