The Failure of Public Transportation in Autocentric Metropolises
There is no doubt that New York City boasts one of the nation’s top public transportation systems, with its extensive MTA subway, bus, and rail routes. Growing up in Queens, NY, I was exposed to this efficient service as I could quickly get from point A to point B almost anywhere within the 5 boroughs of the city, costing only a mere $2.75. However, after moving out of the urban city and into a smaller, suburban town in Nassau County, Long Island that emphasized driving, I realized that this public service was now the lesser preferred alternative that was even scrutinized by local residents. In addition to the local stigma of public transportation, Nassau County public transit options are much more limited, inefficient, and less dependable than public transit in urban areas. Whereas NYC buses and subways operate every 5–15 minutes, Nassau County buses and trains run on an hourly basis, not to mention they are more costly and time-inefficient. To this point, a 9-mile subway ride to Times Square within the city would take 25 minutes and cost $2.75, whereas a trip to my closest shopping mall 8 miles away would take 1 hour, 3 buses, and cost $8.25 in Nassau County. What has accounted for these stark differences in the same public transportation service and is there any way to reconcile these differences?
Simple observations reveal that we, as a society, have constructed sprawling, auto-centric metropolises that just can’t be easily served by public transportation. This can be traced back to the suburban boom in the United States in the 1950s when the car became the dominant mode of transportation. However, “when riders started to switch to the car in the early postwar years, American transit systems almost universally cut service to restore their financial viability” (Bloomberg CityLab). In other words, as we shifted to a higher emphasis on driving, low ridership and low demand in mass transit resulted in less funding, which ultimately led to fewer and less dependable means for public transportation, especially in driving-oriented communities like Nassau County. This discouraged more people away from mass transit, producing a vicious cycle until just about everybody who could drive, drove. As of 2016, car ownership in Long Island rose to 0.766 per person, while the rate per household increased to 1.968, according to a report done by Newsday (Fiscina 2016). However, this increased car ownership did not automatically translate to bettering the lives of all driving-oriented, suburban residents. Unfortunately, those who still depend on public transportation in these areas — either because they don’t own a car, are not eligible to drive, or simply prefer relying on mass transit — are the victims of automobile emphasizing societies, as is the case in Nassau County and the rest of Long Island.
Nassau County offers two forms of public transportation: the local Nassau Inter-County Express bus service (NICE or NICE Bus) and the exorbitant, rather “exclusive” Long Island Railroad (LIRR). The lack of efficient public transportation in Nassau County can largely be attributed to its two-tiered transit system that prioritizes the improvement of the railroad lines at the expense of the bus networks. In what Alon Levy calls “transit apartheid” in his StreetsblogNYC article, Levy points out the stark differences between the Long Island Railroad and the NICE bus service (Levy). The LIRR currently runs its trains to connect the suburbs of Nassau County with NYC, especially Manhattan but assumes that its passengers are affluent car owners who only take the train to get to their 9-to-5 jobs, as demonstrated through its $18.50 round trip ticket price and rigid “peak/rush hour” operating schedules. For working-class Long Islanders going about their daily lives locally, the transit on offer is different. There’s a beleaguered bus system, the Nassau Inter-County Express (NICE) bus, that operates on a completely separate fare, schedule (or rather lack of), and market than the LIRR. Levy argues that this “segments the market: low-income riders take NICE, and middle- and high-income riders take the LIRR,” emphasizing the role that economic inequality and fare prices play in driving people away from local, public transportation and how affluent suburbs have come to stigmatize this service as unnecessary and burdensome (Levy). I agree with Levy’s claim that the socioeconomic stigma associated with mass transit in suburban communities has contributed to its decreased ridership and I further argue that the inefficient public transportation system in Nassau County is attributable to its lack of funding. Supporting this argument, Adina Genn of Long Island Business News, points out how the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) — the public benefit corporation primarily responsible for public transportation in the state of New York — authorized a $32.5 billion dollar commitment to improving the system’s infrastructure within the state over the last 4 years. Within this state funding, only $3 billion is being invested in the suburbs of Long Island, and the rest to the city (Genn). The lack of state funding to improve public transportation infrastructure in Nassau County and Long Island implicitly relays the message that public transit is no longer a priority nor concern of the state.
As aforementioned, I argue that this lack of state funding has further contributed to an even higher rate of dissatisfaction of mass transit to the point where public transportation in Nassau County is now viewed as an economic burden and a rather unthinkable method of transportation. Beyond the lack of state funding that Genn highlights, the lack of funding also appears on the federal level. This year, the NICE bus service received a mere 18.4 million dollars in federal funding from Washington DC, according to transportation historian, Larry Penner of MassTransitMag (Penner). In contrast, NYC’s public transportation system received 3.9 billion in federal funding this past year, even with ridership currently down 93% on the MTA subway and buses as a result of the ongoing coronavirus pandemic (Kuntzman). This further showcases how NYS and federal authorities have focused their attention and resourcing on the city transit system and turned their backs on suburban transit systems. From this inference, it is clear to see that public transportation is neither practical, accessible, nor a viable means of getting from point A to B in Nassau County.
In an article addressing the faults with public transport, author Caitlin Troutman from the Hilltop Monitor reflects on how the public transportation system in the United States has failed, specifically in suburban communities. To her point, she cites how most of the American government, and public, approaches public transportation as more of an alternative for individuals who are too poor to drive, and how the greater affluence of suburbs deters residents from utilizing this service (Troutman). As a result, an ugly cycle is created: the low demand for mass transit results in fewer operating hours and fewer covered areas, which in turn leads to even lower demand. Though I agree with this reasoning, Troutman fails to propose a viable solution to address this failure. Here, Aditi Shrikant offers a simple reasoning and tangible solution to this dilemma in his 2018 Vox opinion article. He states that “American customers mistakenly prioritize reach over frequency,” but the way to get more ridership is to get people to understand how the services work and why they are investing in it (Shrikant). Though I concede with Troutman’s initial argument, to some extent, that many Americans view public transit as a welfare system for those who can’t afford to drive, Shrikant’s proposal to increase public awareness and understanding of mass transit appears to be the more sensible approach to addressing the lack of public transportation in suburban communities. Increasing awareness of the transportation services that are currently provided by Nassau County would “increase mobility by informing individuals … about the fixed route and demand response services that are available to them and making the services easier to understand and use” according to a technical report, Access to Transportation on Long Island (TransSystems, 2007, p. 152). I agree with this plausible solution that increasing the visibility and understanding of public transportation services within local communities would increase ridership and encourage funding support to alleviate the lack of public transportation in Nassau County in the short term. Furthermore, my argument for a long term solution is that we could redesign cities so that driving — and by extension, car ownership, can be a choice and not a “virtual necessity.”
Moreover, public transportation helps to reduce road congestion and travel times, air pollution, and energy and oil consumption, all of which benefit both riders and non-riders alike. Though I did not initially consider the environmental benefits of bettering public transportation to reduce car emissions and carbon footprints, a study done by UC Berkeley revealed that relying more on mass transit and carpooling reduces fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, reduces adverse air pollution impacts, and reduce smog and global warming (Shaheen, 2008, p. 5). If not a motive in itself to increase public transportation usage and decrease individual carbon emissions, I argue that a rise in gas prices would further drive up public transportation ridership more by de-incentivizing car owners from driving. Moreover, Nassau County could implement complementary measures, such as support bicycle systems, parking management, and real-time data, and more frequent/rigid bus schedules to offer convenience for its riders.
Admittedly, there is no downright “optimal” solution to increasing public transit in neighborhoods that emphasize driving, especially in suburban areas like Nassau County, due to low demand. However, this ushers in a new question — if ridership is low, regardless, what is the point of increasing funding on public transit in these areas? Simply answered, public transportation provides basic mobility service and access to employment, community resources, medical care, and recreational opportunities to people without access to a car. As more people utilize this public service, the concerns regarding inefficient mass transit in affluent, auto-centric suburbs like Nassau County increases, and new questions arise that are applicable to the greater implications of society: Is there any way to reconcile these stark differences in public transportation quality considering the economic burden that they will cause to local governments who lack adequate funding? How can we remove the stigma for public transportation in automobile-centric, sprawling suburbs so that it is no longer viewed as a socioeconomic status?
…
Works Cited
Abrams-Cherwony & Associates. TranSystems, 2007, pp. 152–154, Access to Transportation on Long Island.
English, Jonathan. “Why Is American Mass Transit So Bad? It’s a Long Story.” Bloomberg.com, Bloomberg, 31 Aug. 2018, www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-08-31/why-is-american-mass-transit-so-bad-it-s-a-long-story.
Fiscina, Amanda. “Fiscina: No Choice but to Drive on LI.” Newsday, Newsday, 11 Jan. 2016, www.newsday.com/opinion/columnists/amanda-fiscina/millennials-have-no-choice-but-to-drive-on-long-island-1.11306667.
Kuntzman, Gersh, et al. “Report: MTA Will Need ANOTHER $4–8 Billion in Fed Funding.” Streetsblog New York City, 15 Apr. 2020, nyc.streetsblog.org/2020/04/15/report-mta-will-need-another-4–8-billion-in-fed-funding/.
Levy, Alon, and Larry Penner. “On Long Island, Transit Operates as Two Separate and Unequal Systems.” Streetsblog New York City, 26 May 2017, nyc.streetsblog.org/2017/05/25/on-long-island-transit-operates-as-two-separate-and-unequal-systems/.
“MTA’s Hakim: Long Island economy tied to transit.” Long Island Business News, 15 Sept. 2017. Gale OneFile: Business, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A505575214/GPS?u=usocal_main&sid=GPS&xid=c0589d17. Accessed 18 Oct. 2020
Shrikant, Aditi. “Why US Public Transportation Is so Bad — and Why Americans Don’t Care.” Vox, Vox, 26 Sept. 2018, www.vox.com/the-goods/2018/9/26/17903146/mass-transit-public-transit-rail-subway-bus-car.
Shaheen, Susan, and Adam Cohen. University of California Berkeley, 2008, pp. 5–7, The Benefits of Carpooling, escholarship.org/content/qt7jx6z631/qt7jx6z631.pdf?t=ph07of#:~:text=By%20reducing%20fuel%20consumption%2C%20a,greenhouse%20gas%20(GHG)%20emissions.&text=The%20study%20also%20estimates%20a,(Jacobson%20and%20King%202009).
Troutman, Caitlin. “The Failure of Public Transportation in the United States and Kansas City.” The Hilltop Monitor, 4 Mar. 2016, hilltopmonitor.jewell.edu/the-failure-of-public-transportation-in-the-united-states-and-kansas-city/.
