Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
TOP NEWS   LeftArrow - Townhall.com   RightArrow - Townhall.com  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Lightrail in Portland Is Successful, Notwithstanding CATO Criticism & FTA Lack of Support
By Paul Weyrich
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Do you personally know a young voter who has been sucked into Obamamania?


Randall O’Toole, of the CATO Institute, is a native Oregonian, resident in Brandon, who has lived most of his life in the Portland area. He is the author of “Debunking Portland [-] The City That Doesn’t Work,” published in the CATO Institute’s POLICY ANALYSIS series on July 9, 2007, and of a paper entitled “Debunking Portland: The Public Transit Myth” (August 28, 2007). Let me state for the record that I am an admirer of Mr. O’Toole and often applaud his work. However, I believe Mr. O’Toole examined the wrong premises and then came to a series of unsupported conclusions.

As a result of the Metropolitan Area Express (MAX) inter-urban system and the downtown Portland Streetcar, quality development is not only taking place in Portland, Oregon but also in communities such as Gresham and Hillsboro. Let us be clear. No one in Portland officialdom seeks to force people from their automobiles. Rather the idea in Portland is to offer commuters a choice. It is amusing to me that Mr. O’Toole is a strong proponent of school choice. Yet most libertarians would leave the resident with only his automobile.

The great thing about Portland is that residents are offered a choice. Many use their public transportation system. Whereas some large cities are losing population, Portland actually has witnessed people moving into the city. Some walk to work or on good days bicycle. An increasing number take the Portland Streetcar. It has been extended a number of times to the point at which it has reached its full length. Portland is planning another streetcar line to service the opposite side of the downtown area.

Those Oregonians who prefer the suburbs and work downtown take MAX. The most common complaint about transit systems is that they are crowded during rush hours but empty the remainder of the day. Not so with MAX. You can witness full, sometimes even crowded, trains midday and depending upon the event some evenings.

Mr. O’Toole and other critics of Portland always suggest that the transit system can be run more cheaply with buses. Putting aside the fact that Americans greatly prefer trains to buses, the streetcar has done something which I guarantee no bus system would do. The streetcar, with its permanence of routing, has attracted almost $3 billion in new and rehabbed development. It has turned what was acknowledged as a shabby, rundown and declining area into a vibrant remarkable area where people are returning to live. Such development is able to be taxed, thus paying for the operation of the streetcar.

Personnel from 80 cities across the nation and around the world have come to inspect the Portland Streetcar. But for the inherent bias against streetcars at the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), many cities would be building lines similar to Portland by now. Regardless of who wins the Presidency in November 2008 the next FTA Administration is bound to be more favorable to streetcars.

Mr. O’Toole, among his many criticisms of Portland, believes that light rail and streetcars are too slow. The speed Mr. O’Toole cites for MAX includes station stops. A typical MAX train will carry almost five times the number of passengers as a bus. Were those bus seats filled to capacity it would require time to load and unload the vehicle.

The purpose of the streetcar is to act as a circulator. The speed is irrelevant. Both streetcar and light-rail development have stimulated some $6 billion in adjacent development. As Portland’s reply to Mr. O’Toole suggests, this new development long-term is of great benefit to the City, such as wages, taxes and the contributions of these residents. The Texas Transportation Institute notes that Portland ranks 13th in transit ridership in a city which ranks 25th in population. Another source identifies 100 million hours of time saved annually. That amounts to $1.5 billion annually for the Portland region, assuming a $15 per hour value.

Regardless of one’s views about global warming, an interesting article in the quarterly report of CEOs for Cities, entitled “Portland’s Green Dividend,” suggests Portland saves $2.6 billion in savings annually in transportation costs alone. The calculation is as follows: The median commute in the 33 most populous cities is 24.3 miles per day. In Portland, thanks to its excellent transit system, is 20.3 average commute miles per day. There is 2.9 billion in miles saved compared to the median. The $15 per hour value is the time commuting; hence the $2.6 billion figure. Joseph Cortright, Vice President of Impresa, Inc., who authored the paper states, “Four miles per day may not seem like much but do the math.”

According to Portland Oregonian reporter Dylan Riverta, a clash in Washington, D.C. is occurring between cities such as Portland with their transit programs and the FTA position articulated by Mr. O’Toole. Which will prevail? In the long run, I believe it will be cities such as Portland. The facts are clear and compelling as long as the premises to an evaluation factually are accurate and proportional.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Paul M. Weyrich is Chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Research and Education Foundation.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Paul Weyrich's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.

Subject: thread at an end but
The level of subsidies for light rail in PORTLAND alone are astronomical (and implemented against the will of the citizens of Portland.

People WANT to drive, the government didn't have to force them. The Eisenhower admin responded to the demands of the people for an interstate transportation system

Light rail is a TERRIBLE idea for many, many reasons not the least of which is that, on a cost per rider basis, you could simply pay people to stay home and not use the roads at all and still save money.


CONT

Certainly there are cities in the world with the necessary density for light rail, but they are extremely few. Even our pied pipers now admit more roads would have moved more traffic quicker and cheaper and not cause the congestion that light rail is causing by having diverted our road money. We spend more time sitting in traffic wasting energy while 2% of commuters will ride. And Parsons, the folks of the big dig, are the ones intentionally hired because they will giver bogus numbers help politicians con the taxpayers throughout the country. The entire thing is a huge scam.

Look if you want light rail, let a transportation company own it and charge the market rate. Once you have to steal taxpayer money to do it because no sane private company would touch the economics you are doing damage to your economy. Paul properly points out the old Fred Bastiat concept from his book That Which is Seen and That Which Is Not Seen. Truly you do see development along the line that merely took natural development from elsewhere and money from your household budget to local it at one spot for all to see. In short it is misallocation of a Billion for what you do see and ignoring the Billion spent in its highest and best use that you don’t see. That is why taxpayers not riders fund these scams.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily dose of conservative columns, editorial cartoons, talk radio, news, and more!
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.