• What's ticked?
• Accolades
• Contact us

c o l u m n s

• Cheap Charlie
• ChrisCrossings
• Err Travel
• Leocha
• Travel Notes
• Archives

Back to the Suburbs
The Occidental Tourist · April 1, 2001

It never fails. Whenever the Tourist provides a simple, public service statement about the need for more public transportation, it ignites a flurry of mail both pro and con. And he's routinely shocked, shocked, shocked that the 'con' side is short for 'conservatives.'

They're Edge City dwellers who don't want something as, er, unseemly as public rail to tarnish their pristine communities. (Actually, seems like suburbanites are doing a good job of that themselves, by demanding a lifestyle that dictates unending sprawl, unceasing traffic, cookie-cutter residential development and inane Big Box strip shopping/mall projects.)

That said, here's an opposing and intelligently stated view, from a writer named "Chip". Equal time in this column is always welcome. So Chip gets the column for the week. Next week, the Tourist weighs in. And feel free to send 'im your thoughts at tourist@ticked.com:

"I read your "Mass Appeal" column with a somewhat of a smirk. While there are benefits of mass transit, I believe that you discounted the public when 'They get caught up in these urban myths about neighborhood decline, so they routinely shout - or vote - the idea down when elected types bring it up.'

I would submit to you that those suburban folks have good reason to be concerned. In my area, extended rail ended near a major retail mall and was a straight line from "downtown". Funny how crime rates increased at the mall after the rail line was opened. Store owners had to increase their security expenditures substantially. I'm certain that the light rail line had absolutely nothing to do with that crime increase, especially in a era of decreasing crime rates from our ever expanding economy.

Also: My company recently moved its offices "around the beltway" and those people who lived close by now had to drive substantially more to the office. One of my co-workers decided that he'd take mass transit, and utilize the fabled Washington, D.C., Metro system. It cost him $8.50 a day to use the rails. Then, he had to take a bus from the rail terminal to the nearest stop and walk .3 miles to the office. Commute time took approximately 1.5 hours. When he drive the congested Washington DC beltway, it took him less than one hour and cost him $8.50 in gas for the week.

The mass transit system mirrors the old economic patterns of surburbans driving into city centers to work. Increasingly, people are finding jobs in other parts of the suburbs, which the mass transit system was never designed to handle. What's more sensible? Funding more fixed transit systems that will be obsolete before they are completed and having them cost more that what it takes in time and dollars to drive it yourself, even with the congestion? Or voting "no" to having your tax dollars wasted? (That $8.50 per day mass transit cost is heavily subsidized and doesn't reflect the true cost of service either)

When will the public will object less to mass transit and maybe even use it more? When mass transit stops being an exporter of crime and the public no longer has to subsidize the travel of a minority of the population.

The tone of your article was one tinged with a bit of accusatory racism to the surburbans protesting about the mass transit. A few caveats. As far as I'm concerned, the color of an individual perpetrating a crime is irrelevant, it's the crime that matters. Demographically speaking, there are more "poor white folks." I believe that regardless of race, if there is an underclass/criminal element in one area that is suddenly given cheap transportation to a more affluent area, there will be a strong tendency to migrate to the affluent area to commit crimes. Why steal from poor folks when you can hop a train and steal from "rich" folks? After all, they've got more to steal."

OK, the Chipster makes some on-target points, because, after all, issues are always more 'gray' than our elected public servants make them out to be. That said, the Tourist has a different take. So check it out next week.

The Occidental Tourist is a magazine writer in Washington, DC. He writes for Maxim, POV, Capital Style and ABCNews.com. His column appears on Tuesdays. E-mail him at tourist@ticked.com.