Melanie Colburn | July 29, 2005
Billed as "America's Metro" when the federal government cut the red tape (of one sort, anyway) almost 30 years ago, D.C. Metro isn't the American sweetheart it used to be.
Somehow, while other public transportation systems are pining for an increase in riders to lift revenue, fares from the crowds piling into D.C. Metro's packed cars are breaking its budget.
Though the ten local governments that control D.C. Metro's funds are resisting the idea of rewarding a flurry of fiscal and safety mismanagement scandals with the promise of dedicated funding, Big Brother may be swooping in to help. Born as a federal pet project, a Congressional hearing yesterday considered providing $1.5 billion to D.C. Metro contingent upon "dedicated funding, two additional seats on the 12-member board of directors and the creation of an inspector general."
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
I often [i]start[/i] to get mad at the numerous problems affecting public transportation in the United States, but then I have to remind myself that there's precious little [i]private[/i] transportation in the United States.
Having lived in DC, I feel confident saying that the lion's
share of the reasons why local and regional government suck there,
is because of its lack of self-rule.
The people who have the ultimate power over DC - that is, Congress
- do not answer to the people they govern and tax there. They have
no motivation to make the government run well, and they pull shit,
and allow shit, they'd never even try to get away with if they had
to answer to their charges come election day.
Which also had the perverse effect of causing the local government
to be able to get away with insane amounts of negligence, because
they can blame all their problems on Congress, and lead charges
against it, without ever having to worry about achievement in
either running the city well, or in actually fighting off
Congress.
Oh, yeah, this extends to the Metro, which is a regional quasi blah
blah blah. So now that's a third reason why there's a lack of
accountability.
Having lived in DC, I feel confident saying that the lion's
share of the reasons why local and regional government suck there,
is because of its lack of self-rule.
Woo hoo.. I needed a good laugh today joe.
The people who have the ultimate power over DC - that is,
Congress - do not answer to the people they govern and tax there.
They have no motivation to make the government run well, and they
pull shit, and allow shit, they'd never even try to get away with
if they had to answer to their charges come election
day.
Like what, joe? What has congress foisted on us as of late?
Vouchers? (Thank god. Third world countries are run better than
DCPS, which is run by a superintendent and BoE that are either
elected by the District residents or appointed by a mayor). Mostly
Congress buts its head in when its dishing out the $$$, but since
the District has a long history of wasting cash by the metric
assload through malfeasance or incompetence I'll give Congress the
benefit of the doubt when make demands that cash is not, you know,
wasted.
Almost all of the damage done to DC is home grown is caused by
people elected by DC residents. Simply giving DC home rule (which I
do support) won't change a thing.
They have no motivation to make the government run well, and
they pull shit, and allow shit, they'd never even try to get away
with if they had to answer to their charges come election
day.
Which I guess explains why the D.C. government ran so much better
before home rule, when it was an agency of the U.S. government.
What has congress foisted on us as of late?
Well, there was that stunt a few years ago where voters had clearly
approved by a wide margin a medical MJ initiative, but Congress
wouldn't release funds to allow the complete voting results to be
counted. Then there were the "certainly not helping the Metro
budget" stunts of:
-- Making Metro spend money to reprint all their maps and schedules
to show "National Airport" as "Ronald Reagan Washington National
Airport," despite the fact that Metro had just printed all new maps
several months prior to show the locations of several new
stations;
-- Having a bill in Congress preventing Metro from accepting
advertisements from drug legalization advocacy groups.
I'm not apologizing for the DC city government -- being a NoVa
resident, I don't have to, suckers! -- but Congress is no friend of
the people of DC.
Damn, Nathan, miss much? Why don't you try reading the whole
post?
Seamus, at least pre-"home rule," there were clear lines of
responsibility. If something was screwed up in the District, the
feds took the blame. Today, whenever something's screwed up, the
local government and Congress can just point their fingers at each
other.
Hmm... lets see what you said joe
The people who have the ultimate power over DC - that is, Congress
- do not answer to the people they govern and tax there. They have
no motivation to make the government run well, and they pull shit,
and allow shit, they'd never even try to get away with if they had
to answer to their charges come election day.
"Pull shit and allow shit." Whoa... you're absolutely right, how
did I ever miss that comprehensive list of evils and ills of
Congress's grip on the District? Pardon me for asking for a little
more detail.
Well, there was that stunt a few years ago where voters had
clearly approved by a wide margin a medical MJ initiative, but
Congress wouldn't release funds to allow the complete voting
results to be counted...
But how would releasing the pot votes turn DC from a criminally
neglected city to a thriving metropolis? This was, after all, joe's
contention. I'll say it again, give DC total home rule free from
the grip of congress and nothing would change. Its not as if the
population who continue to vote in a bunch of ineffective asshats
will all of the sudden, with the loss of congretional oversite,
become paragons of civicmindedness.
Just like the pols he claim bamboozle us idjut DC residents with
all of their "let's blame it on congress," joe takes the naive way
out of blaming the "lion's share" of DC's problem on non DC
factors, which is just bunk. DC gets the gov't DC deserves.
Congress didn't force us to elect a shitty, shitty Board of
Education. Congress didn't force us to elect a crackhead for Mayor.
Congress didn't force us to vote a squabbling, "who can I blame for
my fuckups" City Council. DC residents did.
"home rule" masks an important financial picture - I'm in Austin
(state capitol of Texas), and here most local money is raised by
property taxes.
Guess how much money the state pays for the vast amounts of
valuable land they hold in Austin?
Guess how much money the University of Texas pays?
And, not coincidentally, we have the same arguments over "home
rule" here - the state legislature occasionally makes noise about
creating a DC-like entity.
Couldn't be any worse - as it stands now, the city must pay for the
roads that funnel state workers from the freeways to their offices,
for the fire/police/EMS coverage they require, etc., but don't see
a dime in property taxes from their employer(s).
I wonder - how much property tax does the Federal government pay to
DC?
Oh, and more specific to Metro, the article author needs a
healthy dose of reality-smacking. The Feds have been subsidizing
operating costs for the Metro while the capital costs (buying
bigger trains, long-term station projects) went unsponsored. Of
course this brings us to where we are now - there's plenty of
demand for this public transportation service even at relatively
high fares (I was just there this week and yes, the cars are
packed), but the lack of past capital investment means that nothing
can be done to satisfy further apparent latent demand.
Unlike most transportation agencies, the Metro doesn't have a
dedicated source of tax revenue - it basically goes begging every
year.
But how would releasing the pot votes turn DC from a
criminally neglected city to a thriving metropolis?
Why, I'm certain I don't know. Perhaps you could ask someone who
was making the argument that it would? I was answering the rather
specific question, "What has congress foisted on us as of
late?"
This was, after all, joe's contention.
I would not deign to speak for joe. He's a big boy.
So I gather the state roads and federal highways that carry
car-based commuters into DC operate in the black,
right?
I've always wondered why mainstream libertarian agitation against
public transportation is so much stronger than the movement against
public through roads.
Has there ever been a study on whether there's a high correlation
between libertarianism and germophobia?
"I've always wondered why mainstream libertarian agitation
against public transportation is so much stronger than the movement
against public through roads."
Because most of said agitation comes from suburbanite Republican
commuters who don't like the religious right, and thus want to hide
under the banner of libertarianism.
"joe takes the naive way out of blaming the "lion's share" of
DC's problem on non DC factors"
...which you can see by the way I wrote one paragraph about how the
structure allows the local government to avoid responsibility,
after a paragraph about how the structure allows Congress to avoid
responsibilaity.
Nathan, when you read my posts, do you see a projection of the
inside of your own head?
Now I'll get back to my core arguments, that counting the votes from the ballot measure would turn everyone in DC into paragons of civic-mindededness, and that the DC Council and Mayor' Office have never done anything wrong. *rolls eyes*
Nathan, when you read my posts, do you see a projection of
the inside of your own head?
Do you conviently forget what you wrote the minute you hit the post
button? The "lion's share" was a direct quote from your first
post.
As for your first argument -- Congress avoids
responsibility -- lets take a look at how congress interacts
with the District. "Home Rule" arguments for the District generally
have to do with a) not having a vote in congress b) having congress
control a large part of the District's funding and c) congress
sticking its nose into local DC laws.
a) Congressional representation with full voting rights would be
awesome. It also will probably not change the day-to-day goings on
of the District gov't by very much. Maybe a better chance to horse
trade votes to get a project here and there for the District, but
nothing that will make or break the mountain of problems faceing
DC.
b) DC pols may not like having to go to Congress and kiss ass to
get their latest project but DC seems to get the money they need.
Spending it, however, is a different problem. Spend a few hours
perusing the DC Inspector
General's website to see where all of the budgetary problems
lie. When it comes to fraud, waste and abuse DC is a superstar.
This has nothing to do with congress and
everything to do with DC's elected officials.
c) I'll ask for a second time: (to paraphrase what you wrote in
your first post) "what shit do they pull and allow" that
detrimentally effects the District? In almost all cases of congress
trying to supercede the District it is done to score ideological,
but meaningless in the daily scope of things, points. For instance,
the aforementioned medical pot vote, trying to overturn the gun ban
and school vouchers. Issues that generate lots of press and heated
arguments but no matter what the outcome of the vote will do squat
to change the day-to-day administration of the District.
The "lion's share" of DC's problems have to do with DC gov't. Its
bloated, ineffectual, and corrupt. This isn't congresses fault,
this is the District's fault... which leads me to your second
argument: the local gov't avoids responsibility. You may
have poo-pooed it in your last post, but you argument is
essentially that the lack of home rule gives District pols an easy
"hey, blame congress" excuse for any of the District's problems,
and that the removal of this excuse will somehow
change this. This is just plain laughable. If the voting population
is, how shall I say this, politically naive enough to buy the first
argument lock, stock and barrel, then if and when home rule is
restored they'll buy whatever new, simplistic excuse the powers
that be thrown at them ("William's isn't black enough" is a fun one
floating around these days, Barry can always fall back on blaming
whitey, Holmes Norton will undoubtedly discover Martians are behind
a vast, anti District conspiracy).
While blaming all of the troubles of DC on the "lack of home rule"
may be what's fashionable among the Northwest hipster crowd it is
woefully naive and shows an all out ignorance of how DC works (or,
as the case may be, doesn't work). 99% of DC's problems were made
by DC residents and the officials it elected.
Now, if we're going to simplistically point fingers and
assign blame for DC's woes I know one group who are a hell of a lot
more culpable than congress, and that's the DC Republican Party. If
they could actually field a slate of candidates that were electable
the Democrats may not have an 85%+ lock on the city. Monolithic
control of an area tends to lead to elected officials who were
better at working the party bureaucracy / maintaining the status
quo than actually doing anything to help the city.
Anyway, joe, since "give the District home rule and the lion's
share of problem would go away" was your hypothesis please
explain
a) what Congress is currently doing (you know, the shit they pull
and allow) that is exasperating DC's fraud, waste and abuse that
would be changed with home rule
b) how taking away the "blame congress" excuse from politicians
would make them actually perform their duties better and/or make
the electorate vote them out of office
For all of your bluster and posturing you still haven't been able
to do either.
Aren't WAMTA and its Metro subway system operated jointly by DC and the surrounding suburban counties in Maryland and Virginia? If devolving to home rule offers so little hope for more responsible local government, maybe Congress should take over the suburban counties too!
If devolving to home rule offers so little hope for more
responsible local government, maybe Congress should take over the
suburban counties too!
Are the suburban counties run as badly as DC? No. WAMTA may have
lots of problems (see
this series in the Post), but WAMTA is one small piece of what
the District and metro area gov'ts do.
Also, which state does does DC belong to? When jurisdictions in
states have serious institutionalized problems the state gov't
tends to be the one bailing them out, whether its by taking control
of the finances if a city goes bankrupt, assuming controls of a
school system, etc. The only governmental power with the ability to
step in with respect to DC is the federal government. You can bet
your bottom dollar if Fairfax County, Arlington, Montgomery County,
PG County, et al was run as badly as DC Virginia or Maryland would
have stepped in to try to clean up the mess.
And again, I'm for home rule. But I'm not stupid enough to think
that home rule is any sort of cure-all for DC's problems. Give the
District home rule tomorrow and it would still continue to be run
by bloated, inefficient and corrupt bureaucracy, supported by the
politicians that DC residents elect.
Nathan,
Please name for me anything that the Department of Health and Human
Serivices ever did that required AFDC recipients to make bad
decisions.
I wouldn't have though the moral hazards of removing the
responsibility for someone's actions, while leaving them with broad
discretion in how to act, would be a subject I'd have to explain on
a libertarian board.
You seem to be determined to see responsibility in DC as a zero-sum
game, as if the admission of irresponsibility on Congress's part
lessens the irresponsbility on the DC government's part. In
reality, Congressional irresponsibility worsens, and enables, that
of the local government, and the local voters.
It's been a while since I lived in DC - I'd forgotten how
reactionary its partisans are. We haven't seen any DC Statehood
Party types on this board yet, but they're even worse. Apparently,
Nathan is wrong that the structure of government causes City Hall
to act irresponsibly, while the federal overseers are effective and
engaged. In fact, it's just the opposite, and all of the actions
taken by the Mayor and Council are appropriate responses to the
unfair hand they're dealt by Congress. As anyone who isn't a racist
honkey can see.
You seem to be determined to see responsibility in DC as a
zero-sum game,
No, responsibility in the District is not a zero sum game, and I
haven't claimed that. Nor have I claimed that "federal overseers
are effective and engaged." My claim is that, unlike being the
cause of the "lion's share" of DC's problems the Home Rule issues
is a smokescreen the "progressives" have latched onto (yourself
included) as the cause and solution to "the lion's share" of the
District's problems. It is not. My point is that home rule has
squat to do with the vast majority of the Districts problems. With
home rule or without home rule the District would still be in the
same messYou claimed that because of the lack of home rule that
Congress "pull shit, and allow shit," yet you seem unable to
actually articulate exactly what shit Congress pull
(Repost. Never let a 15 month old around your keyboard when
you're ranting)
You seem to be determined to see responsibility in DC as a
zero-sum game,
No, responsibility in the District is not a zero sum game, and I
haven't claimed that. Nor have I claimed that "federal overseers
are effective and engaged." My claim is that the Home Rule issues
is a smokescreen the "progressives" have latched onto (yourself
included) as the cause and solution to "the lion's share" of the
District's problems. It is not. My point is that home rule has
squat to do with the vast majority of the Districts problems. With
home rule or without home rule the District would still be in the
same mess because most of the problems happen at the local
government level, which is run by people elected by the District's
residents, or appointed by people elected by the District's
residents. Home rule is largely orthogonal to the problem.
Congressional oversite, in the grand scheme of things, neither
helps nor hinders that.
If DC was a well run, fiscally responsible jurisdiction with whom
Congress continually pull rank on (withholding tones of funding,
etc.) you may actually have a leg to stand on. But it isn't, and
you don't.
So I'll ask again, since you seem to be doing a bang up job of
dodging defending your original hypothesis:
a) what Congress is currently doing (you know, the shit they pull
and allow) that is exasperating DC's fraud, waste and abuse that
would be changed with home rule
b) how taking away the "blame congress" excuse from politicians
would make them actually perform their duties better and/or make
the electorate vote them out of office
For all of your bluster and posturing you still haven't been able
to do either.
And it appears you have a severAlso, it appears that you have a severe case of selective reading joe. In about three different posts I said that I actually support home rule. I think it�s a travesty that we don't have full congressional representation and it would love to be out from under the oversight of Congress. But, unlike you, I am under no delusions that this will change much of anything when it comes to the problems of the District. The District will still have a bloated bureaucracy and will waste money like a gambling addict in Vegas, the school system will continue to suck, we'll continue to be taxed out the wazoo, etc. Nothing, I repeat nothing will drastically change until the majority of the District residents want it to, vote appropriately and continue to apply pressure to make sure change happens. As I said above, for better or for worse DC gets the gov't it deserves.
Nathan,
Congressional oversight isn't used as an excuse, one that enables
DC politicians to garner undue support and avoid responsibility for
mismanagement?
Is that what your saying? That, rather than the pseudo-colonial
system creating structural problems that enable incompetent
administation, there's just something in the
air/water/genetics/culture among Washington DC residents that, in
election after election, causes them to vote irresponsibly, and
causes their representatives to govern irresponsibly?
I say bullshit.
If you were a better reader, or maybe a more honest debater, you
would have noticed, asknowledged that I've said, repeatedly, that
Congress's role in this lies in enabling actions by the DC
goverment. Asking me to name actions taken by Congress sort of
misses the point.
Congressional oversight isn't used as an excuse, one that
enables DC politicians to garner undue support and avoid
responsibility for mismanagement?
Of course it's used as an excuse. Take it away, though, and it will
be replaced with a new excuse. If the residents of the District
will buy that line hook, line and sinker they'll buy any other
excuse. It's not as if the residents of the District haven't bought
other BS excuses for why the schools are failing, security is crap,
roads don't get paved, etc. "Home rule" is hardly the only the only
excuse the pols in DC throw around to explain away DC's problems,
nor is it anywhere near the most prevalent.
That, rather than the pseudo-colonial system creating
structural problems that enable incompetent administation, there's
just something in the air/water/genetics/culture among Washington
DC residents that, in election after election, causes them to vote
irresponsibly, and causes their representatives to govern
irresponsibly?
Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Your average DC voter doesn't
go around saying "you know, we have a psuedo-colonial system
creating structural problem. Let's show Congress how we feel by
voting a complete incompetent bastard into office. If he's a crack
smoker all the better. That'll teach 'em." DC voters, like all
voters, vote their interests. And in the District that's (mostly)
the politics of poverty. Thanks in large part to the likes of
"Mayor for Live" Barry DC lost its middle class in droves, leaving
the wealthy huddled in Northwest and the lowest of the middleclass,
and the poor everywhere else. So, what issue garners the most
attention with District residents? Ones that purport to help the
poor. What sells in the District, vote wise? Affordable housing,
extend welfare, job growth initiatives, etc. Now, those may be
noble initiatives but the proof of the pudding is how one goes
about delivering them. With the DC Democrats it's spend, spend,
spend. "Vote for us and the gov't will solve your problems." Want
job creation? We're not going to lower business taxes and
bureaucracy. No, we're going to spend lots of money on vocational
programs (to fill jobs that will never show up because of the
aforementioned taxes and red tape), and when that fails lets just
increase the already bloated gov't payroll (true story, when Carl
Cohn told the powers that be that one of the first things he would
do as school Superintendent was cut a mass of useless, non teaching
jobs within DCPS that did little other than suck up funds he was
told he wouldn't be able to do that. Giving DC residents jobs, no
matter how meaningless, was more important that teaching the
children. Cohn soon after turned the job down. Needless to say I
fail to see how congress is to blame for this). Want cheap housing?
Don't worry, we'll build it (at a great expense, and it not like
its been all that successful before, but don't worry, it will be
this time. Oh, and try not to notice that the contractor building
these new "projects" is a close, personal friend and got the job on
a no bid basis for much higher than the free market would allow).
Etc.. etc.. etc.
So between the "hey, we'll poor good money after bad into your
neighborhood" vs. the "hey, we're going to cut taxes (meaning its
going to reduce revenues, therefore most likely downsizing the
District gov't by quite a bit; you may lose your job), allow the
housing market to grow unmolested (attracting the middle class, you
know the ones who have the discretionary income to support all
those fancy restaurants and businesses -- that in turn would create
more jobs -- you yell and scream about not having in your
neighborhood, but raising the price of your rent). This will hurt
short term but will help everyone by orders of magnitude in the
long term," if you were poor, a product of the DC education system
and had dick for opportunity, which way would you vote?
Give the District home rule and nothing will change. The issue of
poverty will continue to drive most of the local issues of the
District. Back to my point that the DC Republican part (or any
other party for that matter) is more culpable than Congress, they
need to craft a compelling story about why a lower tax rate, a
liberalized business environment and a smaller bureaucracy is
ultimately a good thing for the District the Democrats will wipe
the floor with them each and every election with the status quo:
i.e. the "we'll throw more money at the problem" strategy.
And its not like DC is alone in these problems. To various degrees
cities such as Detroit, Philadelphia, New York, Chicago, Long Beach
are going or have gone through similar problem as the District.
They don't have your "Congressional oversight boogieman" to blame
for their messes. What makes the District so special?
Snarky aside: two years of living in the District had me pretty
much fleeing the Democrat party for good. According to
"progressive" orthodoxy DC should be a paradise: high taxes,
generous welfare, large public sector, most restrictive gun laws in
the nation, Democratic control since the beginning of time (or at
least the beginning of DC local politics), yet it's may be the
worst municipality in the country.
If you were a better reader, or maybe a more honest debater,
you would have noticed, asknowledged that I've said, repeatedly,
that Congress's role in this lies in enabling actions by the DC
goverment.
Yet you still show no proof of their enabling. I could claim that
the District's problems are due to Judge Wapner no longer being on
TV. Doesn't make it true. Some evidence would be nice.
Funny how you question my sanity, reading ability and debating
skills, but you have yet to defend in any substantial way your
original thesis beyond such things as Ad Hominem attacks and burden
of proof fallacies.
(p.s. you can't spell for shit. Granted, mine's not great, but,
remember, I'm a fucking moron, so its to be expected)
Asking me to name actions taken by Congress sort of misses
the point.
Gee joe, Oh, and almost forgot this one�
Asking me to name actions taken by Congress sort of misses the
point.
Gee joe, when your "Starter for 10" is:
The people who have the ultimate power over DC - that is,
Congress - do not answer to the people they govern and tax there.
They have no motivation to make the government run well, and they
pull shit, and allow shit, they'd never even try to get away with
if they had to answer to their charges come election
day.
I didn't realize that asking for some examples of the "pulling and
allowing shit" you cite to be beyond the bounds of debate. How
silly of me.
It would be much easier for me to live in DC for a number of
reasons. But I would NEVER consider it, because DC is a fucking
leftist wasteland. They tax the fuck out of property owners. The
local government creamed their pants over Kelo, so now they can
steal land to build their precious Nats boondoogle off the pristine
waters of the Anacostia. The private ownership of firearms in DC is
defacto illegal. And this is all LOCAL governance.
So yeah, I'm for home-rule to, but these locals are total assholes,
and a huge part of the problem.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245