There was an interesting piece in Sunday’s Boston Globe Magazine arguing against expansion of the commuter rail system. I don’t know if I fully buy the argument, but the article laid out some interesting reasons. This, however, was not one of them:
You’d think that the officials who want to expand the system would have a good explanation, at least, for why it’s losing riders. But no one really does. Maybe the Big Dig, which is almost complete, has made driving to Boston more tolerable. Maybe it’s the economy, although the number of people employed in Boston, Cambridge, and Quincy remained about the same even as ridership declined between 2003 and 2005.
You’d think that someone asking this question would at least take into account a January 1, 2003 fare increase on the commuter rail of about 30%. That amount might not be enough to send everyone to their cars and the traffic jams, but it might be enough to encourage some riders to drive instead, particularly when you factor in MBTA parking rate hikes and a stagnant downtown economy.(The number turns out to be less than 2 percent of a year, which is nothing to be nonchalant about, but still, let’s keep "losing riders" in perspective).
My main problem with opposing rail system expansion is that you face a choice between political forces supporting a) much better maintenance of current system but overall much less funding of public transportation; and those supporting b) compromised maintenance due to competing expansion projects yet overall more funding for transit. I’d have to side with option B.
No comments have been added to this post yet.