Having
already squandered vast sums of tax dollars,
many of these same bureaucracies, along with
their supporters in the business and
environmental communities, are now pushing
aggressively for the biggest boondoggle of them
all: the Dulles rail extension project, which
would ultimately add 23 miles of new rail
line to link downtown Washington with the Dulles
airport in distant Loudoun County. Estimated to
cost $5.1 billion, the new rail line is strongly
supported by the region's elected officials and
business community despite the project's own
estimates that show it would do little to
relieve congestion, pollution, or energy use in
the corridor where it would operate, let alone
in the region as a whole. Congress and the Bush
Administration should deny the project federal
funding.
High
Cost, Little to No Benefit
The
new rail line would link with the Washington
Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (METRO), the
existing rail system, at Falls Church in
suburban Virginia. Estimated to cost $3.4
billion three years ago, it is now projected to
cost $5.1 billion but would likely clock in at
somewhere between $7.5 billion and $10
billion if ultimately built.
The
project's own projections reveal the lack of any
benefit that would justify its enormous cost:[2]
-
By
the project's completion in 2025, traffic
volumes on the ten highway links in the
corridor would be reduced by only 1.5
percent compared to levels that would occur
without the extension.
-
The
negligible gain in traffic relief would be
erased by 2027, given projected traffic
growth rates. In effect, $5.1 billion (in
current dollars) would be spent for two
years of trivial traffic relief.
-
The
capital cost per new rider attracted to
transit from a car (daily rider annualized)
exceeds $15,000. That is enough to lease
each new transit rider two BMW 328i
convertibles for life and still return a few
thousand dollars to the taxpayer. By this
measure, the Dulles extension would be one
of the most expensive new transit projects
ever conceived.
-
Net
energy savings by 2025 (measured in energy
saved per BTU as car usage declines and
transit usage rises) would be 0.5 percent
for the full Dulles project, and the Wiehle
Avenue link (Phase I) would actually
increase energy usage.
While
detailed analysis of Dulles rail's own
projections indicate little or no meaningful
benefit in congestion relief, a broader look at
the region suggests that the massive investment
already made in rail transit has had little
influence on commercial development in the
community despite claims to the contrary.
Indeed, Virginia's four most prosperous
commercial and residential areas -- Tysons
Corner, Reston, the Loudoun/Dulles tech
corridor, and McLean -- have one important thing
in common: None is served by the existing rail
transit system!
A
Bureaucratic Nightmare
As
voters in the area already know, a large part
the metropolitan area's congestion problem stems
from the mismanagement of the region's
transportation system by a collection of
duplicative bureaucracies, which now includes
three state Departments of Transportation (DOT),
one federal DOT, freelancing members of the U.S.
Congress and their staffs, a metropolitan
planning organization, a new regional
transportation authority recently empowered to
raise taxes, a dozen or so counties and cities,
and a meddlesome business community that
supports wasteful transportation schemes that
promise lucrative real estate development
opportunities but little congestion relief, of
which the Dulles rail extension proposal is a
prime example.
As if
there were not enough cooks already mucking
around in the region's congestion
"broth," the Dulles rail project would
expand this exotic layering of bureaucratic
confusion by placing responsibility for
financing, construction, and (possibly)
operation of the project in the hands of the
Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (MWAA).
As an independent public authority with no
experience in rail transit, the MWAA operates an
airport known for inconveniencing passengers
trying to get from the airport's perimeter to
their flight. Perhaps it was for these reasons
that the U.S. DOT's Inspector General (IG)
expressed skepticism about MWAA's involvement.
Making reference to Boston's mismanagement of
its infamous "Big Dig" tunnel project,
the IG noted, "These lessons are relevant
in light of MWAA's lack of experience in
managing a mass transit project."[3]
Political
Dynamics
Perhaps
these factors were behind the concerns expressed
by James Simpson, Administrator of the U.S.
Federal Transit Administration, when he wrote
Virginia Governor Tim Kaine in late January 2008
to inform him that federal funding for the
Dulles rail project was in jeopardy.
Specifically, Simpson noted that in its current
form the project would receive a
"medium-low" rating, essentially
making it ineligible for up to $1.5 billion in
federal subsidies that Virginia was expecting
for Phase 1 of the project. Phase 1 would
add the first 11.6 miles of new rail line,
extending west from Falls Church, VA, to
Wiehle Avenue in Reston, VA -- several miles
short of the airport. The estimated cost of
Phase 1 has risen from $1.52 billion in December
2004 to $2.55 billion today.
To
the extent that Mr. Simpson was influenced by
the IG's report, he is to be commended for
recognizing that federal grants are not meant
for fulfilling the multi-modal dreams of
regional bureaucrats with little experience in
surface transportation. Instead, federal tax
dollars should be directed at cost-effective
solutions to national and regional mobility
problems. As the above data show, the Dulles
rail project would provide no meaningful
congestion relief to the Washington region in
general or to Northern Virginia in particular.
Nonetheless,
most of the region's elected officials,
including its Washington congressional
delegation, enthusiastically support the project
and are pressuring the Bush Administration to
spend the money anyway. This is understandable
in the age of earmarks, when "bringing home
the bacon" -- as opposed to providing
meaningful congestion relief -- is increasingly
seen as a core duty for a region's elected
officials. However, in an unusual twist to what
is otherwise a regional dispute, some members of
the House leadership, all from distant
districts, have recently weighed in with their
support for the project despite its high costs
and minuscule benefits.[4]
Conclusion
Whatever
the reasons for the leadership's involvement,
and however the project fares in its quest for
taxpayer support, the Dulles rail project has
exposed the counterproductive political process
that surrounds the nation's transportation
policymaking, especially when Congress gets
involved. For these reasons, devolving the
federal transportation program -- and the
responsibility for funding it -- back to the
states should be a high priority for the next
Administration and Congress.
--
March 24, 2008