Opposing My Project Doesn't Make Yours Any More Likely

The stupidest argument I hear on transit is this: "(Progressive idea A) isn't all that great - (progressive idea B) is what we should get behind!"

We should do both - in fact, we can only do both. Opposing A makes the success of B less likely, because losing drains political power.

If you lose on A, the money isn't any more likely to go to B - in fact, it's less likely to do so because you just lost, so GFY. It's a myth that project funding is zero-sum - budgets are made up by politicians, and if you have power there'll be more, and if you don't have power there'll always be less.

In contrast, winning on A makes B even more likely, because winning builds political power, and again, there's always exactly as much money as we're willing to fight for & have the power to deliver.

See:

• Christie killed NJ train tunnel in 2010 - 5 years later, still no Plan B, and the money instead went to finance tax cuts
• Arlington killing Columbia Pike streetcar - over a year later, still no other transit investments

What other examples did I miss?

Put Transit Where People Need to Go (Especially If They're Drunk)

Tonight begins New Bedford's 99th annual Feast of the Blessed Sacrament, a drinking-intensive event with no nighttime public transit.

Just this week, New Bedford Standard Times columnist Steve Urbon lamented how the city's recently-launched downtown shuttle service has few passengers. Urbon speculates the route was designed not around where people already need to go but where tourism officials would like people to go.

Why not take advantage of the opportunity to introduce thousands of potential new customers to the service by offering a special & late-running Feast Shuttle? Give them fliers for the normal shuttle routes that they can read the next morning while they're recovering from their skull-crushing Madeira wine headaches?

In Local Traffic Reports, Roads Always Come First

In the middle of this morning's commute, Boston's MBTA B Line was briefly shut down due to an electrical issue, forcing hundreds if not thousands of commuters to get off at Packard's Corner and take shuttle buses to Kenmore Square, then get back on trains.

This news was presented last in the local traffic report, after a long list of highway stop-and-go's at all the usual gridlock spots that have been stop-and-go every single weekday morning of my life.

It's been the same anywhere I've lived in this great country: Even if aliens came down from space and started space-lasering multiple trains and buses full of commuters and GOOD GOD WHATEVER YOU DO DON'T TAKE THE 16B, that news would have to come after a car in the breakdown lane of I-95 right before exit 24, so watch out for that one.

New Poll: Americans Feel Trapped in Their Cars

Americans would like to have more public transit options and don't know just how skewed our transportation spending is towards new roads, according to a new Natural Resources Defense Council poll:

• 55 percent prefer to drive less, but 74 percent say they have no choice 
• 63 percent (more than three in five Americans) would rather address traffic by improving public transportation (42 percent) or developing communities where people do not have to drive as much (21 percent) – as opposed to building new roads, an approach preferred by only one in five Americans (20 percent) 
• Americans over-estimate what their state spends on public transportation, estimating that it is an average of 16 percent of their state’s transportation budget – and still they would like that amount nearly doubled, calling for their state to spend an average of 28 percent on public transportation (note: The average percentage of transportation money – state plus federal – spent on transit over the past three years was 6.55 percent per state) 

Opponents of smart growth like to claim America is sprawling and car-dependent because people have sat down, carefully considered the options, and decided to move to a place far from work & friends so they can waste tons of money and countless hours stuck in traffic. But there are two realities here: People don't have all day to crunch the numbers on this stuff; and the amount of transit and by extension the amount of housing near transit is limited (and in some cases it's deliberately limited). So people often just figure out where they'd LIKE to live, then keep looking further and further away from that spot until they can find someplace that's affordable.

This poll suggests many Americans would like to live somewhere that's affordable AND has transit options, and they don't realize just how much of their tax money is going instead to subsidize The Next Phenomenally Expensive Paving Project That Will Surely Solve All Our Transportation Problems.

Apple's Rotten Move: Maps App Leaves Transit Users in Dark

For a company that prides itself on doing everything with the user in mind, early reports indicate Apple has cut corners with its new maps app:

[T]he new Apple Maps app does not have transit directions included in the app. The only directions it gives are driving and walking directions. If you click on the transit option for directions, Apple clicks you off to options for other downloading other apps to find transit directions. For people who use public transit as their daily way to get around town, this doesn’t help at all. Since maps are one of the most used apps on the smart phone, this is a major loss. Of course you can go and download another transit app. But that’s not the point. Apple is downgrading transit as a method of transportation.

So what Apple is saying is that if you’re an iPhone user, you better be a driver or a walker. As for public transit, not that important. Maybe Apple employees all drive to Cupertino for work? Or they catch a free company shuttle from San Francisco? Well, maybe it will be in the next update. Not very environmentally friendly for a company that prides itself on the clean-tech aspects of its manufacturing process.

As is usually the case, a product that ignores sustainability is probably a lousy product, and sure enough, early users think Apple Maps is an inferior product to Google Maps. For users, it's no big deal - just as Windows users once began downloading Firefox, Chrome and other browsers to replace the inferior Explorer, Apple mobile users will need to download a superior maps app. Hopefully, just as Explorer faced competition and improved, Apple Maps will do the same.

But looking big picture, this seems like a really dumb move for a company with $100 billion in cash, most of it stashed overseas to avoid taxes. Couldn't it have used a tiny fraction of that cash to build a kick-ass maps app that made getting around without owning a car easier than ever? What about including locations & availability for Zipcar and other car sharing services?

Unfortunately, Apple founder Steve Jobs never seemed interested in doing any good that didn't also make the company piles of cash. It looks like that trend continues here.

Columnist Says Chicago Cubs Have New Curse: Using Transit

Theo Epstein recently took over as president of the Chicago Cubs and said, to no one in particular, "Hey! We spent $125 million last year and lost 91 games and finished 25 games out of first place! I bet we could've spent a lot less than that and still done just as badly!" So he's trimming the major league payroll until the team has a reasonable shot at the playoffs & making reasonable cuts to other expenses.

But anytime new management takes over a team, it is mandatory for a local sports columnist to anonymously quote loyalists from the previous regime bashing this new guy who thinks he's some hot shot while remaining oblivious to the fact that these are the very same employees whose wisdom guided the team to its 91 loss season.

Today's case in point comes from the Chicago Sun-Times' Gordon Wittenmyer:

For instance, a big-market team that just committed $3.5 million a year to a newly created position of president of baseball operations, that created several other high-level front-office jobs and that’s assured of trimming tens of millions of dollars from its big-league payroll this season is pulling a Marge Schott on its scouting staff this week to save relative pennies.

Borrowing a page from the notoriously cheap former Cincinnati Reds owner, the Cubs assigned their scouts two-to-a-room hotel accommodations this week and advised using the L instead of cabs, including to and from airports with their luggage, sources said.

OH THE HUMANITY. Being asked to ride the L train, which goes directly to O'Hare & Midway for 1/10th the cost of a taxi or van ... and with their rolly bags? I'm surprised these people who get paid to fly around the country & watch baseball don't just up & quit.

Or maybe they should keep their traps shut & develop a little flinty Chicago toughness.

Via Buster Olney

With Demand Near Record Highs, Governments Cut Supply of Public Transit

At exactly the time when governments should be working to meet rising public demand for transit, they're instead cutting back:

The economic downturn is playing havoc with the nation’s public transit systems even as ridership remains near record levels: since 2010, 71 percent of the nation’s large systems have cut service, and half have raised fares, according to a survey released Wednesday by the American Public Transportation Association, a transit advocacy group.

And in many cases, those fare increases and service cuts — made necessary by flat or reduced state and local aid — are being implemented on top of similar moves earlier in the downturn.

“It’s compounding,” Art Guzzetti, the vice president for policy at the transportation association, said of the repeated years of service cuts and fare increases. “I’ve been in the business 32 years. We’ve had a lot of ups and downs along the way. That’s been the nature of the business. But notwithstanding that, this is the worst it’s been in my time.”

Since 2006, transit systems have been carrying passengers on more than 10 billion trips a year, a level not seen since the 1950s, the association has found. But on average, they get around a third of their operating money from fares. Most of the money comes from state and local governments, and with tax collections still struggling to get back to pre-recession levels, 83 percent of the transit agencies surveyed reported receiving flat or reduced state aid.

Two things. First, it kills me that progressives are reluctant to raise gas taxes to fund transit because of the myth that the gas tax is regressive. In reality, as ClimateProgress' Joe Romm has detailed, 1 in 4 low-income households don't even own a car. And "most, if not all" gas-guzzling SUVs & pickups are bought by mid- and high-income households. Makes sense - if you're barely scraping by, are you going to buy a Corolla or a Canyonero?

And second, for all the people who take to their smartphones to complain about Metro, how many have ever written Gov. Bob McDonnell to urge Virginia to finally give Metro a dedicated funding source? Who took action to support Democrats like Rep. Jim Moran & Rep. Gerry Connolly in their fight against efforts by Republicans like Rep. Eric Cantor & Rep. Frank Wolf to gut Metro funding?

To get updated on when you can take action to support public transit in the DC area, sign up for emails from the Coalition for Smarter Growth. Or for national news, visit Smart Growth America.

How Much Time & Money Does DC's Metro Save?

Here in the DC area, we spend plenty of time talking about how much our Metro system costs. But how much does it save in time, money & imported oil?

A new report from the Texas Transportation Institute puts some numbers on transit savings:

Washington ranks 6th in the nation for "operational treatment savings" -- services like management of road incidents, street signal coordination and access to HOV lanes that help mitigate traffic. These save D.C. commuters 14,315 hours of delay, the report says.

Even better, D.C. is 3rd overall for preventing delays through public transportation alternatives. Local residents save more than 34 million hours of delay at a cost of $766.6 million, and 24 million gallons of gas, according to the report.

Those numbers are actually higher than Metro itself has estimated. Its FY2012 budget (PDF) estimates annual savings of $520 million & 26 million hours of travel time.

When you add the cost of the gas (about $75 million) to the $766 million savings figure ... and think about how much money & land it would cost to accommodate the 500,000 cars Metro takes off the road ... and events like inaugurations that would be impossible without Metro's ability to move people quickly ... and all the pollution Metro keeps out of our air & water ... suddenly Metro's $1.5 billion annual budget seems like a bargain.

Update 1/22: Great analysis on how the TTI's road traffic model is flawed from GreaterGreaterWashington.org's David Alpert.