I have been meaning to write about this for over a week. After the election, the NYT ran an [l:http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/11/nyregion/11traffic.html?emc=eta1|article on the NYC Partnership's working group on congestion pricing NYC streets]. The article (or rather the Partnership) forced the freshly re-elected (and term limited lame duck) Mayor into a bad spot, and the administration [l:http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/12/nyregion/metrocampaigns/12congestion.html?emc=eta1|shot back] that they were not considering congestion pricing.

I am a big fan of sunlight. I believe it makes the best disinfectant. And there is nothing wrong with sites like fundrace or guidestar or the center for responsive politics or they rule that all try to point out the influence and sources of money for politicians and other organizations. But [lk:activistcash.com|ActivistCash.com] is a little different. The site claims:

[l:http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/02/fashion/sundaystyles/02conserve.html|This article] ran in the Sunday Style Section of the NYT. Just another subtle way that conservation is almost mocked as a means to alleviate our environmental and energy woes-- it is not a real news story, rather a story about how conservation needs to be made sexy. An interesting article none the less, makes some good points, particularly that not everyone needs to conserve in the same way for conservation to work.