2009.06.01
How much should America spend on transit?
As Congress gets to work drafting spending bills, one of the fights taking shape is over how much to spend funding alternative transportation. Funding from the federal Highway Trust Fund now splits about 4 to 1 in favor of roads and bridges over mass transit. Some lawmakers, however, want to shift that proportion more heavily toward transit, which requires less energy per rider mile and generates fewer greenhouse gases and other pollution.
Transportation Secretary Ray Lahood was on the Diane Rehm Show today talking about this and other transportation issues. (Listen here.)
The RTEB has supported greater federal investment in transit, but where do you all come down? Does America spend enough on mass transit? Are you willing to see less money go to roads in order to better fund buses and rail?
RSS feed 
Christian..how are you or the feds defining mass transit? What pops into my limited space mind is large city bus and subway/train systems. Are we also including AMTRAK?
thanks
Comment by BUD — June 1, 2009 @ 4:24 pm
I'd personally like to see more transit, but I wonder how we can accomplish a good transit system given how spread out we are. Most places where transit works are dense, compact, and highly populated. A few cities in the US fit that bill, but not that many. Rapid transit between major cities seems to make sense, but unless the cost is less than airfare, people will probably just fly because it takes less time. Bus transit between closely located cities can make sense, but they need roads and road funding would likely be impacted if transit funding were increased, so the benefits may be outweighed by the negative impacts. What I think we need to have happen is a fundamental paradigm change in how we view transport, living standards, and where we choose to live. Unless most of us decide to give up the half acre in the burbs for a 5th floor apartment in the city, I just don't see transit making more of an impact or being more useful than it is today. Well, unless gas tops $5.00 a gallon or something drastic, then maybe people would opt for change and demand it.
Comment by Other John — June 1, 2009 @ 4:35 pm
OJ makes good points but I fully support public transportation and would love to see more of it. I personally think that if we don't start spending more for public transportation then this country will never start viewing it as a positive.
Comment by HCS — June 1, 2009 @ 4:45 pm
I'm just throwing this out there for discussion, Bud, though I do think your list is a good start. Buses and light rail are at the core of local mass transit. I'd add in money for bike lanes and pedestrian trails/sidewalks, but that would be a small slice of the overall billions. I fear, that federal funds is the only way some places (*cough* Christiansburg) will ever build those to the level needed.
Other John makes some excellent point. Americans do need to change their mindsets as much as their infrastructure. Still, as gas does rise in price, living in far-flung suburbs will become less appealing.
For now, it makes sense to start investing in local mass transit options. Then, as individual cities become equipped with transportation options, it would later make sense to link up distant regional cities with high-speed rail. When airplane ticket become ridiculously expensive, many people will be willing to travel a few hours longer to save a lot of money and enjoy a lot more comfort.
Changes aren't going to come overnight, but as a nation we need to think forward not stuck in the current automobile paradigm. It took us 100 years to get here. Maybe we could get to somewhere better in another 50 or 100.
But, as I said, I'm more interested in hearing what you all think about this.
Comment by C. Trejbal — June 1, 2009 @ 5:20 pm
One thing that will make a big difference will be city and county planners. Having neighborhoods, work and shopping areas clustered (?) would help keep mass transit costs down and mass transit convenient. Also involved in this planning must be employers. Can you imagine 50 or so years ago with the amount of assembly line workers whose work schedules were totally predictible on how easy it must have been to schedule buses?
I think the Navy is coming on board with the light rail for the Naval Bases in Norfolk, a big step in the right direction.
Comment by Patt — June 1, 2009 @ 9:51 pm
It's difficult to be against more public transportation, but as OtherJohn already pointed out, it's also difficult to make it feasible with our current housing paradigm.
People gripe about the government subsidizing Amtrak, but a mighty nation without a functioning rail service is really unthinkable. There may never be a time when our more far-flung regions - fly over country - are amenable to the benefits of public transport. But selling the more central and urban-ly located population on the many plusses of mass transit shouldn't be impossible. In most densely populated areas commuting involves hideous traffic issues, and gas price issues, and then finally parking issues. A clean and convenient light rail made available might be very attractive.
Comment by Kristen — June 1, 2009 @ 10:55 pm
Several busses go past my house every day, but I can't ride them. They are school busses.
If the school system can afford to send a bus practically to every student's doorstep, why can't they provide busses for the rest of us?
Comment by Ed H — June 2, 2009 @ 12:18 am
OK...I'll be a contrarian here... maybe we are confronting the fact that PRIVATELY owned vehicles are a tremendous deal. The person can come and go as he/she pleases, take diffferent routes, stop off for groceries and as a result live where they want. Trains make sense in high volume corridors in the NE..DC to Boston. Locally we have the SMARTBUS which is a great way of linking Roanoke to Bbburg. Did it take any strategic thinking/long term planning? No it took a few buses and areas working together. My conclusion is that the majority of the mass transit costs ought to be carried by the counties or cities served as the solutions/services will be markedly different for each.
Comment by BUD — June 2, 2009 @ 6:50 am
It is highly unlikely that many more people will make use of the bus (and I hear from people who do that the routes are a problem) but the mass transit will be the workhorse for getting cars off the interstates. We are an independent lot and mass anything is a tough concept. I would gladly hop a train to see my daughter in Philly but the cost on top of the timing makes it easier and cheaper to drive. Cities or counties cannot afford more money into mass transit. Everybody wants more and they want to pay less for it. Good luck with that.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — June 2, 2009 @ 8:16 am
HCS, I hope my post didn't come out that I'm against public transit, because I actualy favor it highly. For several years, I rode buses to school and work, and enjoyed not having to deal with parking, maintenance, or the frustrations of driving daily. I also rode the Smartway Bus for a bit over a year when my employer was down in Salem and I lived in the NRV. It was great, and I was pretty disheartened when I could no longer use transit when I changed jobs and no options were available. I've since moved, and where I now live is not served by any transit options, though studies I've seen indicate that several thousand commuters use my route to work daily, so transit could be added and might likely have a positive impact if it were done. If it ever is provided, I'm going to be one of the first in line. Any time a regional transit study has been floated, I provide the feedback saying we need more options in the NRV. It will happen one day, either out of slow change and progress, or because we hit some sort of critical boiling point where we have no other choice. I'd prefer the gradual change though.
Comment by Other John — June 2, 2009 @ 8:16 am
OJ - sorry if my post indicated that I thought you were against public transit. I already knew from other postings that you are in favor of it. But you are right it's going to be hard because of our layout now not to mention people's mindset.
The convenience and cost of driving your car has to become less. and the convenience and cost of public transit has to offer more before anyone can expect to get people out of their cars. If we don't dump money into public transportation then we might as well forget it.
Take a college campus for example...students and employees generally have to pay a heft price for parking and then generally they find that parking is inconvenient unless they get there at 6am. So, if there is a decent bus system around that is a much cheaper and more convenient option. But, where I live in Roanoke I pretty much never have to pay for parking and our bus system just doesn't function for the general population. In fact, I doubt that even functions well for those who do use it, they are simply the ones who do not have any other option.
Comment by HCS — June 2, 2009 @ 8:58 am
HCS, there's a nice catch for students on campuses...those who drive actually pay for both! At VT, student fees to cover transit are included in all on-campus students' costs, so they pay for the transit system whether they use it or not. If a student chooses to drive, they still pay the transit fees, plus they pay for a permit. However, it does little to discourage driving to campus. I lived in an apartment complex just across the road from the campus, and nearly half of the complex residents would start their cars, drive a block to campus, then circle for 5 minutes looking for a parking space. Meanwhile, I walked and would beat them to class. Perhaps if the number of parking spaces were reduced or the permit fees were doubled, that might not happen so readily. Definitely though, costs will have to be prohbitive to encourage drivers to change their behaviors.
Comment by Other John — June 2, 2009 @ 10:43 am
Oh yes that is an important tidbit there OJ.
Comment by HCS — June 2, 2009 @ 10:50 am