"In fact, transit is much more costly than driving, and requires huge subsidies to attract any riders at all," writes O'Toole in, "Public Transit in Georgia: High Costs for Low Fares," which was released last week by the Foundation.
"Moreover, transit systems in the vast majority of American cities use more energy and emit more greenhouse gases than the average car," adds O'Toole, whose latest book is, "Gridlock: Why We're Stuck in Traffic and What to Do About It."
For every dollar collected in fares from transit riders, the average transit system in America requires more than $2 from taxpayers for operating subsidies plus more than $1 for capital improvements and maintenance, according to O'Toole's analysis.
While it's no surprise that Georgia's transit systems require large subsidies, it may surprise Georgians to know that most systems are "far less environmentally friendly than a typical sports utility vehicle," O'Toole writes.
He compared the cost of driving with the cost of transit and found that the total cost of driving in Georgia is still less than 22 cents per passenger mile, with a subsidy per passenger mile of a half-cent. By comparison, the national average cost of public transit is more than 90 cents a passenger mile, more than 70 cents of which is subsidized by non-transit users.
In Georgia, the costs are a little lower: 84 cents per passenger mile, 72 cents of which is subsidized. Georgia transit riders pay an average of 85 cents every time they board a bus, while taxpayers pay an average of nearly $3 to support that trip.
As for energy efficiency, O'Toole says, driving is more energy efficient and cleaner than most public transit in Georgia. The most energy efficient transit systems in Georgia are vanpools, the closest thing public transit offers to actual cars.
Why is transit less energy efficient? One reason is that a crucial part of energy efficiency is filling the seats, O'Toole says. The average transit bus in Georgia fills only 22 percent of its seats, and counting standing room they operate an average of about one-sixth full. The Atlanta rail system fills an average of 39 percent of its seats, but counting its ample standing-room capacity it operates only about one-eighth full.
Those who want to save energy and reduce pollution would do better encouraging people to drive more fuel-efficient cars than encouraging cities to expand transit service, O'Toole says.
That's not to say there are no ways to make transit a better deal. For example, O'Toole cites the mantra of rail proponents - "Highways are subsidized, so we need to subsidize rail transit as well" - in calling for an end to highway subsidies. That's one way to get transit authorities to be more cost-conscious instead of justifying the diversion of billions of dollars to rail projects. Contracting out, privatizing and downsizing transit vehicles also can contribute to lower costs and more efficient public transportation, he says.
For those who truly have no access to automobiles or are unable to drive, O'Toole suggests vouchers. From taxis to airlines, a voucher enables those individuals to make the best choice for their needs - at a lower cost to taxpayers.
O'Toole's Issue Analysis should become a cautionary tale for Georgia's planners chomping at the bit for their turn at the federal trough. And it should be a road map for local governments now that Gov. Sonny Perdue has signed into law the Transportation Investment Act of 2010, which would allow regions to come together on projects to be funded by a penny sales tax. For transportation policy to succeed, it is imperative that Georgians see prudent expenditures that relieve congestion relief and improve mobility.
The Issue Analysis, "Public Transit in Georgia: High Costs for Low Fares" can be accessed at tinyurl.com/2d4xg7q.
Benita M. Dodd is vice president of the Georgia Public Policy Foundation, an independent think tank that proposes practical, market-oriented approaches to public policy to improve the lives of Georgians.
Follow us on Twitter!
Of course there are far more reasons to support transit than its environmental friendliness. It is far more effective than anything O'Toole prescribes at reducing traffic congestion. It helps create dense urban centers that are the engines of our economy. And it is much safer than driving.
Though the likes of O'Toole may not believe it, transit is a valuable part of any city's transportation mix.
In addition to this methodology error, Mr. O'Toole's analysis (which I read completely) gave no weight to a wide variety of other factors, including but not at all limited to total capital costs for ALL road construction, ongoing rebuilding, and maintenance...to actual ownership costs of a private vehicle. (Tolls would add only a few pennies per miles? Unlikely. Ask GA 400 drivers. Putting "tolls or other usage fees" on all roads instead of subsidies? That won't sell at all.)
In short, for such sweeping conclusions, his report was far too short and simply not rigorous enough to prevent challenge.
Mr. O'Toole is as very vocal libertarian, a political philosophy I support quite often, particularly when government waste and foolishness are in view. But as an author of opinion books and provider of "consulting services" Mr. O'Toole wants to sell, his objectivity is open for discussion.
As a statistician, I remain committed to the belief that valid conclusions can only come from valid methodology. And proper methodology can only come from complete objectivity.
Mr. O'Toole's analysis is lacking in both.
I really appreciate the common sense light of reality that this article shines on the "Lite Rail" farse that some folks here in Cobb county have dreams of tying this county down with. That said, I have to point out that there is no "penny sales tax". It is a 1% sales tax...which means you are paying more than a penny anytime you spend more than a dollar. People are clueless enough already...lets stop acting like "it's only a penny" when it is not.
Make your point using valid comparisons, Mr. O'Toole. Base it on capacity -- per available seat/space, not per used seat.
The assumption made is all private vehicles are operating at a 100% load factor, when in fact the average 5-passenger car is running at a 20% load factor. So cars are more efficient and “greener” than transit because transit load factors are low ??? Sorry. Not valid. If existing rail transit operated at 100% capacity, the costs per passenger mile cited by Mr. O'Toole would be less than 1/4 of the numbers reported, making the conclusions of the analysis fully misleading.
Ms. Dodd seems to think transit planners are in their business only to get a shot at "the federal trough". To the contrary, entirely Ms. Dodd. Those who are truly interested in bringing economic and efficient transit to Georgia and the Country as a whole are designing their systems and structures to operate WITHOUT subsidy. But politicians don't like that -- because they can't control a transit system that doesn't need government cash. Just ask the good folks at AMT and OTG. They have the answers. Poorly designed and managed systems using old transit models built as political solutions are NOT examples of good transit solutions and are NOT valid for comparison due to their low usage factors.
This looks like a hit job on transit done by the road building lobby. But that has never happened around here, now, has it....
Rail should follow the interstates and land for parking should have been purchased many years ago.
If construction costs are reduced, more miles can be constructed. More miles can reach more service points. It's all very much interconnected.
This is why I like the OTG HighRoad system's approach. More detail at www.OTG-Inc.com .