In the wake of a transportation bond issue that I voted for in Virginia (I voted against all other bond issues, including the one for parks. Yes, I'm proud of myself) I got to thinking about the kinds of things that would characterize the perfect underground rail system. Here are my initial thoughts - note that I'm not here talking about the really important strategic things, but more minor considerations: (PS, I'd love to hear comments).

1. A short, catchy, name - preferably one that can be reduced to a single letter (The "T", in Boston). Failing that, one with a short nickname (London's "Tube").

2. Eating should be permitted on board, and food dealers present in the stations. (again, like the T). In no circumstances should people be arrested for eating on the train (Washington's Metro).

3. There should be two escalators in each station, one heading in each direction, and they should flank a staircase for those wanting to walk up. Of course, there should also be an elevator.

4. There should be a street map of the immediate area in every station (like DC). A street map you can take away with you is even better (like in some stations in London)

5. The name of each station should be printed in big, block, letters in each station. There's nothing worse than desperately staring to see if you're in the right station.

6. A voice should tell you what this station is as you pull into it, and what the next station you're heading to is. This helps to make sure you've joined the train in the right direction. Of course, there should be both a map of your particular line, and of the whole system in each coach of each train.

7. There should be a flat fee (Boston/New York), and not a variable fee (DC). A usually flat fee, with some higher fees (London) isn't too bad.

8. The machines should accept tokens, but also have cards for cheaper day and week passes.

9. Train lines should be labelled with a final destination and a direction. Some people navigate by figuring out if the train is going roughly where they want to be headed (Vienna on Dc's Orange Line is in the Virginia suburbs, which is where I'm going, so maybe I should stand on this train that says Vienna), while others rely on directions (London's west and east bound works really well for me). Train lines should also have numbers rather than colors if there are any more than six or seven lines (Paris, New York), but an easily identifiable name is good too (London, New York).

10. There should be LCD screen in each station that tell you how long you have to wait for the next train (London, DC).

11. The ticket or token machines should let you pay with coins, bills, and credit cards. (Paris, New York, London, DC, but not Boston)

12. There should be a relatively strict licensing regimen for underground musicians. Strict here means screening for competence (Paris), not content.

Enough blogging from me for a little bit, especially on the election. Time for more important things, like watching Chinatown, cooking pasta carbonara with mushrooms, and reading Yeats, Auden, and Milosz.

In the meantime, please read Timothy Burke's essay on the right kind of moral values.

I was recently converted to the joys that is Charles Fried, by his article on Free Speech-- Speech in the Welfare State: The New First Amendment Jurisprudence: A Threat to Liberty (59 U. Chi. L. Rev. 225).

Now Orin Kerr points me to this talk by Fried. The best so far:

Why is it that of all the institutionns of government the Supreme Court is still the most respected, even though it is an institution of government which regularly annoys the Hell out of a lot of people?

There's worry that Arlen Specter may preside over the judiciary committee with a much less friendly eye than Orrin Hatch did. (He has retracted some earlier comments he made, but conservative partisans shouldn't rest too easy; I've read the Thomas and Brown hearing transcripts, among others, and he is prone to tough questions rather than rehabilitating ones).

Also, John Ashcroft may resign.

The obvious political solution for the President, it seems to me, is to make Specter Attorney General. That gets Specter out of line for the Judiciary Committe takeover, and also puts a quality moderate republican as AG, who-- after the media's demonization of Ashcroft-- will probably earn the president some popularity points.

Ashcroft, so went the original scuttlebutt, was the president's sop to his far right supporters, but they would probably approve of the trade. They get Ashcroft as attorney general, but they also get a serious chance of replacing any retiring Justice with an anti-Roe or or Roe-limiting choice.

The only real question I see is whether Specter would take the job, having just fought so hard to keep his seat. Tougher call.


UPDATE:

A reader responds:

Can't happen. Pennsylvania's governor is a Democrat. Bush didn't push so hard for Specter to retain his seat, only to let an appointed Democrat serve the whole six-year term.