The car kingdom.
In the DFW Metroplex, cars are king. If you don’t have a car, you cannot get from point A to point B efficiently. On the other hand, public transportation in Dallas is terrible. There are terrible schedules and slow routes. I have taken public transit to and from UT Dallas. It takes me three times as long to get home as it does to drive. But it’s not like the roads in Dallas are amazing, either. Among other problems, including pollution, heat, and car crashes, DFW traffic is terrible. The city incurs billions of dollars in costs solely due to congestion problems (Dallas Culture Map). Compared to other American cities, Dallas’ public transportation system is underperforming. According to the MTA, the NYC subway has 3.6 million users a day (MTA). On the other hand, 81% of DFW residents don’t use public transit (North Texas Daily). Public transit is supposed to be safer, cheaper, and more accessible. Many of those who cannot afford cars, or cannot drive one, need public transit to get around the city. However, the dilemma in Dallas is somewhat different. Most people live far from the city in the suburbs and other towns. There is less incentive to get on a bus, which is usually slower than a car. Public transit is not easily accessible. But we can fix public transit.
How do we fix the problem: classic solutions.
First, we must work on increasing infrastructure to make public transit accessible. Everyone in the DFW metroplex has access to a public transit resource right at their doorstep or within walking distance. Toronto is a great example of this. The TTC (Toronto Transportation Commission) had increased funding to build transit lines in suburbs and focused less on highways and roads. Now, the Toronto bus system covers 3,100 miles in the city (Impact Economist) . We can expand our public transit to cover suburbs and other areas in the metroplex. People could easily travel from Carrollton to Fort Worth via train, making transportation efficient. Second, we must invest in the current transit system to make it more efficient. This would mean 24/7 systems and faster wait times. Ottawa was able to create the O-train, with trains coming by every 10-15 minutes (Transit Futures). It’s easier to hop on and off the train, and if you miss a train, you won’t have to wait for an hour for the next one to arrive. Third, we must incentivize the system. The problem with public transit is that it’s never getting enough funding. Because there is no money, there is no development. If we can get businesses and developers to invest in the program, we will be able to create infrastructure that complements the transit system. Working with businesses will enable the city to invest in and collaborate with local businesses, thereby increasing job opportunities and economic growth. More people will be willing to get on the train and have new experiences. If we can implement these systems, we can create a transit system that is accessible, efficient, and fun.
Can we really solve the car problem?
The solutions mentioned above can only be effective in the United States under certain conditions. First, we don’t have freedom on how public land is used, and that public transit is easily buildable.
Second, funding from the government is not the most effective way to fund and help create public transit. Before the Great Depression, our public transit was monopolized by the private sector and was only made “public” during the Progressive Era due to high fares and other issues with transit. It was only in the 1960s and 1970s that transit infrastructure was purchased from private companies, and at that point, public transit had incurred significant losses and a reduction in service. The federal government then enacted the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, which helped to create more transit options. But most of this funding was given to state and local officials, who at that point weren’t subsidizing transit infrastructure due to low or little ridership (The Great American Transit Disaster). Cities like San Francisco and New York, however, improved their public transit because of how many people used transit in those cities. However, the NYC metro system is still in constant economic crisis despite its revenue and ridership gains. Many people still turn to privatizing transit as a solution because it has the advantage of increasing revenue and making transit more efficient (RouteFifty).
I’ve been skirting around a major issue when it comes to public transit here, and it really comes to light when talking about privatization. Sure, making transit private will ensure efficiency and better options, but we’re forgetting about who benefits from public transit the most – the public! Privatizing the system will narrow access to very few people, typically the middle and upper classes, who already use cars and other modes of transportation. Public transit was “bought” from private companies during the 1960s and 70s, an era of massive social change and civil rights gains. We also fail to recognize that most people in urban and suburban areas are coming from poorer, non-white backgrounds.
I’m going to finish up with the case of Atlanta’s public transit. Officials in Atlanta allowed their public transit to crumble around the 60s and 70s, where people of color started coming into white areas to work and live, reducing segregation in urban and suburban districts. We can see this today. In San Antonio, Oakland (a mixed-race area in Oakland), the BART (a local public transit rail) stops a couple of times. In Walnut Creek (a suburban, “whiter” area), the stops are only 1-2 miles apart (Kinder Institute for Urban Research). Transit was used in racial politics, making our transit poorly funded.
Most of the solutions we have for public transit require either more funding from the government or local officials, investment from the private sector, or better infrastructure and city planning designed for public transit. All these solutions ignore the fact that our public transit has been a source of racial divides and politics, which should come as a priority when we work on creating transit for all people.