cat-letterstotheeditor

Friday, 17 February 2012 00:01

A conservative for the Red Line

Written by  William S. Lind

 

Real conservatives like commuter trains. Why? Because we ride them . Chicago's excellent Metra commuter train system provides examples. If we look at Lake County, a wealthy area served by Metra's trains, we find 13 percent of commuters with incomes of more than $75,000 take the train rather than drive to work. In fact, the mean earnings of rail commuters were higher than $76,000; the figure for bus riders was less than $14,000.

Here's a real grabber: in Lake County, the mean earnings of rail commuters were more than double those of people who drove to work alone. Those demographics say a lot of people on Metra's trains are political conservatives.

It's easy to understand why conservatives ride commuter trains like the planned Red Line from Charlotte to Mooresville. On the train, we can work on our laptop, read or get a nap. On the road, our attention has to go to the rear bumper of the car in front of us. Commuter trains whistle past the traffic jams.

Rail transit of all kinds, including commuter trains, serves other conservative goals. It promotes economic development and raises property values. Many of Chicago's Metra stations have become densely developed hubs that bring lots of real estate tax revenues into town coffers. Rail transit offers suburbanites a way to get around when gas prices soar or events in the Middle East make gas unavailable at any price, as they did in 1973 and 1979.

Whenever a city moves to build more rail transit, one of the "anti-transit troubadours" shows up armed with a lot of questionable numbers that purport to show it is a bad idea. One recently paid a visit to the Charlotte area to oppose the Red Line. They present themselves as conservatives, but they are not. They are libertarians. While conservatives support some transit projects and oppose others, depending on the merits, libertarians oppose all rail transit all the time. They say things that are blatantly untrue such as "Highways pay for themselves while trains are subsidized." In fact, according to the Federal Highway Administration, highways cover only 51 percent of their costs from user fees such as tolls and the gas tax. Nationwide, rail transit covers 50 percent of its operating expenses out of the fare box. It's a wash.

Because rail transit raises property values, it can also self-fund some of its construction. That is what the Red Line is proposed to do, through "value capture." In effect, some of the additional tax revenue the train will generate is made available up front to help build the line. Additionally, a special assessment for adjacent property owners would only go into effect if approved by the majority vote of affected property owners. Conservatives like this, because the people who will benefit pay and local governments need levy no new taxes.

For a commuter rail line to gain conservative approval, it should meet some tests. The Red Line does. It will serve an upscale area whose residents can afford to take trains, which charge more than buses. The capital cost is reasonable at about $18 million per mile.

Conservatives in the towns and communities served by the Red Line will find it makes their lives better. It will ease their commutes, including the commutes of people who still drive because it will take cars off the road in rush hour. It will increase their property values and give their local governments more revenue without any tax hikes.

Conservatives like things that work, and the Red Line promises to work well. It deserves conservative support.

William S. Lind is Director of The American Conservative Center for Public Transportation and co-author, with the late Paul M. Weyrich, of Moving Minds: Conservatives and Public Transportation.

4 comments

  • Comment Link Hopewell Saturday, 18 February 2012 11:58 posted by Hopewell

    Mr. Lind, your generic analysis is flawed from the jump.

    First, the Red Line is not about ridership- it is about development. Massive development is the only way planners were able to justify the project.

    Second, while I don't know the source of your "only a 50% subsidy" (it's higher than anything I've read), fare revenue for the Red Line will cover barely a tenth of the operating + capital costs. And your assertion on rail transit is misleading- "rail transit carries 50% of its OPERATING cost"- what about CAPITAL cost?

    Third, you neglect to mention how the towns will service the resulting development if all the tax revenues pay for the train.

    Fourth, the project requires high density development and you neglect to mention the negative impact on congestion this will have.

    Mr Lind, Charlotte is not Chicago.

  • Comment Link Hopewell Saturday, 18 February 2012 11:57 posted by Hopewell

    Mr. Lind, your generic analysis is flawed from the jump.

    First, the Red Line is not about ridership- it is about development. Massive development is the only way planners were able to justify the project.

    Second, while I don't know the source of your "only a 50% subsidy" (it's higher than anything I've read), fare revenue for the Red Line will cover barely a tenth of the operating + capital costs. And your assertion on rail transit is misleading- "rail transit carries 50% of its OPERATING cost"- what about CAPITAL cost?

    Third, you neglect to mention how the towns will service the resulting development if all the tax revenues pay for the train.

    Fourth, the project requires high density development and you neglect to mention the negative impact on congestion this will have.

    Mr Lind, Charlotte is not Chicago.

  • Comment Link Rick S Thursday, 16 February 2012 22:15 posted by Rick S

    I'm sure the irony is lost on Mr Lind when he says...

    "Whenever a city moves to build more rail transit, one of the anti-transit troubadours shows up armed with a lot of questionable numbers that purport to show it is a bad idea."

    You see, Mr Lind is apparently one of those troubadours himself. His documention was distributed at Mr O'Toole's presentation, and here he is now with a follow up piece. I'm sure they cross paths regularly.

    You can follow the action at aShortChronicle.

  • Comment Link ralph Thursday, 16 February 2012 20:08 posted by ralph

    Your gas tax going to highways subsidizes trucks and buses. Do the math.

Leave a comment

Make sure you enter the (*) required information where indicated.
Basic HTML code is allowed.

keep-it-local

Use of his website signifies your agreement to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
© Copyright 2011 LakeNormanCitizen.com. All rights Reserved.