Should the DC suway system be forced to name a station after Reagan?

[dantheman]

I don’t wish to impugn the man’s presidency, but I think we can’t really know how good a president someone was until a considerable amount of time - perhaps 25 years? - has passed. It seems to me that some people are anxious to change the names of things to honor him now for two reasons - because they might look back to the days of his presidency with positive reflection (perhaps through rose-colored glasses, perhaps not) and because the man is not in good health, in the advanced stages of Alzheimer’s. I think it’s probably wrong to honor someone for the wrong reasons, and I believe it’s better to let more time elapse so we can all determine just how his presidency falls among the others. Decisions like this one should be made with as little emotion as possible, since there’s taxpayers’ money at stake. If I were pledging $500 million of my own cash to rename this stop, I could do so for whatever reason I may have. But since so many people are affected by this, it’s better to make the decision when all superfluous emotions (such as the battle with Alzheimer’s) aren’t present.

Am I off base?

That being said, there was a report on WTOP (DC radio) that said Michael Deaver, who was in charge of communications (I think) under Reagan, was asked his opinion on the issue, and he didn’t think Reagan would want any of this stuff named after him. I’m not sure if that’s an opinion that’s common among former Reagan employees, however.

I don’t have any problem with the naming, exactly; as long as they don’t call it Hitler Station or some other incredibly offensive name, they can call it whatever they wish, as far as I’m concerned. But then there’s the thorny issue of the monies for the changing. I feel that if the government wants to make the change (and against the wishes of WMATA), then the government itself should pay for it, rather than the monies coming out of WMATA’s pocket. That seems only fair.

[capacitor]

Damn, they want Reagan on the $10 bill? and kick off the only Black person in a bill (Hamilton) to do this??? Stanley Crouch is right, Bob Barr et al. are racists.

[Father_Pacelli]

I imagine changing the name might help out the tourists. They’d see “National Airport” and wonder if that means Reagan National or Dulles International.

Don’t laugh–you’d be suprised at just how completely clueless tourists can be.

[Captain_Amazing]

*Originally posted by capacitor *
**Damn, they want Reagan on the $10 bill? and kick off the only Black person in a bill (Hamilton) to do this??? Stanley Crouch is right, Bob Barr et al. are racists. **

Err…Hamilton’s father was James Hamilton, a Scottish merchant, and his mother was Rachel Faucett Lavien, a French Huguenot.

[Guinastasia]

I still say that if they really want to honor Reagan-why not start a fund for research on Alzheimer’s? THAT would benefit many people.

No, they just want something silly without real substance.

[Sofa_King]

Perhaps we could use some other shining examples of the Reagan Legacy to commemorate the station and the airport.

How about the

**Iran-Contra Washington National Airport

Payroll Tax Hike Washington National Airport**

$5,646,202,616,695.52** National Debt Washington National Airport (of course, that number would have to be updated by the second, and we could tack three other Presidents onto the title)

Government Cheese Giveaway Washington National Airport

Release The Insane Onto The City Streets of Washington National Airport**

And of course, the

Air Traffic Controller Strike Break Washington National Airport

[lawoot]

From the ‘Reagan Legacy’ site:

“Congressman James Hansen (R-UT) introduced HR 452 to authorize the establishment of a memorial to former President Ronald Reagan within the area of the National Mall.”

I’ve got it! How about putting up one of those 'you are here’signs in his name!!! (only remove all the arrows)

Does anyone else think it’s funny that an organization called Americans for Tax Reform (The Ronald Reagan Legacy Project is one of their projects) wants to waste taxpayer money on this crap?

[SterlingNorth]

*Originally posted by Father Pacelli *
I imagine changing the name might help out the tourists. They’d see “National Airport” and wonder if that means Reagan National or Dulles International.

Don’t laugh–you’d be suprised at just how completely clueless tourists can be.

Oh, come now. I don’t think there’s anyone out their clueless enough to confuse National with Dulles International. Confusing National with BWI, maybe. But with Dulles, now that’s just absurd!
[Notice that the congressman in question doesn’t give WMATA any money to do this, maybe because he thinks subway signs come from the subway fairy.

and to answer divemaster

Metro could have very well changed the name when they made up new maps and signs just a couple of months ago. They added several stations and had to change everything anyway.

Or they could have done it last year on at least two occassions when they changed the name of a couple of other stations. There may be reasons Metro doesn’t want to do it; but money ain’t it.

Well, generally the community where the station is located gets say as to what to call each station. And the community usually pays for the trouble of changing the station’s name.

Example:
Fairfax County itself paid to change the name for the final three stations on the orange line (“Vienna” to “Vienna/Fairfax” et. al.). DC asked for the current abominations at “U St./African-Amer Civil War Memorial/Cardozo” (formerly “U Street-Cardozo”) and “Mt. Vernon Sq/7th St-Convention Center*”
[sub]* CONVENTION CENTER DOES NOT EXIST YET, SO JUST IGNORE THE SIGN AS OF NOW[/sub].

So you’re just going to have to ask Arlington County why they want to stand up for home rule.

[dantheman]

Originally posted by SterlingNorth *
DC asked for the current abominations at “U St./African-Amer Civil War Memorial/Cardozo” (formerly “U Street-Cardozo”) and "Mt. Vernon Sq/7th St-Convention Center"
[sub] CONVENTION CENTER DOES NOT EXIST YET, SO JUST IGNORE THE SIGN AS OF NOW[/sub].*

Actually, I take the green line every day. The signs may say “U St./African-Amer Civil War Memorial/Cardozo”, but when they’re announced as stops by the engineers, they only say “U Street Cardozo”. They then add, “African-American Civil War Memorial” - but only after the main station name’s announced, kind of like when they say “MCI Center” at Gallery Place/Chinatown. Also, “Mt. Vernon Sq/7th St-Convention Center” is announced as “Mt. Vernon Square/UDC”. The “Convention Center” designation exists on the maps, but it’s not being announced. So I wouldn’t quite damn DC for having those station names when that’s not how people actually riding the trains know them.

[Sam_Stone]

And the irony is that Reagan led the fight against government monuments, at least when it comes to modern politicians. Funny that the guy who fought hardest for small government should have followers that want to plaster his name all over government buildings and public facilities. Reagan would have HATED that.

[London_Calling]

Just announced this week (by Yoko at a press conference, no less :eek: ) Liverpool Airport is to be re-named next year Liverpool John Lennon Airport.

Hoping Heathrow gets to be called Joe Strummer Airport but not holding my breathe.

[gEEk]

I hate to break up the vigorous bashing of Bob Barr (deserved, I might add, he’s a weenie) but I think that there is another side to this issue that is not being considered.

As Divemaster and others have pointed out, Metro changes signs all the time. Just recently, several new stations were added, requiring new signs. Plus, not too long ago, the U Street-Cordoza station was renamed the U Street-African-American Civil War Memorial-Cordoza station. This of course imposed the exact same costs as changing the name of the National Airport stop. No public outrage, not here and certainly not nationwide, was noted at the time. Obviously, the question is not money.

It has been noted in the local papers (The Washington Times in particular, unsurprisingly) that the board that controls the Metro and its signage is comprised primarily of Democrats. The antipathy of Democrats toward Ronald Reagan is well documented. The antipathy of DC officials toward Congress in general and Congressional Republicans in particular is legendary. It seems quite possible that the resistance to the name change comes not from budgetary concerns, but from partisan pettiness. In fact, I would argue that it is Metro that has precipitated this confrontation. They decided not to change their signage to reflect the name change.

To be fair, I also think that the Republicans are being equally partisan in pushing for the name change. I think Bob Barr is a jackass of mythic proportions who likes to bully the DC government.

However, partisan wrangling aside, I think changing the names of stations to accurately reflect the areas they serve is quite reasonable. I think the renaming of the U Street station is a fine idea, as it will likely increase the number of visitors to the African-American Civil War Memorial (which even I, a lifetime resident of the area, had no idea was there). Like it or not, the name of the local airport is Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport. The Metro system should alter its signs to accurately reflect that name.

gEEk

[grimpixie]

In Zimbabwe the main road of every town (At least of every town that I visited in my three week holiday there) is called Robert Mugabe Avenue/Steet/Road. That’s the joy of being a dictator - just change the damn thing and kill/deport/harrass any one who winges about it…

Democracy is far to complicated

Gp

[drewbert]

*Originally posted by capacitor *
**Damn, they want Reagan on the $10 bill? and kick off the only Black person in a bill (Hamilton) to do this??? Stanley Crouch is right, Bob Barr et al. are racists. **

Uh, can we come back to this for a second?

Cap? Um… WTF?

[Patty_O_Furniture]

Originally posted by gEEk:

As Divemaster and others have pointed out, Metro changes signs all the time.

All the time? You make it sound as though they change station names every 2nd Tuesday. Considering the 26 years of operation, I don’t agree that a handfull of changes amounts to “all the time”.

Just recently, several new stations were added, requiring new signs.

Yes- new stations requiring new signs. This money was already budgeted. We’re talkign about spending a whole different batch of unspecified money to change perfectly good signage.

Plus, not too long ago, the U Street-Cordoza station was renamed the U Street-African-American Civil War Memorial-Cordoza station. This of course imposed the exact same costs as changing the name of the National Airport stop. No public outrage, not here and certainly not nationwide, was noted at the time.

This was motioned for by the local council members and voted for by the local government. Everybody agreed to spend their tax money to change their local community. We don’t need Federal thumbscrews to force us to make cosmetic changes to our city.

It seems quite possible that the resistance to the name change comes not from budgetary concerns, but from partisan pettiness.

I won’t doubt that there exist some partisan grudges, but Barr chose his battle knowing that. The money isn’t there, and the simple fact is the signs don’t need to be changed.

[Metro] has precipitated this confrontation [by deciding] not to change their signage to reflect the name change.

The airport’s name could change to Huey, Dewey & Louie National Airport and the current name for the metro station (which just happens to be nearby) would still be correct as “National Airport”.

I think the renaming of the U Street station is a fine idea, as it will likely increase the number of visitors to the African-American Civil War Memorial.

So your point is that if we added RWR’s name to the subway stop, more people would visit the airport?

Like it or not, the name of the local airport is Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport. The Metro system should alter its signs to accurately reflect that name.

Like it or not, the name of the local airport used to be Washington National Airport. The Metro system didn’t pay homage to George Washington, why should it bow down before Reagan?

[gEEk]

*Originally posted by Attrayant *
All the time? You make it sound as though they change station names every 2nd Tuesday. Considering the 26 years of operation, I don’t agree that a handfull of changes amounts to “all the time”.

My point was that sign changes are not unheard of, and in fact, all of the signs were changed just recently to reflect both the new stations and the name change at U Street. If Metro had changed the name of the National Airport stop at that time the net cost would have be $0.

Yes- new stations requiring new signs. This money was already budgeted. We’re talkign about spending a whole different batch of unspecified money to change perfectly good signage.

As I said above, this would have been a perfect time to change the name of the airport stop. The fact that Metro choose not to, knowing full well that Congress expressly wanted the change, implies that their decision was expressly political.

This was motioned for by the local council members and voted for by the local government. Everybody agreed to spend their tax money to change their local community. We don’t need Federal thumbscrews to force us to make cosmetic changes to our city.

No, but you sure do like that Federal money don’t you? In fact, the feds fund Metro. From the Department of Transportation website:

U.S. Federal Transit Administrator Gordon J. Linton today announced that the Federal Transit Administration will provide $199 million in federal transit funds to the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority for continued construction of the final 13.5 miles of the 103-mile Metrorail System.

I think that gives them a reasonable expectation of cooperation.

I won’t doubt that there exist some partisan grudges, but Barr chose his battle knowing that. The money isn’t there, and the simple fact is the signs don’t need to be changed.

And Metro choose theirs. And they will most likely lose, because, in the end, Congress controls everything that happens in the District. Right or wrong, that’s the way it is. This seems a particularly silly battle to fight given the miniscule money involved versus the huge potential for harm to home rule. If Metro had just changed the name when the changed the signs a few months ago none of this would be happening. Instead, it’s a big deal. Real smart.

I think the renaming of the U Street station is a fine idea, as it will likely increase the number of visitors to the African-American Civil War Memorial.

So your point is that if we added RWR’s name to the subway stop, more people would visit the airport?

No, my point was I agree with the change of name at U Street.

Like it or not, the name of the local airport used to be Washington National Airport. The Metro system didn’t pay homage to George Washington, why should it bow down before Reagan?

As someone mentioned before, I think Washington National referred to Washington DC, not George, so this is irrelevant. Actually, I think changing the name of the airport was stupid in the first place. I think the Republicans are so hung up on Reagan that they’d name a restroom after him if they could. But given that they did change the name, and given the special status of DC vis-à-vis Congress, I think the prudent thing to do would have been to change the name when they changed the signs. Since they did not, here we are. Bob Barr’s acting like an idiot, but he does wield a lot of power, power that can do real harm to Metro and the District. Is this a fight worth losing?

gEEk

[Patty_O_Furniture]

Originally posted by gEEk:

My point was that sign changes are not unheard of, and in fact, all of the signs were changed just recently to reflect both the new stations and the name change at U Street. If Metro had changed the name of the National Airport stop at that time the net cost would have be $0.

There is still the little problem of THEY DON’T NEED TO BE CHANGED.

Ahem.

As I said above, this would have been a perfect time to change the name of the airport stop. The fact that Metro choose not to, knowing full well that Congress expressly wanted the change, implies that their decision was expressly political.

So change it just because Congress wants it? Well OK as long as this is what somebody from Georgia wants.

Next: Congress wants people in hell to have ice water; threatens to withhold funding to DC’s dept of sanitation unless Prince of Darkness complies.

What does DC/Metro do if Virginia decides not to have the signs changed?

If Metro had just changed the name when the changed the signs a few months ago none of this would be happening. Instead, it’s a big deal.

Well no, I think it’s the opposite. It’s not a big deal, so Metro doesn’t want to spend time & money on it.

As someone mentioned before, I think Washington National referred to Washington DC, not George…

What I see is Captain Amazing saying this:

Also, when National was built, it was made quite clear that it was being named after George Washington., and that the “Washington” in the name referred to him.

I haven’t seen a cite one way or the other, but that is sort of beside the point. Even when it was WNA, the metro signs still said National Airport, and they were correct. They are still correct. So Barr doesn’t want the signs, etc. corrected, he just wants them fancied-up with the name of his hero.

Is this a fight worth losing?

A fight worth losing? I don’t think I’ve ever heard that before. If you mean “is this a battle worth fighting?”, well I feel like fighting it for now, since my part of the fight is just venting on a message board. As to whether or not Metro wants to fight it, that’s up to them. In the end, the Feds will get their way as they always do.

The legal logistics are interesting, but that would be a hijack. So I’m starting a new thread that deals with the issues of Federal bullying.

[ElvisL1ves]

*Originally posted by gEEk *
The fact that Metro choose not to, knowing full well that Congress expressly wanted the change, implies that their decision was expressly political.

As was the strict-partisan-lines vote in Congress to rename the airport in the first place, don’t forget.

And Metro choose theirs. And they will most likely lose, because, in the end, Congress controls everything that happens in the District.

Except that the airport is not in the District. It’s in Arlington, VA - check a map. Likewise, the regional transportation authority is not an arm of the Federal government.

Actually, I think changing the name of the airport was stupid in the first place. I think the Republicans are so hung up on Reagan that they’d name a restroom after him if they could…Bob Barr’s acting like an idiot, but he does wield a lot of power, power that can do real harm to Metro and the District. Is this a fight worth losing?

Agreed with the above, except that Bob Barr’s real power is debatable. His reputation may hurt at least as much as it helps when he actually tries to do something, and when he does succeed or even try, it’s at the expense of painting his entire party as being as hateful and foolish as he is. I think it’s worth asking the Republicans if this is a fight worth winning, while we’re at it.

[FortMarcy]

*Originally posted by Captain Amazing *
Also, when National was built, it was made quite clear that it was being named after George Washington., and that the “Washington” in the name referred to him.

The official name of the airport is now “Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport”. “Washington” was (and still is) a geographic reference.

*Originally posted by pldennison *
Excellent bit in this morning’s Post about this ridiculous matter. It brings up the facts that:

1. The National Airport Metro stop is not part of the airport, or operated by the airport, so whether its name matches that of the airport is irrelevant.

2. Name changes at Metro stops must be initiated by the jurisdiction in which the stop resides.

3. The National Airport stop is located in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

4. The cost of changing signs, literature and Metro maps throughout the system would cost Metro about $400,000.

1. The airport is the only reason that the metro stop exists.
2. That name changes should be initiated by the jurisdiction in which the station resides is a Metro Board policy, not a law.
3. Metro does not care what the state government has to say, they only care about the local jurisdiction (Arlington County).
4. That’s a pretty high price tag considering Ballston’s name change cost $71,000.

*Originally posted by Attrayant *
All the time? You make it sound as though they change station names every 2nd Tuesday. Considering the 26 years of operation, I don’t agree that a handfull of changes amounts to “all the time”.

There have been eight station name changes in the last five years.

*Originally posted by ElvisL1ves *
As was the strict-partisan-lines vote in Congress to rename the airport in the first place, don’t forget.

Not strict partisan lines:
Senate vote: 76-22
House vote: 240-186
President: Clinton

*Originally posted by ElvisL1ves *
Except that the airport is not in the District. It’s in Arlington, VA - check a map. Likewise, the regional transportation authority is not an arm of the Federal government.

The airport does in fact reside mainly in the District. It was built on land reclaimed from the Potomac. This land is considered part of D.C. The airport did subsequently expand into Arlington, though.

The Transportation Authority is leasing National (and Dulles) from the federal government. Also, the Congress included federal oversight as part of the lease.

[gEEk]

Attrayant said:

There is still the little problem of THEY DON’T NEED TO BE CHANGED.

Yeah, neither did the U Street station name need to be changed; rather an interested party requested the change. The costs involved are identical, so that’s no the issue. The difference here is, Metro refused. Problem is, the interested party in this case has significant leverage and is willing to use it.

So change it just because Congress wants it? Well OK as long as this is what somebody from Georgia wants.

Next: Congress wants people in hell to have ice water; threatens to withhold funding to DC’s dept of sanitation unless Prince of Darkness complies.

What does DC/Metro do if Virginia decides not to have the signs changed?

Nice rant, but irrelevant. Note that Metro is partially funded by the federal government. The board that controls Metro is comprised by reps from MD, VA and DC. National Airport is technically located in the District as has been noted already. This is a fight between Barr and Metro, DC is in this case an innocent bystander, but threatened nonetheless given the unique relationship between it and Congress. I probably should have avoided mention of DC as it just clouds the issue. My fault.

If Metro had just changed the name when the changed the signs a few months ago none of this would be happening. Instead, it’s a big deal.

Well no, I think it’s the opposite. It’s not a big deal, so Metro doesn’t want to spend time & money on it.

Again you are sidestepping my point here. Metro could have made the name change without spending dime one if they had done it at the same time as either the new station openings or the U Street change. The fact that they choose not to has been interpreted by Barr as a slap in the face, not without reason IMHO; it was clearly a political move. While Barr is an idiot and an ass, it is still a dumb move to deliberately piss him off.

Is this a fight worth losing?

A fight worth losing? I don’t think I’ve ever heard that before. If you mean “is this a battle worth fighting?”, well I feel like fighting it for now, since my part of the fight is just venting on a message board. As to whether or not Metro wants to fight it, that’s up to them. In the end, the Feds will get their way as they always do.

I choose my words very carefully. My point is, if it comes down to it and both sides refuse to back down, Metro and the District will very likely lose and lose big. The damage could be far in excess of the $400,000 cost to replace the signs. Barr has been making noises about withholding the $119 million in federal funding for Metro if they continue to resist the name change. Metro has chosen a fight that they cannot win without serious help from the Senate. That seems a mighty slim reed to grasp given the potential costs.

ElvisL1ves said:

The fact that Metro choose not to, knowing full well that Congress expressly wanted the change, implies that their decision was expressly political.

As was the strict-partisan-lines vote in Congress to rename the airport in the first place, don’t forget.

Another poster has addressed the veracity of this claim, but I want to address the relevance. I’m not saying that Barr and the Republicans are right, quite the contrary in fact, I’m saying that Metro is being obstinate, petty and just plain dumb in resisting. I don’t think tit-for-tat is a good way to run a railroad.

I think it’s worth asking the Republicans if this is a fight worth winning, while we’re at it.

Agreed, but the risks for the ‘pubs are far less in real terms than they are for Metro and the District.

FortMarcy said:

Originally posted by ElvisL1ves
Except that the airport is not in the District. It’s in Arlington, VA - check a map. Likewise, the regional transportation authority is not an arm of the Federal government.

The airport does in fact reside mainly in the District. It was built on land reclaimed from the Potomac. This land is considered part of D.C. The airport did subsequently expand into Arlington, though.

Just wanted to add that National Airport is not the only example of this. The Naval Research Lab is on the other side of the Potomac in Maryland, and yet is considered part of DC. Bolling AFB too, I believe.

gEEk