True North

Conrad deFiebre, Minnesota 2020 Fellow, posts today: “Governor Does His Best to Derail Transit Gains.” The governor’s budget proposal aside, there seems to be some logical inconsistencies in deFiebre’s rant.

That (state general fund) money was needed because of a big hole in transit budgets left by declining revenues from the motor vehicle sales tax, which in a slowing economy has consistently fallen short of projections based on auto sales.

Isn’t the goal of the Minnesota 2020 transit policy to get people out of their cars, which if successful will lead to people buying fewer cars and buying new cars less often, regardless of the economy? If the transit plan is successful, auto sales should continue to fall and so should projected tax revenues – so how was transit funding suppose to work if the Minnesota 2020 plan was successful?

So now the talk is of fare increases and service cuts, the familiar fallback that hits hardest those least able to pay. Metro Transit riders are already paying some of the nation's highest fares, financing 30 percent of bus operations and a remarkable 38 percent of the cost of running the Hiawatha light rail line.

The gas tax was pegged as a “user fee” and drivers were criticized for not paying their fair share of road maintenance. Yet expecting transit riders to pay their “fair share” of transit operating costs is unacceptable. Are those LRTriders from Bloomingtongoing to work in downtown really those “least able to pay?” Those people going to the Viking games or to the new Twins Stadium with $200 tickets ($65 along the outfield baselines)? If there is an argument here, it is we out to subsidize riders based on need (others pay full fare) and let riders choose how they spend their transportation vouchers (buy a car, take a cab, take a bus, ride a train) rather than subsidizing a specific form of transportation. What is “remarkable” about 38 percent of operating costs (no dollar baseline number given) is that anyone could term a 62 percent operating deficit a “success.”

"More people than ever depend on the bus system to get around," said Dave Van Hattum of Transit for Livable Communities. "Our urban bus lines are packed, and our suburban park-and-rides are filled to capacity. In a struggling economy, bus service should be the last thing we cut since it directly impacts many people's abilities to reach their jobs."

Ok – then why are we cutting bus service on University Avenue to put more people on a train? People will have to walk farther to catch a Central Corridor train, which will run less frequently than the current bus service and take longer to make the trip. How does that not affect people’s ability to reach their jobs?”

Transportation policy ought to be about maximizing mobility – maximizing the number of people that can get from where they are to where they want to go to do what they want to do when they want to do it. The Progressive transportation policy being railroaded through the Legislature is about convenience for the well-to-do and a legacy for the legislative elite for which everyone else pays.

Craig Westover is a contributing columnist to the Pioneer Press Opinion page and a senior policy fellow at the Minnesota Free Market Institute (www.mnfmi.org). His e-mail address is This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .