The Poetics of Traffic Jams
            

            I loved the traffic story: for its winning characters (a "poet of
thermodynamics" and a "Jam professor"), its clear explication of competing
scientific theories, and the satisfaction of knowing that our nation's best
physicists are even more annoyed by traffic than are the rest of us.

            I noticed that the story didn't use the word "sprawl." It didn't reference
Al Gore's "livability agenda" for the 2000 election or quote any politicians
decrying the pernicious social effect of traffic. (Sipress did call the Eastern
seaboard 'sprawling,' but that's it). Instead, the story was nicely focused on
local trouble spots such as the Capital Beltway and the Woodrow Wilson Bridge.
I wonder if this indicates that sprawl has ebbed back into the realm of the
regional, or just that Sipress was so annoyed by all the rhetoric that he left
it out of his piece.

            Speaking of local issues, the carpetbagger issue rankles me, too, but for
different reasons. I keep hearing New Yorkers described as transient drifters
whose own roots are so ephemeral that we are willing to let any politician rent
a hotel room and represent us. As someone who's lived in four of the five
boroughs, whose family (on both sides) has lived in the city since arriving in
America, and who worked for the City of New York, I am offended. This is partly
because my local pride has been injured, but also because I think that New
York--with its size, diversity, abundant businesses, crumbling schools, huge
infrastructure, and so on--has local needs that are just as (if not more)
particular as any other district in the country. And even if New York City's
denizens are more transitory than the average American, residents of New York
State are not. So even if we elect an adopted Senator rather than a homegrown
one, it won't be because we lack a sense of place.

            Yesterday you warned me not to lump you with radio hosts who chide Hillary
for capitalizing on her husband's fame and power. Yet today you wrote that
"Hillary owes her celebrity solely to her husband's political career." Yes, she
does--just as George W. Bush, Al Gore, and Jack Kennedy once owed theirs only
to their fathers. If sons can create political careers based on the successes
of their fathers, why can't wives do so based on those of their husbands? If
you're going to prevent one political dynasty from being created, you're going
to have to topple them all.

            Walter, our correspondence is drawing to a close. Thank you so much for
sharing your breakfast thoughts, especially with someone with far fewer years
of newspaper-reading (and writing!) under her belt.

            Cheers,
Jodi

            P.S.: I never responded to the wager you made with me yesterday. If Rick
Lazio wins the New York Senate race, I'll buy you a Manhattan at the bar of
your choice.