[PEN-L:8359] Re: Re: Re: Re: California Green Party Assembly Representive

["Michael Hoover" <hoov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> Because public transport is underfunded, most people associate public
> transport with inefficiency, poverty and bad government.  But the disgust
> with
> traffic grows daily and people do not want freeways too near their cul de
> sacs.
> Michael Perelman

part of public transit 'renaissance' in 1970s was result of growing
disenchantment with urban freeway system...renewal was largely
financed by federal govt't which appropriated about $89 billion
between 1970-1994 for mass transit development...feds spent almost
same amount between 1990-1994 on interstate highway system and
estimates indicate similar amount is needed to repair about 5,000
of existing 42,500 miles of system...

cost overuns on new systems, failure to meet ridership projections,
and inability to operate at a profit left federal mass transit
funding vulnerable to budget attacks and ideological polemics...
for example, low ridership (about 20% of projections) on Miami's
Metrorail served as rationale for cutting federal subsidies and
free markeeter rhetoric intended to turn people off to mass transit,
but without continuing fed aid, feeder lines needed to raise
ridership can't be built...

today, state (47%) and federal (9%) subsidied make up majority of
public transit revenues with fares and ads contributing the rest...
but operations lost money even at peak of public transit ridership
earlier in 20th century...so to get advantages - convenience,
punctuality, speed, lower oil costs, reduced pollution - it may
not be possible to demand that public transit systems run at a
profit...   Michael Hoover