Category — Mass Transit

Steve Sailer is the leading voice of the moderate race realists. But everyone with an interest in racial issues should read his blog every day.

Most people are not used to debating these issues with an opponent unafraid to pull his punches, and it is not unusual for them to seem ill-prepared to properly respond to someone like Sailer. Often, debaters fall back into the “I’m not comfortable with that” defense. That might work fine at a party, but when playing chess, this isn’t really an effective response. And Sailer is a master chess player. And unlike the social liberals, Sailer is playing without the self-imposed handicap of his opponents: fear of ceding even a pawn (any concession to innate intellectual racial differences in any form or curve).

William Saletan at Slate has given Sailer some attention in his essay, “Mental Segregation.” To be fair, Saletan deserves credit for this, and politically, you can’t really expect a Slate writer to actually declare, “You know, this Sailer guy makes sense! Maybe we should reevaluate our current expectations and demands about racial performance differences!” Saletan is braver than most. Most stay far, far away from a serious discussion about Sailer’s writings.

But eventually, sure enough, Saletan suggests we continue to punt.

Sailer’s argument is that racial classification is natural—that we “can’t help but be interested in race” because we tend to define others as in or out of our extended family. I think he’s right about that. We’re prone to tribalism. But that’s not a reason to encourage racial classification. It’s a reason to beware it.

Sailer responds,

In other words, Steve Sailer will more or less win on the scientific grounds any debate over race he choose to engage in seriously, so it’s best not to debate the topic at all.

Fine. But can we first get rid of all the government’s laws, institutions, and regulations that not only count by race but then discriminate by race, such as the EEOC, the four-fifths rule, the CRA, and so forth?

Will Sailer’s response be published on Slate? Probably not. But recognition of this great thinker is growing. And I am grateful to both Slate and Saletan for that.

Of course, as a (somewhat) Leftist NYC Jew, an essay from me on a race realist paleoconservative like Sailer would be highly inappropriate without some shrill denunciation about something. [Read more →]

Brenda Walker notes some disturbing developments about the drought in California. It’s rather harrowing. While I don’t expect VDARE to actively promote mass transit (though of course, I wouldn’t complain), I appreciate that Walker focuses on the deleterious environmental effects of overpopulation.

Aren’t such concerns unheard of on the right?

No, they are not.

Watch how one conservative republican mayor in Charlotte, NC, risked his entire career to build a light rail, changing the way North Carolina approaches transit problems. And yet the stimulus bill does little to ensure expansion of mass transit.

American people have discovered mass transit. But mass transit systems do not have the funds to meet increased demand, and in fact, are facing service cuts, some quite severe. The government is doing little to help. You would think that the massive stimulus bill in the works would at least address this specific shortfall.

Instead,

Transit systems across the country are raising fares and cutting service even when demand is up with record numbers of riders last year, many of whom fled $4-a-gallon gas prices and stop-and-go traffic for seats on buses and trains.

Their problem is that fare-box revenue accounts for only a fifth to a half of the operating revenue of most transit systems — and the sputtering economy has eroded the state and local tax collections that the systems depend on to keep running.
[...]
The billions of dollars that Congress plans to spend on mass transit as part of the stimulus bill will also do little to help these systems with their current problems. That is because the new federal money — $12 billion was included in the version passed last week by the House, while the Senate originally proposed less — is devoted to big capital projects, like buying train cars and buses and building or repairing tracks and stations. Money that some lawmakers had proposed to help transit systems pay operating costs, and avoid layoffs and service cuts, was not included in the latest version.

I can’t help but suspect…is this *oversight* perhaps part of the automobile bailout?

Hat tip: Eli Valley

This is truly abysmal. Ominous. This cannot happen.

The NY Times reports that the MTA is planning the following service cuts unless other ways can be found to balance their budget.

the deficit-closing plan would eliminate the W and Z subway lines; eliminate service on the M line to Bay Parkway in Brooklyn; shorten the route of the G line, which will permanently stop at Court Square in Long Island City, Queens, instead of 71st and Continental Avenues in Forest Hills, Queens; lower the frequency of most letter-line trains to every 10 minutes from every eight minutes on weekends; lower the frequency of all trains to every 30 minutes from every 20 minutes from 2 to 5 a.m.; eliminate overnight bus service on 25 routes

Healthcare Economist makes a great point that the time to raise the gas tax is right now, as soon as the new Congress is sworn in and Obama takes the reigns.

1. When gas prices were over $4 per gallon, raising the gas tax was politically infeasible. Now, however, with the price of gas under $2.50 in San Diego, a gas tax increase of 50 cents per gallon would still keep gas prices under $3 (which doesn’t sound too bad anymore).
2. Furthermore, the government is looking for new revenue sources to plug its huge deficit and the gas tax is one solution.
3. Finally, since the elections have just taken place, politicians have some measure of job security at least for a few years. With this added job security, Congressmen and Congresswomen can increase the gas tax without having to worry about pandering to voters.

Less traffic, less pollution, and more money for debt or tax relief. An increase in the gas tax is a win-win proposition.

Tax relief? That’s a really silly idea — we have a deficit that is killing us, and are waging some very expensive wars with no end or purpose in sight But that just goes to show you — even some on the fiscal-Right are on board for addressing our energy needs, and expanding mass transit dramatically.

And now is a great time to do this. Right, Ron?

Hat tip: Chanoch

I know, “shocker.”

NYT reports that six years ago,

Amtrak managers were talking about a bankruptcy filing, and for two years the White House presented a federal budget with zero dollars for the struggling passenger system — a ploy that nearly killed the railroad.

I used to live in DC, and getting to and from the airport is awful. The metro itself, which is “so clean!” and “so pretty!” is also severely limited in terms of where it will take you in the DC metropolitan area.

Unfortunately, Senator McCain is an old school Republican when it comes to mass transit, in that he doesn’t appear to see the need for such infrastructure.

The Washington Post reports,

McCain was also one of two dozen senators who voted last week against a bill that included Davis’s proposal to authorize $1.5 billion in dedicated funding to Metro over 10 years. The provision was part of broader rail safety and Amtrak funding legislation.

Davis said that he was disappointed with McCain’s vote but that he thinks McCain’s opposition was directed more at Amtrak.

A statement from the McCain campaign, however, targeted the Metro funding as well as Amtrak. “Senator McCain strongly objects to earmarks in the bill such as a $1.5 billion earmark for the Washington. . . Metro system and questions if this money is warranted above the needs that may exist among other mass transit systems in our country,” the statement says. “With the serious financial situation facing our nation, this [multibillion-dollar] commitment of taxpayers’ dollars can [be] dedicated to addressing far more important national priorities.” The Dulles rail issue was not addressed.

Oh, and believe or not, our own beloved current president doesn’t quite get this sort of mass transit thing either, which is why they reached out to The Maverick in the first place.

Rep. Tom Davis (R-Va.) and Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va), both of whom are retiring, are appealing to their longtime colleague to publicly back the Metro expansion, which has a rocky history with Bush administration officials. This year, federal officials voiced concerns that nearly sank the project, the first phase of which would stretch through Tysons Corner. Federal officials have since given the project a series of approvals.

If McCain wins, I am so sure we will see all sorts of wonderful mass transit initiatives. Just like we saw under Bush.

Too little too late, but we’ll take it anyway.

The WSJ reports,

The U.S. Congress passed legislation Wednesday to boost funds for Amtrak and expand passenger rail service at a time of record ridership.

The Senate voted 74-24 to approve the five-year, $13 billion bill, which also mandates new safety measures for trains, including collision-avoidance technology. The House passed the bill last week.

Why have they done this?

Lawmakers have long debated whether taxpayers should continue to subsidize the nation’s intercity passenger rail network, which ran a $1 billion deficit in the fiscal year ended Sept. 30, 2007. But momentum has grown in Congress to invest more in passenger rail service amid concerns over rising gas prices, climate change and traffic congestion.

That momentum comes as more and more Americans are turning to trains to escape high gas prices. Amtrak set another record in the year that ended Tuesday with more than 28 million riders, preliminary figures show, a double-digit percentage increase over the previous year.

Only one problem. The president of Big Oil the United States.

The legislation will now proceed to the White House for President Bush’s signature. The president threatened to veto a previous Amtrak funding bill earlier this year. But the bill approved Wednesday passed by a margin large enough in both chambers to suggest there is enough support in Congress to overcome a veto.

Even if he does, it still isn’t quite a done deal. The AP reports,

It also calls for Amtrak to receive $13 billion over five years in subsidies, though Congress will have to separately approve the money year after year.

Maryland, outside of the few DC metro lines, is impossible to get around without a car, and the commute is often unbearable. Bal-Wash is a parking lot during the extended rush hours.

Ken Ulman, of the Baltimore Regional Transportation Board, wants to change that. He wants to help.

“Some people feel we can build our way out of this by building more roads, but that’s a shortsighted focus,” Ulman said.

Instead, he wants to designate “$340 million in future state transportation funding for mass transit projects.”

But as the Baltimore Sun reports, some Maryland Republicans have a better idea. Just build more roads. Because that is working so well.

But last week, officials who represent Howard’s rural areas decried the change, saying it was unfair for their constituents to pay gasoline taxes to fund mass transit that they rarely use.

“It sounds like some Marylanders are going to get a free ride at the expense of others,” fumed Del. Warren E. Miller, a western county Republican who says gasoline tax money ought to go exclusively to highways. Transit should be funded separately, he said.

Miller, Del. Gail H. Bates and Sen. Allan H. Kittleman, all Republicans, said that despite high gas prices and growing demand for bus and train service and parking, transit passengers should pay more through higher fares, which cover less than half the cost of the service.

“Oh, come on. We’re going to be putting in more mass transit that doesn’t even begin to pay for itself?” Bates asked. “I think we’re slighting my taxpayers.”

In fact, it is the people who drive who would be getting the free ride if they don’t put in tax dollars. Mass transit is unique in that it benefits even those who don’t partake in it, because they enjoy less traffic and less pollution.

And that’s just some of the local benefits.

Ken Ulman is taking a risk to help people even though the benefits may not be felt fully for decades. And unfortunately, that makes him unique for an elected public official, as there is pressure to prefer enacting policies and programs whose benefits manifest earlier, as they translate into re-election easier. Instead, Ulman has placed the long-term needs of the constituency he serves above his own short-term ones.

And that kind of makes him a hero. And one day, I wouldn’t be surprised if some public works or building is named after him.

At times, when calling for a massive expansion and utilization of mass transit, I have seen preference for hybrids instead of rail and buses. Even friends who themselves would prefer to see the same thing have treated my insistence like that of a flower child who demands peace and an end to all international conflicts. Americans like their cars. End of story. Solutions, albeit only partial ones, must be emphasized. Mass transit expansion on a significant level simply wasn’t a possibility for most of the U.S. In many dark moments, I secretly suspected they were right. Until last night, that is.

The NY Times reports,

With the price of gas approaching $4 a gallon, more commuters are abandoning their cars and taking the train or bus instead.

Mass transit systems around the country are seeing standing-room-only crowds on bus lines where seats were once easy to come by. Parking lots at many bus and light rail stations are suddenly overflowing, with commuters in some towns risking a ticket or tow by parking on nearby grassy areas and in vacant lots.

“In almost every transit system I talk to, we’re seeing very high rates of growth the last few months,” said William W. Millar, president of the American Public Transportation Association.

“It’s very clear that a significant portion of the increase in transit use is directly caused by people who are looking for alternatives to paying $3.50 a gallon for gas.”

And there are some very interesting surprises.

…the biggest surges — of 10 to 15 percent or more over last year — are occurring in many metropolitan areas in the South and West where the driving culture is strongest and bus and rail lines are more limited.

What does this, along with other encouraging factors, mean?

The Energy Department recently predicted that Americans would consume slightly less gasoline this year than last — for the first yearly decline since 1991.

In fact, growth is so strong, we now have a problem.

But meeting the greater demand for mass transit is proving difficult. The cost of fuel and power for public transportation is about three times that of four years ago, and the slowing economy means local sales tax receipts are down, so there is less money available for transit services. Higher steel prices are making planned expansions more expensive.

Typically, mass transit systems rely on fares to cover about a third of their costs, so they depend on sales taxes and other government funding. Few states use gas tax revenue for mass transit.

I personally would level a national gas tax that would be divided between each state and national mass transit projects. This is an emergency situation. It cannot wait. We must act now.

And we have reason to believe the public will support such a measure.

The South Florida Regional Transportation Authority, which operates a commuter rail system from Miami to Fort Lauderdale and West Palm Beach, posted a rise of more than 20 percent in rider numbers this March and April as monthly ridership climbed to 350,000.

“Nobody believed that people would actually give up their cars to ride public transportation,” said Joseph J. Giulietti, executive director of the authority. “But in the last year, and last several months in particular, we have seen exactly that.”