Andrea Bernstein

Manhattan is the top work destination in the country for so-called extreme commuting – work trips that are more than 90 minutes each way. And the fastest growing commuter counties are in Northern New Jersey.

Adam Lisberg, from his blog adamlisberg.com

Word just came in this morning, shortly after Jeremy Soffin's good-bye.

Adam Lisberg, a former New York Daily News Bureau Chief and Editor of City & State, will be the new MTA chief spokesman, making him responsible for the final word on the nation's largest transit system.

Lisberg joins the NY MTA after a period of turmoil precipitated by the sudden departure of former MTA Chief Jay Walder, who left his job for one in Hong Kong.

Walder was replaced by former Cablevision exec and former Giuliani Deputy Mayor Joseph Lhota, one of NY Governor Andrew Cuomo's most high-profile hires.

Early in his tenure (and even before he was confirmed by the Senate), Lhota had to swallow the bitter pill of losing some of the MTA payroll tax. The Governor has promised to backfill that funding in the state budget, due any day now, but advocates have charged it makes the MTA's future funding more uncertain.

Still, Lhota, a Republican, has been a scrappy chief in his first few months, advocating for more transit funding to his Republican allies in the U.S. Congress and in the statehouse.

His choice of Lisberg shows a savvy eye to one of the authority's biggest problems when it comes to securing that funding -- its poor public image.

Lisberg is a scrappy and savvy journalist who gets along with a wide variety of people -- kind of like his boss.

We look forward to working with him.

Here's the press release announcing his appointment.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) announced today the appointment of Adam Lisberg to the position of Director of External Communications, effective March 30^th.  In his new job, Lisberg will be responsible for the day-to-day operations of the press office and for setting a communications agenda for the agency.  He will also serve as the chief spokesman for MTA Chairman & Chief Executive Officer Joseph J. Lhota, to whom he will report directly.

“Adam is an award-winning journalist who is joining us at an exciting time as we attempt to change both the operation and the image of the MTA.  His talents and experience will be instrumental in shaping our message as we move forward,” Chairman Lhota said.

Lisberg's most recent assignment was editor of City & State, a newspaper and website covering New York government and politics.  Known as an innovator with a keen editing eye, he revamped the look of the paper and beefed up its web presence, making City & State a must-read in political and government circles.

Immediately prior to that, he served as City Hall Bureau Chief for the New York Daily News, where he also wrote a weekly column.  A newspaper veteran, Mr. Lisberg has also held reporting positions at The Record (Bergen County, NJ) and The Burlington Free Press in Vermont.  Lisberg resides, with his wife, in Downtown Brooklyn.  He grew up in a suburb of Chicago and graduated from the University of Chicago.

“I’m excited to join an agency that plays such a crucial role in the New York City region, and to help the MTA deliver its message to the millions of people it serves across a wide range of media,” Lisberg said. “Mass transit is the lifeblood of New York City and the surrounding counties.  As the MTA tackles enormous construction projects at a time of financial strain, I’m looking forward to helping the agency explain its challenges and its achievements to the millions of people who rely on it.”

He replaces Jeremy Soffin, who recently left the MTA to pursue a position in the private sector.

The most recent census numbers show several thousand commute to work by plane each week, enabled by technology and fueled by economic necessity. In census data from a decade ago, this phenomenon was undetectable.

“What we’re seeing is the collapse of a region’s boundaries,” said Mitchell Moss, the director of the Rudin Center, a New York University transportation think tank. “Distance has been overcome.”

Data crunched by the Rudin Center at New York University for WNYC show how this super-long distance commuting is upending notions of work, home and office.

As super commuting rises, Moss said a number of notions begin to fray – like “rush hour” and “the work week.”  Many air commuters will fly on Tuesdays and Thursdays because that’s cheapest, and work a day or two at home.

Scott Sunshine’s commute starts at 4:30 am. He drives about an hour to the airport in Ft. Lauderdale, Fl., takes a two hour flight, then the AirTrain from JFK, to the E train and finally the No. 6 train.  He’s in his midtown Manhattan office by 10 a.m., and four days later, he’s home in the Sunshine State.

“I’m a carpool with a bunch of people from my town who make the same commute,” Sunshine said.

The most recent census numbers show several thousand commute to work by plane each week, enabled by technology and fueled by economic necessity. In census data from a decade ago, this phenomenon was undetectable.

“What we’re seeing is the collapse of a region’s boundaries,” said Mitchell Moss, the director of the Rudin Center, a New York University transportation think tank. “Distance has been overcome.”

Data crunched by the Rudin Center at New York University for WNYC show how this super-long distance commuting is upending notions of work, home and office.

As super commuting rises, Moss said a number of notions begin to fray – like “rush hour” and “the work week.”  Many air commuters will fly on Tuesdays and Thursdays because that’s cheapest, and work a day or two at home.

Sean Donovan can relate. He’s on the 6 a.m. flight every Tuesday from Detroit to New York for his job at a drug company.

“In the industry I’m in, you never know from month to month or year to year if I’m going to have a job,” Donovan said.

He ran the numbers. Even paying for his mortgage in Ann Arbor, a studio in Manhattan, and all the airfares, he said he still comes out ahead coming a third of the way across the country for work.

The reasons for the air commuting phenomenon are various – but all recent.  The economic collapse meant there were more well-paying jobs in New York than elsewhere.  But outside New York, housing values dropped 25 percent, and people couldn’t sell their homes.

Nor did they necessarily want to.

And in the last few years, technology has made this easy: commuters can interact with kids via Skype or iChat and can work on the plane.

“I never set the ‘Out-of-Office’ reply on my email,” said Dave Gustafson, who lives in Atlanta, works in New York, and has offices in Silicon Valley. “I’m never really out of the office.”

Gustafson said there are benefits to his lifestyle.

“Because I travel like this I’m not locked into living in a particular area. We’re talking about relocating to another part of the country, and I don’t have to find a new job, so long as I’m near an airport. We can pick our place.”

He’s picking Colorado.

Families say they’ve adjusted, but with reservations.

“It was a lit bit of a disappointment for us because it’s not what we wanted,” said Scott Sunshine’s wife, Hilary. “We were hoping to remain together as a family unit, and initially it was difficult. But at the end of the day, this is what Scott’s been doing.”

Hilary Sunshine says she’s thrilled Florida is her home, and where their four children go to school.

As for Scott, he’s calculated he’s traveled to the moon and back – twice.

Some 4,000 commuters travel to and from New York City by air for work -- part of a tiny but rapidly growing group of super super-commuters.

Senator Charles Schumer on the Prospect Park West Bike Lane (Paul Steely White photo)

Kind of hard to think up a more imaginative twist to the Prospect Park West bike lane story -- yesterday, while riding his bike with his daughter Anna, Paul Steely White, the executive director of Transportation Alternatives and one of the motivating forces behind the high-profile lane, yesterday almost literally bumped into Senator Charles Schumer riding on the lane.

"My three year old Anna and I were riding our bikes to the park. And all of a sudden as we approaching the park I saw what looked like Senator Charles Schumer riding on the Prospect Park West Bike lane. I whipped out my cell phone and snapped the shot," White tells us. "And as I was taking the photograph he looked at me and smiled and said, I ride all the time."

Schumer's wife, Iris Weinshall, the former City Transportation Commissioner, was a major backer of the lawsuit to remove the lane.

That lawsuit was dismissed, though that dismissal is being appealed.

Schumer's office had no comment.

Biden in Toledo March 15 (photo Obama Biden campaign)

A year ago and a half ago – October 2010 -- I was in Jackson Michigan, an hour's drive on a long flat plain due west of Detroit, in a county that is evenly split between Democrats and Republicans.  The auto industry looms large in Jackson, as it does in much of Michigan.  Almost everyone seems to work in the industry or have family that does – or did.

One of the things I’d come to find out was how the auto bailout was playing in Jackson.  Even then, the White House had been laboring mightily to  argue the virtues of the bailout, sending out report after report about auto industry jobs that had been saved by the deal.

But it wasn’t selling.

That month, I met Linda Webb, who was working at Target. She practically spit teeth at the thought of the bailout. “I feel they should’ve gave the people the money to spend to keep the companies going,” she told me while pushing her grocery cart out of the local Walmart super market. “But they did it the opposite. They gave it to all the big people that didn’t need the money. If they handed me money like they handed them, I could’ve went and bought a car — it would have kept them in production.”

Tough. In the fall of 2010, saving a big company turns out to have stirred up a populist sentiment against that very thing.  The auto bailouts didn’t seem to be worth much electoral coin.

That shouldn’t have been surprising -- as the New York Times has reported, in early 2009, 3 out of 4 Americans didn’t think Washington should help the automakers.  Six in 10 opposed the bailouts once they happened.

But, as a Pew poll last month found, those numbers have practically reversed, with Americans saying the bailouts were mostly good for the economy, by a 56 to 37 percent margin.  The industry's now in the black, and -- most importantly -- people are going back to work.

This is hugely significant for the Obama Biden 2012 campaign in the key swing states of Michigan and Ohio, and they’ve seized upon it.    There isn’t a speech on the economy when President Barack Obama doesn’t invoke the bailout, and mention the 55 mpg targets cars will reach by next decade.  It’s become of meme for Obama.  An improved, energy-efficient car, for an improved energy-efficient economy.

This month, the campaign stepped it up even further.  On March 14, a press release landed in my inbox from the Obama Biden campaign with the headline “Strong growth in auto industry drive job creation across the state of Ohio.  New report illustrates the importance of the auto industry for middle class families.”    Since most of the reports on this have come from the White House, it was striking that this had now leaped to a purely campaign argument.

A day later, Biden himself took this show on the road. Sounding about as fired up as he’s been since 2008, and speaking to a crowd of enthused autoworkers, Biden stuck it to the Republicans. Referring to a now-infamous op-ed penned by Mitt Romney “Let Detroit go Bankrupt.” Biden said “What’s really bankrupt is the economic theories of Gingrich, Santorum and Romney,” adding: “We’re about promoting the private sector they’re about promoting the privileged sector.”

President Obama himself traveled to Michigan on the day of the Republican primary last month to fairly chortle over GOP woes -- both Romney and Santorum were having trouble jumping their opposition to the bailout.

Of 2009, the President said:  "The heartbeat of American manufacturing was flat-lining and we had to make a choice.  With the economy in complete free fall there were no private investors or companies out there willing to take a chance on the auto industry.  Nobody was lining up to give you guys loans.  Anyone in the financial sector can tell you that."

"So we could have kept giving billions of dollars of taxpayer dollars to automakers without demanding the real changes or accountability in return that were needed — that was one option. But that wouldn’t have solved anything in the long term.  Sooner or later we would have run out of money.  We could have just kicked the problem down the road.  The other option was to do absolutely nothing and let these companies fail.  And you will recall there were some politicians who said we should do that."

Then came the boos.

In 2008, Obama did so well in Michigan that John McCain gave up campaigning there.  In 2010, Republicans swept.  But in 2012, the bailout has proven so successful that it's become a mandatory talking point.

There are, as pundits like to note, plenty of caveats for Obama in Michigan and Ohio.  But one thing is clear.

The Obama White House bailed out a giant industry.  And in so doing, gave it self a populist argument that may prove one of its most powerful this year.

How the worm turns.

Photo: National Cherry Blossom Festival

It's been a bit of a kerfuffle -- why there haven't been bike share stations on the National Mall, when the area involves long walks, and not-all-that convenient Metro stations.

But as of today, it's over, the National Park Service has installed two bike share stations, as the press release says "just days before the start of the National Cherry Blossom Festival."

DDOT says there will be a total of 5 bike share stations on the mall.

Both Washington, DC and Virginia are now adding additional stations and bicycles and the city of Alexandria is expected to launch a pilot program this year.

Climate change has increased the chance of serious flooding in the New York region threefold, according to a new study by the Princeton, N.J.-based think tank Climate Central. 

Some interesting nuggets in the Bureau of Transportation Statistics third quarter 2011 airline report:  those pesky baggage fees and reservation fees?  They contributed a total of $1.5 billion to airline revenue between July and September of 2011, alone.

Airlines collected another $872 million from frequent flyer award sales and pet transportation fees.   The press release notes:

"Other fees, such as revenue from seating assignments and on-board sales of food, beverages, pillows, blankets, and entertainment are reported in a different category with other items and cannot be identified separately."

Here's the full release:

Scheduled passenger airlines reported a profit margin of 6.8 percent in the third quarter of 2011, down from the 10.4 percent profit margin in the third quarter of 2010, BTS reported today in a release of preliminary data. 

BTS, a part of the Research and Innovative Technology Administration, reported that the network airlines reported an operating profit margin of 7.1 percent as a group in the July-to-September 2011 period. The low-cost group's profit margin was 6.0 percent, and the regional group’s was 2.5 percent. See Airline Financial Data Press Releases for historic data.

As part of their third-quarter revenue, the airlines collected $898 million in baggage fees and $603 million from reservation change fees from July to September 2011.

In addition to baggage and reservation change fees, airlines reported ancillary revenue of $872 million from passengers and from other sources. This revenue category includes revenue from frequent flyer award program mileage sales and pet transportation fees. Total third quarter 2011 airline revenue from all ancillary sources that can be identified, including fees and frequent flyer sales was $2.381 billion, with Delta Air Lines reporting the most, $814 million.  

Baggage fees and reservation change fees are the only ancillary fees paid by passengers that are reported to BTS as separate items. Other fees, such as revenue from seating assignments and on-board sales of food, beverages, pillows, blankets, and entertainment are reported in a different category with other items and cannot be identified separately.

The baggage and reservation change fees from passengers combined with ancillary revenue from other sources constituted 5.8 percent of the total revenue of the 27 carriers that reported receiving ancillary revenue. Spirit Airlines reported the largest percent of operating revenue from ancillary revenue of any carrier, 31.1 percent. For additional Miscellaneous Operating Revenue data, go to BTS Schedule P-1.2.           

            See BTS Airline Financials Release for summary tables and additional data.

A Denver bike share station (RTD photo)

After a winter intermission, both Denver and  Boston relaunch their bike shares this week.  The two northern cities (along with Minneapolis and Washington, DC) were among the nation's first bike share programs. Washington, DC's bike share is year-round, and Minneapolis's will start up the first week of April.

Chicago and New York are expected to launch two of the nation's biggest bike shares this summer.   San Francisco is launching a smaller, 500-bike program this summer.

New York is actively planning bike share share station locations, and both New York and Chicago are putting together bike share sponsors.

More soon.

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg with Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, March 2012 (photo: NYC Mayor's office)

Does New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg want money for the 9/11 museum?  Apparently, he wants money for transit, more.

At his daily press conference, Bloomberg was asked about an upcoming meeting with House Majority Leader Eric Cantor -- and if the Mayor would ask for federal funding for the 9/11 museum.  Bloomberg didn't address the 9/11 museum, instead riffing on the need for transit funding.  Here's the transcript:

Q: Are you going to ask Representative Cantor to support Federal funding for the 9/11 Museum?

Mayor: It’s a whole bunch of things. You know the biggest thing that we really, I think, could get done with him because it probably fits in with what the politics are on both sides of the aisle in Washington at the moment, I’d like to see if we can’t get some help in getting a tax credit for commuters. You know, the highway bill helps you if you drive, but it doesn’t help mass transit and we’re very dependent on that. But there are a whole bunch of issues that are nationwide issues that I- we really care about – immigration and those kinds of things.

The U.S. Transportation Secretary, Ray LaHood, is making a pair of speeches today on transit -- one at the American Public Transportation Association, one at the National League of Cities. To coincide with that he's announcing $25 million to plan future transit.

Here's the release:

U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood today announced the availability of approximately $25 million in competitive funding grants to help communities take their first steps in planning future transit options to better connect people to where they live, work and play.

“President Obama challenged us to build an economy that works for everyone, and the tremendous demand for more transit service across America shows how much communities want alternative ways to get to work, school, medical appointments and elsewhere,” said Secretary LaHood. “We have critical transportation work that needs to be done and Americans who are ready to do the work.”

The funds are available through the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) Alternatives Analysis grant program, which is the first key step that local decision makers must take as they pursue federal funds for key transit construction projects. The analysis begins with a solid understanding of the local transportation problems at hand, followed by a period of study that engages the public, local officials, and potential funding partners in evaluating the costs and benefits of various transit solutions—and ways to pay for them. The Alternatives Analysis process helps to ensure that communities think through the best and most feasible choices available to them, before committing local resources and competing for federal funds from the FTA.

“To achieve the President’s vision of an America that’s built to last, we’ll continue to support local decision making about the best ways to bring more transit to communities nationwide,” said Federal Transit Administrator Peter Rogoff. “With gas prices rising, the need for transit alternatives is greater than ever.”

Last year, FTA awarded $25.4 million for 34 Alternatives Analysis studies throughout the U.S. The agency reviewed 71 applications from 29 states seeking a total of $60.8 million. Among the transit corridors now under consideration that build on last year’s grants are a 24-mile north-south corridor along Chicago’s lakefront, the five-mile South Central Corridor in Phoenix, and a 22-mile corridor between the City of Charleston and Town of Summerville in South Carolina.

Austin, TX, got a new commuter rail in 2010.

Okay, so its not really a sweepstakes, but Texas -- yes, Texas -- home to much of the the US oil and gas industry saw some of the biggest spikes in transit ridership in 2011, according to an American Public Transportation Report released Monday.

The report found transit ridership at 10.4 billion trips annually, the second highest ridership since 1957.  Only 2008, which had some of the highest gas prices in history and -- until October -- a relatively strong economy -- had higher transit ridership.

Also during 2011, nationally, driving declined 1.2 percent.

Austin, which built  a new rail extension that opened in 2010, saw a 169 percent increase in ridership.   Dallas, which is undergoing an aggressive transit expansion saw a 31.2 percent increase in light rail ridership.

Other areas with notable hikes:  Seattle saw a 37.2 percent increase in light rail ridership.  Cleveland saw the biggest jump in subway ridership (12.3 percent) and Nashville saw a 33 percent rise in commuter rail.

When the NY MTA began a massive construction project in Brooklyn, disrupting service for riders in Park Slope and Windsor Terrace, it sweetened the pot by extending G train service deeper into Brooklyn, connecting those neighborhoods to Fort Greene and Williamsburg.

According to an MTA podcast from 2009 "As a result of extending the G, it’s estimated that on a typical weekday, 8,700 riders will save an average of three minutes. The G will operate to Church Ave through 2013, the scheduled completion date for the Culver Viaduct project."

But the when the Working Families Party started circulating a petition  this week (prompting many alarmed emails to Transportation Nation), the MTA appeared to have a change of heart.

"We have made no decision on the G line extension which was put into place to facilitate the Culver Viaduct rehabilitation work," spokesman Charles Seaton said in an email. "We will do an assessment toward the end of the year and then make a decision prior to completion of the work—about a year and a half from now."

A sobering by-product of the Fukushima nuclear power plant disaster in Japan last year -- the country has had to rely more on natural gas for its energy, and that's meant a big jump in greenhouse gas emissions.

On our partner The Takeaway David Biello, associate editor of environment and energy at Scientific American, discusses the future of nuclear energy, one year out with host John Hockenberry.   You can listen to the full interview here.

President Obama held his first news conference of the year on Super Tuesday as his Republican rivals battled for votes in 10 states. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

Our sister site ItsaFreeCountry.org is carry it here.

By a 51 to 45 majority, Californians favor high speed rail, according to a Public Policy institute of California poll.  (page 17 of pdf) But that majority turns to a minority among likely voters, with only 43 percent supporting high speed rail and 53 percent opposing.

The areas that would benefit from high speed rail were the most in favor.  San Franciscans support it by a 57% majority and Los Angelenos with a  54% majority, with the Central Valley almost evenly split.

Asians were most in favor of high speed rail, with 69% in favor.  Latinos were also more in favor (56%) than whites, where a 55% majority oppose high speed rail.

President Obama at Daimler Trucks in Mt. Holly, North Carolina (photo: John Adkisson/Getty Images News)

Continuing to push his energy agenda in the key swing state of North Carolina, President Obama Wednesday said more fuel efficient trucks will be able to save $15,000 a year -- and reduce oil consumption by more than 12 billion barrels.

Tell congress "we’re tired of hearing phony election-year promises that never come about," the President told a rowdy crowd. " What we need is a serious, sustained, all-of-the-above strategy for American-made energy, American-made efficiency, American innovation, American fuel-efficient trucks, American fuel-efficient cars.  We may not get there in one term --" President Obama said, before being interrupted with chants of  "Four more years!" -- "It's going to take us a whole to wean ourselves off the old and grab the new.  But we're going to meet this challenge because we are Americans!"

Here's the full transcript:

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT

ON ENERGY

Daimler Truck Manufacturing Plant

Mount Holly, North Carolina

12:50 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: Hello, North Carolina! (Applause.) Hello, Mount Holly! (Applause.) Thank you, Juan, for that introduction. I did not know he was a preacher. (Laughter.) He must be at least a deacon. (Laughter.) I was hearing -- "Welll" -- (Laughter.) He was starting to get the spirit up here. I'm going to take Juan on the road to introduce me everywhere. (Laughter.) Can I hear an "amen"?

AUDIENCE: Amen!

THE PRESIDENT: Amen.

I want to thank Mark Hernandez, Ricky McDowell -- (applause) -- and Martin Daum for hosting us and being such great tour guides. Thank you so much, everybody. Give them a big round of applause. (Applause.)

We've got a few outstanding North Carolinians in the house. You've got your Governor, Bev Perdue, is here. (Applause.) Your mayors, Bryan Hough and Anthony Foxx are here. (Applause.) Two outstanding Congressmen, Mel Watt and Heath Shuler are here. (Applause.) Thank you all for being here.

It is good to be in North Carolina. Anthony Foxx pointed out that I decided to wear a tie that could be a Tar Heel -- (applause) -- but it's got a little Duke color in there, too.

AUDIENCE: Booo --

THE PRESIDENT: I didn’t want to get in trouble with anybody, so I was hedging my bets. (Laughter.)

I always tell people I am one of the best advertisers for North Carolina. I love this state. (Applause.) Love this state. Everybody here is so nice, so welcoming. Even the folks who don't vote for me, they're nice to me. They usually wave five fingers. (Laughter.) So it's just a great pleasure.

And I just had a chance to see some of the folks who are doing the work here today. I couldn't be more impressed. Some people have been here -- like Juan -- 32 years, 25 years. Some folks have been here for four months, or six months, have just gotten hired. But everybody had such pride in their work.

And the Freighterline trucks that you’re making here at this plant run on natural gas, and that makes them quieter, it makes them better for the environment, it makes them cheaper to fill up than they would be with diesel. I hear you sold your 1,000th natural gas truck last November -– (applause) -- the first company to reach that milestone. And it was made right here in Mount Holly. (Applause.) And last year, this plant added more than 1,000 workers, hiring back a lot of folks who were laid off during the recession. (Applause.) That is something to be proud of.

Now, here at Daimler, you're not just building trucks. You're building better trucks.

AUDIENCE: That’s right.

THE PRESIDENT: You're building trucks that use less oil. And you know that’s especially important right now because most of you have probably filled up your gas tank a time or two in the last week, and you've seen how quickly the price of gas is going up. A lot of you may have to drive a distance to work. Higher gas prices are like a tax straight out of your paycheck.

And for companies that operate a whole fleet of trucks, the higher costs can make a big difference in terms of the profitability of the company.

Now, here's the thing, though -- this is not the first time we've seen gas prices spike. It's been happening for years. Every year, about this time, gas starts spiking up, and everybody starts wondering, how high is it going to go? And every year, politicians start talking when gas prices go up. They get out on the campaign trail -- and you and I both know there are no quick fixes to this problem -- but listening to them, you'd think there were.

As a country that has 2 percent of the world's oil reserves, but uses 20 percent of the world's oil -- I'm going to repeat that -- we've got 2 percent of the world oil reserves; we use 20 percent. What that means is, as much as we're doing to increase oil production, we're not going to be able to just drill our way out of the problem of high gas prices. Anybody who tells you otherwise either doesn’t know what they’re talking about or they aren’t telling you the truth.

Here is the truth. If we are going to control our energy future, then we’ve got to have an all-of-the-above strategy. We’ve got to develop every source of American energy -- not just oil and gas, but wind power and solar power, nuclear power, biofuels. We need to invest in the technology that will help us use less oil in our cars and our trucks, in our buildings, in our factories. That’s the only solution to the challenge. Because as we start using less, that lowers the demand, prices come down. It's pretty straightforward. That’s the only solution to this challenge.

And that’s the strategy that we’ve now been pursuing for the last three years. And I’m proud to say we’ve made progress.

Since I took office, America’s dependence on foreign oil has gone down every single year. In fact, in 2010, it went under 50 percent for the first time in 13 years.

You wouldn’t know it from listening to some of these folks out here -- (laughter) -- some of these folks -- (laughter) -- but a key part of our energy strategy has been to increase safe, responsible oil production here at home. Under my administration, America is producing more oil today than any time in the last eight years. Under my administration, we’ve quadrupled the number of operating oilrigs to a record high. We’ve got more oilrigs operating now than we’ve ever seen. We’ve opened up millions of new acres for oil and gas exploration. We’ve approved more than 400 drilling permits that follow new safety standards after we had that mess down in the Gulf.

We’re approving dozens of new pipelines. We just announced that we’ll do whatever we can to speed up construction of a pipeline in Oklahoma that’s going to relieve a bottleneck and get more oil to the Gulf -- to the refineries down there -- and that’s going to help create jobs, encourage more production.

So these are the facts on oil production. If somebody tells you we’re not producing enough oil, they just don’t know the facts.

But how much oil we produce here at home, because we only have 2 percent and we use 20, that’s not going to set the price of gas worldwide, or here in the United States. Oil is bought and sold on the world market. And the biggest thing that’s causing the price of oil to rise right now is instability in the Middle East. You guys have been hearing about what’s happening with Iran; there are other oil producers that are having problems. And so people have gotten uncertain. And when uncertainty increases, then sometimes you see speculation on Wall Street that drives up gas prices even more.

But here's the thing. Over the long term, the biggest reason oil prices will go up is there's just growing demand in countries like China and India and Brazil. There are a lot of people there. In 2010 alone, China added nearly 10 million cars on its roads. Think about that -- 2010, 10 million new cars. People in China, folks in India, folks in Brazil -- they're going to want cars, too, as their standard of living goes up, and that means more demand for oil, and that's going to kick up the price of oil worldwide. Those numbers are only going to get bigger over time.

So what does that mean for us? It means we can't just keep on relying on the old ways of doing business. We can't just rely on fossil fuels from the last century. We've got to continually develop new sources of energy.

And that’s why we've made investments that have nearly doubled the use of clean, renewable energies in this country. And thousands of Americans have jobs because of it. It also means we’ve got to develop the resources that we have that are untapped, like natural gas. We're developing a near hundred-year supply of natural gas -– and that's something that we expect could support more than 600,000 jobs by the end of the decade.

And that’s why we've worked with the private sector to develop a high-tech car battery that costs half as much as other batteries and can go up to 300 miles on a single charge. Think about that. That will save you some money at the pump. And that is why we are helping companies like this one right here and plants like this one right here to make more cars and trucks that use less oil.

When I ran for office, I went to Detroit and I gave a speech to automakers where I promised that I was going to raise fuel standards on our cars, so that they’d go further on a gallon of gas. I said we should do the same thing on trucks. I have to tell you, when I said it, I didn't get a lot of applause in the room, because there was a time when automakers were resisting higher fuel standards -- because change isn't easy. But you know what, after three decades of not doing anything, we got together with the oil companies, we got together with the unions, we got together with folks who usually do not see eye to eye, and we negotiated new fuel economy standards that are going to make sure our cars average nearly 55 miles per gallon by the middle of the next decade. That's nearly double what they get today -- nearly double. (Applause.)

Now, because of these new standards for cars and trucks, they're going to -- all going to be able to go further and use less fuel every year. And that means pretty soon you’ll be able to fill up your car every two weeks instead of every week -– and, over time, that saves you, a typical family, about $8,000 a year.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: We like that.

THE PRESIDENT: You like that, don't you?

AUDIENCE: Yes! (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT: Eight thousand dollars -- that's no joke. We can reduce our oil consumption by more than 12 billion barrels. And thanks to the SuperTruck program that we’ve started with companies like this one, trucks will be able to save more than $15,000 in fuel costs every year. Think about that, $15,000.

It looks like somebody might have fainted up here. Have we got some of the EMS, somebody. Don’t worry about -- folks do this all the time in my meetings. (Laughter.) You’ve always got to eat before you stand for a long time. That’s a little tip. But they'll be okay. Just make sure that -- give them a little room. All right, everybody all right? Okay.

So these trucks can save $15,000 every year. I want people to think about what that means for businesses, what it means for consumers. It is real progress. And it's happening because of American workers and American know-how. It's happening because of you. It's happening because of you.

We’re also making it easier for big companies -- some of your customers, like UPS and FedEx -- to make the shift to fuel-efficient cars and trucks. We call it the National Clean Fleets Partnership. And since we announced it last year, the number of companies that are taking part in it has tripled. And that means more customers for your trucks. (Applause.) We're creating more customers for your trucks.

And I am proud to say that the federal government is leading by example. One thing the federal government has a lot of is cars and trucks. We got a lot of cars and we got a lot of trucks. And so what I did was I directed every department, every agency in the federal government, to make sure that by 2015, 100 percent of the vehicles we buy run on alternative fuels -- 100 percent. (Applause.)

So we’re one of the biggest customers in the world for cars and trucks and we want to set that bar high. We want to set a standard that says by 2015, 100 percent of cars, alternative fuels.

So we’re making progress, Mount Holly. But at the end of the day, it doesn’t matter how much natural gas, or flex-fuel or electric vehicles you have if there’s no place to charge them up or fill them up. So that’s why I’m announcing today a program that will put our communities on the cutting edge of what clean energy can do.

To cities and towns all across the country, what we’re going to say is, if you make a commitment to buy more advanced vehicles for your community -- whether they run on electricity or biofuels or natural gas -- we’ll help you cut through the red tape and build fueling stations nearby. (Applause.) And we’ll offer tax breaks to families that buy these cars, companies that buy alternative fuel trucks like the ones that are made right here at Mount Holly. (Applause.) So we’re going to give communities across the country more of an incentive to make the shift to more energy-efficient cars.

In fact, when I was up in New Hampshire, in Nashua, they had already converted all their dump trucks -- they were in a process because of this program -- they were converting it to natural gas-driven trucks.

This is something that we did in education -- we called it Race to the Top. We said we’ll put in more money but we want you to reform. We’re going to give you an incentive to do things in a different way. And if we do the same thing with clean energy, we can save consumers money and we can make sure the economy is more secure. So we’ve got to keep investing in American-made energy and we’ve got to keep investing in the vehicles that run on it. That’s where our future is.

And in order to continue this progress, we’re going to have to make a choice. We’ve got to decide where our priorities are as a country. And that’s up to all of you. And I’ll give you an example. Right now, $4 billion of your tax dollars goes straight to the oil industry every year -- $4 billion in subsidies that other companies don’t get. Now, keep in mind, these are some of the same companies that are making record profits every time you fill up your gas tank. We’re giving them extra billions of dollars on top of near-record profits that they’re already making. Anybody think that’s a good idea?

AUDIENCE No!

THE PRESIDENT: Me, neither. (Laughter.) It doesn’t make any sense. The American people have subsidized the oil industry long enough -- they don’t need the subsidies. It’s time to end that taxpayer giveaway to an industry that's never been more profitable, invest in clean energy that's never been more promising. (Applause.)

So I called on Congress, eliminate these subsidies right away. There’s no excuse to wait any longer.

AUDIENCE: That's right!

THE PRESIDENT: And we should put every member of Congress on record: They can stand up for the oil companies or they can stand up for the American people and this new energy future. (Applause.) We can place our bets on the fuel of the past, or we can place our bets on American know-how and American ingenuity and American workers like the ones here at Daimler. (Applause.) That’s the choice we face. That’s what’s at stake right now.

So, in between shifts, get on the phone or email or send a letter or tweet -- (laughter) -- your member of Congress; ask them where they stand on this -- because it will make a difference. And you’ll know where I stand on this. Let’s make sure our voices are heard. The next time you hear some politician trotting out some 3-point plan for $2 gas -- (laughter) -- you let them know, we know better.

AUDIENCE: Yes!

THE PRESIDENT: Tell them we’re tired of hearing phony election-year promises that never come about. What we need is a serious, sustained, all-of-the-above strategy for American-made energy, American-made efficiency, American innovation, American fuel-efficient trucks, American fuel-efficient cars. We may not get there in one term --

AUDIENCE: Four more years! (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT: It's going to take us a while to wean ourselves off of the old and grab the new. But we're going to meet this challenge because we are Americans. Our destiny is not written for us; it is written by us. We decide what that next chapter is going to be.

AUDIENCE: Yes!

THE PRESIDENT: And I'm confident, working with folks like you, the outstanding working people of Mount Holly, of this plant, of North Carolina, of states all across the country, we can pull together, and remind everybody around the world just why it is that the United States of America is the greatest nation on Earth.

Thank you very much, everybody. God bless you. God bless the United States of America. (Applause.)

The Hill is reporting that House Speaker John Boehner is making one last push to rally Republicans around his $260 billion transportation bill.

From the report:

Boehner bluntly warned lawmakers that if the House does not pass its own bill, it will be stuck with a two-year, $109 billion Senate bill, or “something that looks just like it,” according to a source in the room.

“You don’t like that? I don’t like it either. Why would any of us like it?” the Speaker told his members. “It means punting on the opportunity to pass an infrastructure bill that bears our stamp. It means giving up on the opportunity to make sure a bill is enacted that is responsibly paid for, that has full-scale reforms in it and, most importantly, that is linked to increased production of American energy.

“But right now, it’s the plan.”

More soon.

Sad news for those of us who've pounded the NY MTA for information over the last five years -- Jeremy Soffin, relatively newly married and the father of a newborn, will be leaving as the agency's chief spokesman.

Soffin's been there through several MTA chiefs, including Jay Walder, who left this October for a job in Hong Kong.

It's tough job answering for the nation's largest transit agency -- and of the few in the world that runs 24/7 -- and we certainly have asked our share of tough questions.

We wish him well.