The Antiplanner » Home Page

Safe, Cost-Effective, and Equitable Transport

By | | Transportation
7 Comments

The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) is not the worst state transportation department in the country, but neither is it the best. In 1921, North Carolina was one of the first states to impose a tax on gasoline and dedicate it to roads. It held to the user-pay principle for more than 60 years, but in 1984 it began diverting some of those fuel taxes to transit.

Click image to download an 11.5-MB PDF of this 108-page report.

Today, about 6 percent of NCDOT’s budget, which nearly all comes from highway user fees, gets spent subsidizing transit, Amtrak trains, and state-owned non-commercial airports. That doesn’t sound like very much, but the state is under pressure to increase that percentage. Continue reading →

Dems Successfully Moved the Goal Posts

By | | News commentary, Transportation
3 Comments

At first glance, a proposed $400 billion transportation bill from House Republicans appears to be more reasonable than President Biden’s $2.3 trillion infrastructure bill or even Senate Republicans’ $568 billion alternative infrastructure plan. In fact, the latter two plans are supposed to be on top of Congress’ periodic reauthorization of routine highway and transit spending, while the House Republican plan is supposed to be for that reauthorization.

As such, the Republican plan represents such a massive increase in spending over previous years that it is almost as if it was written by the Democrats. The 2015 “FAST Act” spent $305 billion over five years, or $61 billion a year. That in itself was too much because the Highway Trust Fund collected less than $212 billion in highway user fees during those five years, so an additional $93 billion came out of deficit spending.

Considering the pandemic, revenues over the next five years aren’t likely to be much greater. Yet House Democrats proposed last year to spend $495 billion over five years, a huge increase that would require a tripling of deficit spending over the previous five years. The Republican response is a $400 billion bill, which is still a doubling of deficit spending. Instead of being ashamed of this, Republicans bragged that they are proposing “the largest percentage increase for surface transportation programs in the last quarter-century.” Continue reading →

How Public Transit Won’t Lure Riders Back

By | | Transportation
6 Comments

Everybody knows that the purpose of living in cities is to keep public transit systems operating. Thus, says Bloomberg News, people who work at home are “threatening” transit for everyone else (meaning all of the 1 percenters who ride transit).

Not to worry. Someone named Kristin Schwab, over at Marketplace, has a plan to “lure riders back” to transit. (Is that like luring little kids with candy?) Transit is safe from COVID, she claims, but to overcome public perceptions that it is not, transit agencies should still require people to wear masks and regularly clean transit vehicles. Okay, that’s not so much a plan as it is wishful thinking.

Back at Bloomberg, San Francisco writers Tiffany Chu and Daniel Ramot say that we should fix transit by (1) giving it dedicated funding, meaning funding that transit agencies are sure to get no matter how poorly they perform; and (2) tie funding to outcomes, meaning transit agencies only get money if they produce results. These contradictory suggestions are made worse by the “outcomes” Chu and Ramot suggest, including “expanding access to jobs, improving cost efficiency, driving equity and reducing carbon emissions.” Continue reading →

Columbia River Bridge Faces Opposition

By | | Transportation
6 Comments

The revived plan to replace the I-5 bridge over the Columbia River between Portland and Vancouver has been hammered by two liberal transportation experts in Portland. New Urbanist Joe Cortright calls it “vastly oversized and over-priced.” David Bragdon, former president of Metro, one of the agencies that wrote the original plan, documented years of falsehoods perpetrated by planners and called the proposal the “most expensive, stupid something” that could be done in the corridor.

As I noted recently, the plan called for a 12-lane bridge to serve a six-lane freeway. It also included a bridge for light rail even though voters in both Portland and Vancouver had rejected funding for this light-rail extension. Piling stupidity on stupidity, the plan called for a bridge that couldn’t open for ship traffic, and because light-rail trains couldn’t go up a steep enough grade to allow such traffic, planners proposed to buy out several existing shipping companies rather than leave light rail out of the plan.

Predictably, Cortright complains about the 12 lanes without ever mentioning the light-rail boondoggle. Bragdon only mentions light rail to suggest that the Washington Department of Transportation planned to stab Oregon in the back by deleting light rail from the project after it was approved. The reality is that both the 12 lanes and the light rail were insane and planners were crazy to propose a project whose 12 lanes would alienate the New Urbanists and whose light rail would alienate fiscal conservatives. Continue reading →

The Case Against Amtrak

By | | Transportation
1 Comment

CNN says that, with Biden’s proposal to give Amtrak $80 billion, “Amtrak’s moment may finally have arrived.” But what would it mean for Amtrak to have a “moment”? Would it mean that passenger trains return to once again become an important source of transportation, as they were in the 1920s? Or does it mean that Amtrak will get a lot more money for continuing to carry a trivial share of the nation’s passenger travel?

Click image to download a five-page PDF of this policy brief.

Since 1971, Congress has given Amtrak about $54 billion in subsidies, which in today’s dollars is about $85 billion. Biden’s plan would nearly double that in one fell swoop. But this is not going to double Amtrak ridership. For one thing, eleven years ago Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor had a $52 billion maintenance backlog, and it is undoubtedly larger now if only due to inflation. More than half of the $80 billion Biden proposes to give it will be spent rehabilitating existing infrastructure, not making improvements that are likely to increase ridership. Continue reading →

VMT Recovers to 97.2% of Pre-Pandemic Miles

By | | Transportation, Useful Data
1 Comment

Miles of driving in March 2021 were 19 percent greater than March 2020 and just 2.8 percent less than March 2019, according to data released late last week by the Federal Highway Administration. This is the first time in more than a year that driving exceeded 93 percent of pre-pandemic levels.

Motor vehicles and highways have proven to be the most resilient form of travel during and after a pandemic.

At 99.7 percent, rural driving was nearly at 2019 levels. Urban driving lagged at 96.0 percent, but was still well ahead of urban transit. Continue reading →

Honolulu Rail Disaster Gets More Disastrous

By | | Transportation
9 Comments

When we last looked at the Honolulu rail project, less than a month ago, the projected cost had risen from $5 billion (when the city decided to build it) to $11.3 billion and the date it was expected to open had been delayed by more than 11 years. It’s gotten even worse since then.

Wheels that are too narrow will slip off tracks at joints like these, known as “frogs.” Photo by Meggar.

The latest problem is that the railcar wheels are too narrow for the tracks. To negotiate “frogs,” the places on switches where tracks cross, the wheels need to be a half-inch wider. Continue reading →

Amtrak Acela vs. Maglev

By | | Transportation
8 Comments

Amtrak’s CEO, William Flynn, agrees with the Antiplanner on at least one thing: the proposed Baltimore-Washington maglev is a bad idea. The maglev, he told a Congressional subcommittee last week, “would only serve a small number of affluent travelers.”

Of course, that’s the pot calling the kettle black. Flynn probably thinks 0.1 percent of passenger travel (which is what Amtrak carries) is a large number, but it’s not. Amtrak fares in the Northeast Corridor are much higher than bus fares, so Amtrak itself is only serving a small number of affluent travelers.

Flynn also pointed out that the maglev will use a lot more energy than the cars, trains, and buses it would replace. I made the same point in my comments on the maglev, which I submitted last week. Based on the amount of greenhouse gases generated by Maryland’s current electric power plants, the maglev would add more than 300,000 metric tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere each year. Wayne Rogers, CEO of the maglev project, told the subcommittee that the maglev would divert “up to 16 million car trips,” but the power required to do so would generate far more tons of carbon dioxide than it would save. Continue reading →

Restoring Trust to the Highway Trust Fund

By | | Policy brief, Transportation
Leave a comment

In what some considered to be a backroom deal, the New Jersey Turnpike Authority agreed last month to give more than $500 million a year in toll revenues to New Jersey Transit, up from $164 million a year in the previous five years. The decision was a surprise to the public, as it was made with no preliminary discussion under an agenda item innocuously listed as “State Public Transportation Projects Funding Agreement.”

Click image to download a four-page PDF of this policy brief.

This decision to use highway user fees to prop up a transit agency known for its bad management, including “nepotism, cronyism and incompetence,” further erodes the trust highway users have in the people managing state and local transportation resources. This trust is important partly because roads are mostly funded by a variety of excise taxes that don’t automatically adjust for inflation. Increasing the taxes is more politically difficult if users don’t believe that the funds will go for the facilities they thought they were paying for. Continue reading →