Barney knocks Bernie

From the interview with Barney Frank on Slate (Barney Frank Is Not Impressed by Bernie Sanders):

"The caucuses are the least democratic political operation in America. They cater to the people who have a lot of time on their hands, and what’s interesting is Sanders is the nominee of the caucuses and Hillary is the nominee of the primaries."

"Bernie Sanders has been in Congress for 25 years with little to show for it in terms of his accomplishments and that’s because of the role he stakes out."

"I do think that he overstates it when he says, 'they’re all corrupt.' It’s simply not true. And by the way, when it comes to specifics, the only specific I have heard is Glass-Steagall, which makes very little change in the finance system. I think he gets a pass from the media. Other than Glass-Steagall, what did he propose in 2009 and 2010 when he was a senator when we were dealing with this? The answer is nothing."

What do you make of Hillary’s campaign?

"I think it’s been good on the whole. I think she should have admitted earlier she made a mistake on the emails. I am struck by the fact that with all these emails of hers getting out, there hasn’t been a single really embarrassing one. I’m pleasantly surprised by that."

Do you think she should release her Wall Street speeches?

"Yeah, but I don’t think anybody is really against her because she won’t. By the way, I think Sanders has been outrageously McCarthyite on that."

McCarthyite?

"Yes, I saw one commercial that said the big companies weren’t punished. Why? Well, maybe it’s because Hillary is getting speaking fees. So the Secretary of State should have been indicting people? I mean, yes, McCarthyite in the sense that it’s guilt by association. He complains about what she did with regards to all this money stuff. Where’s the beef of that?...There was this complaint, 'Oh she had contributions from Wall Street.' So did Barack Obama. So does almost every Democrat because you can’t unilaterally disarm."

How do you feel about Obama’s presidency, looking back?

"Well I’m on the whole supportive. I will tell you this, I am now ecstatic about his interview with Jeff Goldberg from the Atlantic. That is the most thoughtful presidential statement on a major issue I’ve seen in a very long time."

Frank recommends this by Steve Eisman: Don’t Break Up the Banks. They’re Not Our Real Problem.

Treasure Island project: Smart growth?

Smart[sic] growth in San Francisco

From Curbed:

Treasure Island has always been an odd duck among San Francisco neighborhoods. Artificially constructed for the 1939 Golden Gate Exposition, the island’s gorgeous bay views should by rights make it a plum destination. Instead it’s a wind-blasted no-man’s land, with only a handful of residents and businesses. Redevelopment plans have been in the pipe for decades, but acquiring land from the Navy, as well as ongoing concerns about potential toxicity and the seismic soundness of the island’s landfill construction, held up the start date.

Not to mention the threat of sea level rise as per this map. Not to worry, however, since the developers are planning to encircle the island with a berm/levee (Major S.F. Bayfront Developments Advance Despite Sea Rise Warnings):

Brad McCrea, regulatory program director at the Bay Conservation and Development Commission, said Treasure Island’s developers brought “eyes-wide-open expertise” to their planning. But he said he was skeptical of applying this kind of technology-centered approach everywhere around the bay, given that sea level rise could continue for centuries. “At the end of the day, this will be a levee-protected community,” McCrea said. “There’s no getting around that.”

A more short-term problem: traffic. Think traffic is bad on the Bay Bridge now? Wait until people start moving into those 8,000 new housing units and the hotels planned for the island.

See also this and this.

Aaron Peskin gets credit for trying to stop this dumb project.