Based on traffic conditions yesterday, high gas prices certainly didn't seem to be keeping people off the roads, but that's why we rely on data and the data shows a fairly large decline in driving recently showing that even in a country where public policy massively, massively, massively subsidizes driving and provides for few alternatives that people still do respond to incentives. What we need to do now is start subsidizing driving less (including through implicit subsidies like parking regulations) and start plowing some of the savings into better service on our existing transit routes and the creation of new ones.
« Electing Judges | Main | The Undorsement »
Less Driving
25 May 2008 12:26 pm
Comments (17)
Two comments:
First, they claim that volume increased in February 2008 as opposed to 2007, but when you look at the charts, it fell by 0.4%.
Second, if you divide the total number of miles driven in February 2007 by 28, you get 7.75 Billion miles per day. If you divide the amount in 2008 by 29 days (to reflect the leap year), you get 7.45 Billion miles per day, for a drop of 3.9% year over year, giving declines of 1.9% (January), 3.9% (February), and 4.3% (March), showing the beginnings of a fairly significant trendline.
It seems to me that the DOT report should have reflected the leap year, no?
putting aside the question of how to plan entirely new communities, I wonder if you have any proposals for doing this in towns that already exist. What mayor or city council is going to even consider the idea of making parking more expensive or reversing subsidies or effective subsidies to drivers at a time when voters are already giving them hell about the high price of gas? Planning a walkable city 20 years from now will not get you reelected next November...
Part of the problem is that we inevitably associate "prosperity" with "more driving." We're driving less now, but Americans are always going to have this internal association of "less driving" with "tough times."
The reforms you speak of, while we have the opportunity, will only come about if the point is made that the path to prosperity is not to be slaves to our cars and slaves to gas prices and that dependence on driving makes our lives worse, not better, regardless of how cheap it is to fill up.
Mitch - city planning policies dating to the 40s essentially demanded car-oriented suburbs. Most planners don't agree with this type of planning now, but the established base of laws and precedence still favor car-oriented suburbs, and the single-family homeowners tend to vote more than apartment-dwellers, so the policies continue.
Plus, the Interstate Highway system.
Plus, while I'm not a "all of these wars are just for oil" guy, I do recognize that a big reason why the Middle East is on our radar in a way that, say, Africa isn't is because of its oil. So we spend a lot of money to ensure that the countries that export oil are stable.
Re: We're driving less now, but Americans are always going to have this internal association of "less driving" with "tough times."
I'm not sure that correct. Most people I know hate long commutes through congested traffic. I certainly do. We have just moved to Baltimore and I would love to live within walkable or bikable distance of work, but that's not going to happen: the office is right downtown (well, Inner Harbor) and most of Baltimore is a gigantic slum, and even the nicer parts of town have never heard of a "back yard". So it looks like I'll be stuck with a 10 mile or farther drive. With luck we'll live close enough to the commuter lines to make rail an option.
"massively, massively, massively subsidizes driving"
Duuuuuude,
I like totally remember a 2004 DOT study of U.S. Federal Gov transit revenue and spending pointing out that for every 1000 people that ride rail (For example: Amtrak) the U.S. Federal Gov ponies up over a 100 bucks. Roughly the same for light rail. For airlines, on the other hand, it's about 6 bucks and for cars it's basically a wash (Looking for the report right now but can't find it - a little help here?).
Now I know state and local governments have their own piggy banks, allowances, and spending etc. but I don't think it's fair to say that car travel is massively subsidized without saying that rail travel is as well.
And I say this as someone who:
- Shared a car with my wife for almost 3 years in Dallas and Seattle (running for the bus in 100 degree heat, yeah!).
- Whole-heartedly supports buses and light rail (i.e. yeah it's expensive but it's also worth it).
Re MarcInSeattle
"Shared a car with my wife for almost 3 years in Dallas and Seattle (running for the bus in 100 degree heat, yeah!)."
100 degree heat in Seattle?
Duuuude,
Any study from the Bushoid DOT is going to find that (surprise, surprise) we don't any anything to drive. That's just bull. The feds shell out billions each year over and above what the gas tax collects to build roads, and most of the roadbuilding money in the US comes from counties and states. If you own your home in Seattle, look at your King County tax statement- the roads are called out as 'streets and arterials' and averaged about 22% of the tax when I lived there.
The real question, however, is whether you even want to get what you're buying with your subsidies, and the answers are becoming plain- suburban sprawl and high automobile dependency are big-time losers.
If you really support transit, don't just mope around thinking you might be wrong. Learn more about it and why supporting transit is right.
Better start supporting those flying cars, Matt, if you want to change transportation patterns in this country.
Otherwise, you're just "jerking off", to quote the preacher in "Blazing Saddles".
The reason why San Francisco has some of the best public transit in the country is: 1) it's small - you can almost walk around it in half a day; 2) it has hills that people hate walking up; 3) it's fairly wealthy.
None of which applies to most of the rest of the country.
People are not going to take public transportation until they can take it from "here" to "there" - that is, where they are going, not ten blocks - or ten miles - from their destination.
And there will always be destination that are ten blocks or ten miles from the nearest public transport.
And not unless anything they decide to buy can be carried instead of stowed in a back seat or trunk. Which means you need an enhanced delivery system for merchants as well.
You clowns have been screaming for better public transportation for fifty years. You screamed the most back in the '70's - before you were born, Matt - during the oil crisis then. See the results?
Email me when your current calls produce results.
You clowns have been screaming for better public transportation for fifty years. You screamed the most back in the '70's - before you were born, Matt - during the oil crisis then. See the results?
So I guess since things haven't improved, we should stop?
But nobody saysthat everything always hasto be done by transit. I am a big transit and bike enthusiast, but me and my wife have a car that we use to go buy big things, visit out of the way places, go skiing, etc etc.
What us transit advocates sk for is an opportunity to build cities so that transit is an option.
Trying to make the cities we live in better is not "jerking off." It is a rational response to a serious problem
Matt, I also love trains, and I cheer every time you point out our country's cities are in a death spiral because of the subsidized automobile.
But without a beard, you look suspiciously like Thomas the tank engine. And given this, I'm unsure if your advice can be considered truly independent analysis.
http://www.thomasandfriends.com/
[100 degree heat in Seattle?]
Uh, no. Please allow me to clarify:
- 100 degree heat in Dallas in June, July, and August.
- Days and days of rain in Seattle (30+ days straight in Jan/Feb 06)
Neither is exactly a day at the beach when you're running to catch the bus, waiting at a stop without shelter, or riding a bicycle and trying not to get run over.
[Any study from the Bushoid DOT...]
Yes, yes, I despise Bush as much as the next Seattleite but it doesn't necessarily mean the numbers are wrong.
[...we don't pay any anything to drive. That's just bull.]
I'm not saying that it doesn't cost anything to drive. I'm saying that when you divide the net expenditure (spending - revenue) by the hundreds of millions of people who drive it's a good deal.
Problems like Global Warming and air pollution though mean we need to also invest in alternatives which brings us back to Matt's original post.
Still, just as a side note, well maintained, adequately sized roads allow bus systems to work more efficiently and help fire fighters, paramedics, and police officers do their jobs.
[...look at your King County tax statement...]
Sorry, sorry about that. I should have been more clear. I was leaving state and local spending out to keep things simple. Arguably an oversimplification but well I suppose we can leave that for later.
"So I guess since things haven't improved, we should stop?"
No, you should recognize when you're dealing with forces you can't change without major change in other areas - other areas which you also can't change.
In short, grow up and get real.
I'm not in the least against some notion of "public transit" (other than the fact that I'm against it being financed by "the public", i.e., the state, since I'm an anarchist.)
But it ain't gonna happen.
But without a beard, you look suspiciously like Thomas the tank engine. And given this, I'm unsure if your advice can be considered truly independent analysis.
lulz.
I used to ride the bus when I lived in Boca Raton. It took me roughly twice as long to get to school by bus as it took to drive. I now live in Tallahassee. It takes me less than 10 minutes to get to work if I drive. It would take me over an hour to get to work if I took the bus. Most of that is waiting at the transfer terminal. That transfer terminal is less than a mile from my office. But. I can't walk or ride my bike there because of the impossible heat and the hills. I'm simply not in good enough shape to bike a 30% grade and certainly not on the days when it hits near 100 here. There's no shower at work. At least in Boca we got the sea breeze.
Tallahassee is currently undergoing a large public works program called Blueprint 2000.
My boss (I happen to work in the eminent domain field) went to a meeting the other day and learned that, down the road, median-based public transportation is in the plans. That would be a phenomenal asset to this city in which many of the roads are "canopy" roads which would be really devastated by adding sidewalks. But. It will most likely be several years in the future. But, having been to a few cities with tram systems, I'm really salivating.
Re serial catowner
"The feds shell out billions each year over and above what the gas tax collects to build roads, and most of the roadbuilding money in the US comes from counties and states."
Excuse me, the federal government doesn't spend so much as a thin dime out of general revenues on road building. In fact, outside of military bases and national parks, the federal government doesn't build roads at all. Federal gas tax money is allocated to the states on a formula written into the Surface Transportation Act. States can finance Interstate construction on a 90/10 federal/state allocation basis and federal aid highways on a 80/20 federal/state allocation basis.
In particular, earmarks for highway construction come out of federal gas tax funds, not general revenues.
In particular, earmarks for highway construction come out of federal gas tax funds, not general revenues.
In some of my more perverse moments, I have advocated getting rid of federal gas taxes completely. This way, the government would view an increase of driving as a cost that force the gov't to figure out ways to moderate and provide alternatives for, rather than as a self-sustaining revenue-generator.
Comments closed June 08, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
What are all the ways that driving is subsidized? I already have an idea, but I'd like to see a complete list (if someone's already done so). Can you link to an article discussing this?
Posted by mitch | May 25, 2008 1:10 PM