A pittance for public transit

Donn Esmonde provided insight in his column yesterday on a proposal the NFTA is considering to raise transit fares.

I'm here to provide a little outrage on the bigger picture.

Global warming is staring us in the face. Gas is $4 a gallon, or there abouts. Transit ridership is up and more people are riding buses and subways than they have for the past 50 years.

Bus and subway operators across the nation are struggling to keep up. High fuel prices hit them, too. Equipment is aging. There's more riders than seats on some popular routes.

Where is Uncle Sam in all this? You know, the guy supposedly trying to kick his addiction to foreign oil?

Well, he's partying like its 1986. That's the year Metro Rail opened and global warming was a vague concept.

Fact is, the federal government has beat a steady retreat from funding mass transit since at least Ronald Reagan's time. The feds used to help public transit systems pay for both operations and capital improvements. That ended in 1991. Now public operators get something akin to a block grant, to spend as they see fit.

The outcome is a rob Peter to pay Paul scenario.

Or, in this case, Ralph Kramden.

The federal government this budget year has earmarked $4.6 billion in formula aid to assist systems in urban and high-grow states starting to choke on their congestion.

Federal spending in 1986, adjusted for inflation, comes to $5.4 billion.

In other words: ridership up, global warming up, federal aid down.

To put it in perspective, the federal government's spending on mass transit in cities and high growth areas equals the bill for 13 days of fighting in Iraq.

How does this play out in Buffalo-Niagara?

The NFTA will get about $11 million in federal aid this year. The state kicks in about $47 million, although that's about $1.3 million less than it was counting on, thanks to the budget crunch in Albany. Local revenues, mostly a piece of the county sales tax and mortgage recording tax, comes to about $37 million. Passenger fares come to about $28 million.

In other words, fares cover about a quarter of the overhead. Which means more ridership means more deficits. It's like a loss leader, but the NFTA has no way of making it up, at least so long as aid isn't tied to ridership, which it isn't.

NFTA Executive Director Larry Meckler doesn't have a beef with the state, which, in recent years, has increased aid faster than the rate of inflation. So have the feds, for that matter, but its a pittance compared to what it used to be and bolstered by earmarks wrangled by our Congressional delegation.

"It's getting tougher and tougher to get dollars," Meckler said. "We shouldn't have to beg for money for mass transportation.

"If you can get people on buses and trains, I think it solves a lot of problems."

Comments

[HapKlein]

I must add one more comment.

The subjects of transportation, parks and others that attach the federal governments role to the general welfare of the people invariably unites Liberals, Libertarians and conservatives in highly divided views.

Transportation was forced on the Federal Government by commerce. In the early 18th Century fertile land and crops were west of the Appalachians and Allegheny Mountain range and consumers were east of them. The farmers lacked transportation and there was nobody capable to build the required roads and canals. The federal government responded and westward expansion, manifest destiny and a permanent role for the federal government was on its way.

With the rail roads the same dynamic occurred. Just about every state and manufacturer had separate ideas of the width of the rail tracks. Left to the states we would still be transferring goods at each state line. The feds established rules and created the first big commercial bubble n the nation.

With the arrival of the Interstate system after WWII the federal government became firmly attached to subsidizing auto transportation. Theoretically gasoline taxes were to pay for the federal role but the last figure I saw was the cost of auto transportation was about one third of the outlay for highway infrastructure construction and maintenance.

Alongside this funding of the speedy routes for suburban commuters was the idea that we could also ensure that workers could have public transportation at a reasonable cost. The hopes for this wasn’t utopian as much as it projected that if we kept building separate roads to provide a car for every citizen the surface of the United States would be entirely covered by roads and parking lots. Something like Southern California.

But Public Transportation in the United States has never had strong advocates. Auto and fossil Fuel industries just loved cars and hated buses and subways. Their support of congress folk who thought the same way ensure that we support a one-person, one-car society and pay afterward for the impacts on our air and water, not to mention the waste stream of batteries, tires and rusting car bodies the rest of us subsidize.

No, we all pay for all transportation either now or later. It’s just that we all pay much less for public transportation in the long run.

[hatemenow]

Tara,

I think your terribly misunderstood when it comes to the crisis put before us. Most of this crisis is due to the middle class trying to live above their means by taking on mortgages that they didn't understand, nor could'nt afford once the rates changed. Of course Wall Street did not help this either, but to place the blame solely on Wall Street's feet is an easy out. People need to be better informed on their purchasing decisions, and personal responsibility is also very important. read Donn Esmonde's article today as he touches on it a little bit.

[tara]

What the point.. GIVE ME GIVE ME.

I am tired for the war on poverty( free jhousing, medical, welfare, ssi etc), I am tired of the subsidizes ( ECIDA,Brian Davis's pay no taxes etc) I am tire of the favored tax breaks for the rich, I am tired of the bail out.

THE JOBS ARE GONE AND SO WILL THE MIDDLE CLASS.

[Frances]

For $125 million the NFTA could do better by it's passengers. You would think that knowing what they knew about the RT5 construction and the tearing up of the Ridge Rd. Lackawanna bridge the NFTA would have changed the schedules somewhat to accomodate the length of time it now takes to get downtown (for me- 55 minutes to travel 7 1/2 miles)Most of my usual fellow riders have given up and take the earlier bus which leaves the Village of Hamburg at 6:05 am because they can't get to work/school by 8 am. Going home is a joke-someone drives all the way back downtown to pick me up; so much for saving the environment. If the NFTA wanted to promote fuel efficiency, the Hamburg bus wouldn't drive around Commerce Park, nor would it be forced to turn around in that little square of driveway called Victory Transit Center behind OLV hospital.Now there's an accident waiting to happen! The buses themselves are crap. The only thing missing from my morning commute are the crates of chickens tied to the top, if you get my meaning. How much experience do I have as an NFTA customer? Only about 30 years, and it's never been worse.

[hatemenow]

good article. The federal government does need to spend more on public transit systems, for the good of everyone. Personally I would love to see the NFTA's budget grow so that there are more Transit cops (with their fancy cars... idiotic remark), and more bus routes to suburban areas.

[Chancellor Carlyle Roberts, II]

So, where exactly does the Constitution give the federal government the power to fund LOCAL public transit? It doesn't.

If states and local communities want public transit (which isn't a bad thing to have), let them pay for it. How about cutting all these non-elected authorities that serve as a shadow government in New York State. How about cutting the socialist programs that have essentially eliminated the federal 5-year lifetime limit on receiving public assistance and have kept the old system of intergenerational Welfare. How about cutting tax loopholes and corporate welfare.

Counties and local communities need to stop looking for handouts and start becoming more financially independent.

[HapKlein]

Global warming (that gets rid of the morons) and dwindling supplies of fossil based fuels dictates national reaction to the incredible forces that dictate the future of life in America. In response to these dynamics, during the 1970’s gigantic programs for mass transit in the nation were designed. The intent of these programs were to produce more efficient transportation to do the most good for the most people for the longest period of time in ensuring we could maintain our economy by lowering individual transportation costs.

Railroad improvement and expansion across the nation was also supposed to be part of this.

Then Ronald Reagan mostly dozing during the cabinet meetings that discussed these plans and later with the Contract with America the government scuttled most of these programs leaving us with an SUV dependence on foreign oil and the largest transfer of wealth in the history of the world that enriched Arabia and leaves for the future the largest federal debt in history.

The mass transit projects were shelved or so drastically curtailed that they are not very effective where they should have been. Imagine how much better we would be with a transit system from downtown Buffalo to the airports in Lancaster and Niagara Falls and SUNYAB north. That was the original plan.

But we allowed small-minded jerks determine our future with the halfway measures we have in place. It was in the national interest to develop these projects just as it is in the national interest to find more oil and gas but we allowed the conservatives to narrow our view and threaten our future.

Because of its huge impacts and importance to economic growth all transportation is a national priority and deserves more federal involvement and support. We had better all realize this and ensure we elect folk who can make it happen. Lets have government and throw the ideologues into the street.

[Mike]

My outrage? My outrage is that these Buff News folks keep referencing "global warming". As soon as I read that, forget it, don't care.

[RealBuff]

oh well. I guess this means no more fancy patrol cars or SUV's. They probably should buy buses instead of new SUV's...

Why is it that agencies feel the need to grow year over year?

I understand costs rise, but the NFTA can anticipate rising costs. Its nice to see videos linked, but where can I find actual budgets posted on their site? How much do they spend on lobbying in Albany and DC? What does it cost to "study" traffic analysis on Main St.?
What is the ROI for their property management group?

Fewer than 10% of our availibe population uses metro. With all the millions we pour into it, couldnt we just buy all these poor people a new hybrid? I bet we could and maybe even a garage to put it in.

So which candidate will spend more on transpotation; Hussein or John Wayne?

[Weee]

Gimmie $125 million a year, and I'll give you a lot more than sporradic suburban routs and a train to nowhere.

[AnObserver]

Outrage? Seems both you and Esmonde don't pay any attention to the fact that a fares on the buses only covers 25% of the actual costs and on the trains 19% of the actual costs. Just like city schools and city government, expensive services are provided at a mere fraction of the actual cost that's really being paid by someone else. Maybe that someone else has a little outrage, too.