D.C Public Transit
Topic: Evaluation and recommendations for equity-driven public transit
Setting: doctoral course
in public policy in 2023
In economic terms, public transportation in the District of Columbia (DC) exists as an exclusionary toll good with varying fares across the different modes of transportation offered (Kraft & Furlong, 2021; WMATA, 2023a). Revenue for Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority’s 2024 fiscal year project passenger fares generating $406 million, which comprises around 16.9% of the year’s operating budget and 8.5% of the organization’s total source of funds (WMATA, 2023b). Ridership figures for 2023 have seen a recovery since the height of the pandemic for the two primary modes of transportation, Metrorail and Metrobus, but respectively stand at 53.7% and 58.7% to 2019 figures (WMATA, 2023d; WMATA, 2023c).
Landscape
WMATA oversaw the attempt at a partial fare elimination and subsidization program in 2021 (Metro for D.C. Amendment Act of 2021, 2021). Implementation would see residents’ fares for buses eliminated and a monthly subsidy of $100 available to them for the DC metro and surrounding transportation networks. However, WMATA has not enacted such measures and has experienced resistance (George, 2023). Utilizing McConnell’s (2010) framework to analyze policy success, the statute stands as a failure. While experiencing a degree of process success at first, the coalition behind the effort was unsustainable. Resultantly, there lacks any program realization and the political success remains unclear.
Problem
Public transportation asks individuals, most earn less than the U.S. median income, to pay for access to work, education, healthcare, and other basic needs that require mobility. This means of transportation also stands as the primary commuting method for individuals below the poverty line (U.S. Census Bureau, 2021b). WMATA recently approved the new Metro Lift program, the organization’s first offering for reduced fares based on income level (WMATA, 2023e). However, Perrotta (2016) found that individuals who have lower incomes see the cost of public transit as prohibitive. To make use of public transportation, they may pursue subsidy programs, practice fare evasion, or forsake their inaccessible need.
Aligned with spatial mismatch theory, the ability to utilize public transportation affects employment prospects (Tyndall, 2016). When public transportation became unavailable after a weather-related crisis, individuals who relied on public transit saw higher unemployment rates than those with vehicles. Specific to youth, public transportation has been characterized as a labor market institution where its availability considerably influences unemployment rates (Brandtner et al., 2017). The impact of spatial mismatch specific to public transit sees African Americans disproportionately affected (Alireza Ermagun et al., 2023). Palm and colleagues (2021) found that individuals with low incomes postponed healthcare treatment due to interruptions of public transportation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Accessibility of public transportation sees socioeconomic and equity impacts that reverberate across communities.
Recommendation
Fare elimination for public transportation in DC presents itself as the policy solution as the unaffordability of public transportation coincides with the effects of spatial mismatch. In effect, this would transform public transportation from a toll good to a public good as it would be non-rivalrous and non-exclusionary. Such government action aims to eliminate the economic inefficiencies experienced when unnecessary unemployment exists, such as lower government revenue and higher costs for social programs (Kraft & Furlong, 2021). While the loss in passenger revenue will also carry a cost, the designed measures will carry a level of effectiveness, efficiency, and equity. In Kansas City, where such a policy has been adopted, transit riders felt that the policy enabled to purchase essentials, obtain healthcare, connect to their community, and sustain their employment (Urban League of Greater Kansas City, 2021).
With fares eliminated, the WMATA’s infrastructure surrounding collection and enforcement can be eliminated as well. These costs include factors such as the personnel dedicated to enforcement and the purchasing and upkeep of the collection system (Healy, 2020). During fare elimination considerations in Los Angeles, the LA Metro’s chief executive estimated these expenses at as much as one-third of fare revenue. The remaining gap in revenue will be addressed by increasing corporate advertising opportunities and adopting a low emission zone toll. The low emission zone policy will reflect that of Paris and, more explicitly, burden individuals choosing personal vehicles to navigate the city (Cui et al., 2021). This measure will simultaneously generate revenue to fund the cost of public transportation while also incentivizing the use of public transportation.
References
Alireza Ermagun, Fatemeh Janatabadi, & Sanju Maharjan. (2023). Inequity analysis of spatial mismatch for low-income socially vulnerable populations across America. Transportation Research, 118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2023.103692
Brandtner, C., Lunn, A., & Young, C. (2017). Spatial mismatch and youth unemployment in US cities: public transportation as a labor market institution. Socio-Economic Review, 17(2), 357–379. https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwx010
Cui, H., Gode, P., & Wappelhorst, S. (2021). A global overview of zero-emission zones in cities and their development progress. https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/global-cities-zez-dev-EN-aug21.pdf
George, J. (2023, May 4). Metro deals blow to fare-free bus plan in win for Bowser. Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2023/05/04/metro-dc-council-bus-fares/
Healy, P. (2020, August 30). Filling funding shortfall may not be biggest challenge for Metro’s free transit plan. NBC Los Angeles. https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/filling-funding-shortfall-may-not-be-biggest-challenge-for-metros-free-transit-plan/2420771/
Kraft, M. E., & Furlong, S. R. (2021). Public policy : politics, analysis, and alternatives (7th ed.). Sage Press.
Li, F., & Wyczalkowski, C. K. (2023). How buses alleviate unemployment and poverty: Lessons from a natural experiment in Clayton, GA. Urban Studies. https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980231159569
McConnell, A. (2010). Policy Success, Policy Failure and Grey Areas In-Between. Journal of Public Policy, 30(03), 345–362. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0143814x10000152
Metro for D.C. Amendment Act of 2021, D.C. Municipal Regulations § B24-0429 (2021). https://lims.dccouncil.gov/Legislation/B24-0429
Mid-America Regional Council. (2022). Transit zero fare impact analysis. MARC. https://www.marc.org/sites/default/files/2022-04/Transit-Zero-Fare-Impact-Analysis.pdf
Palm, M., Sturrock, S. L., Howell, N. A., Farber, S., & Widener, M. J. (2021). The uneven impacts of avoiding public transit on riders’ access to healthcare during COVID-19. Journal of Transport & Health, 22, 101112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2021.101112
Perrotta, A. F. (2016). Transit Fare Affordability: Findings From a Qualitative Study. Public Works Management & Policy, 22(3), 226–252. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087724×16650201
Semega, J., & Kollar, M. (2022). Income in the United States: 2021 current population reports. https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2022/demo/p60-276.pdf
Tyndall, J. (2016). Waiting for the R train: Public transportation and employment. Urban Studies, 54(2), 520–537. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098015594079
U.S. Census Bureau. (2021a). Means of transportation to work by selected characteristics. Data.census.gov. https://data.census.gov/table?q=Commuting&t=Income+and+Earnings&tid=ACSST1Y2021.S0802&tp=true
U.S. Census Bureau. (2021b). Means of transportation to work by workers’ earnings in the past 12 months (in 2021 inflation-adjusted dollars). Data.census.gov. https://data.census.gov/table?q=Commuting&t=Income+and+Earnings&tid=ACSDT1Y2021.C08119
Urban League of Greater Kansas City. (2021). 2021 state of Black Kansas City, charting the path forward: Is equity enough?https://static1.squarespace.com/static/59c3f63f49fc2b9eb12a6663/t/61846fee0c2adb21ffbe9835/1636069365443/2021+SOBKC+Charting+the+Path+Forward+flipbook_PDF.pdf
WMATA. (2023a). Cost to ride. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. https://wmata.com/fares/basic.cfm
WMATA. (2023b). FY2024 proposed budget. In Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. https://www.wmata.com/about/records/upload/FY2024-Proposed-Budget-1-6-23-FINAL.pdf
WMATA. (2023c). Metrobus ridership summary. Https://Www.wmata.com/Initiatives/Ridership-Portal/Metrobus-Ridership-Summary.cfm. https://www.wmata.com/initiatives/ridership-portal/Metrobus-Ridership-Summary.cfm
WMATA. (2023d). Metrorail ridership summary. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. https://www.wmata.com/initiatives/ridership-portal/Metrorail-Ridership-Summary.cfm
WMATA. (2023e). New income-qualified reduced fare program to create more equitable, affordable access to transit across region with launch of “Metro Lift.
” Www.wmata.com. https://www.wmata.com/about/news/Metro-Lift-launches-June-20.cfm