Thursday, October 04, 2007

Our disastrous national traffic jam -- Providence Journal

Lee Drutman: Our disastrous national traffic jam
09:09 AM EDT on Thursday, October 4, 2007
LEE DRUTMAN

WASHINGTON

ONE OF THESE DAYS (and it will surely be soon), a major American metropolitan city will come to a screeching halt during rush hour. There will simply be too many cars, trying to get too many places, all at once, and too little pavement to accommodate all this automotive ambition. Such is the logical conclusion of all the trends.

Recently, the Texas Transportation Institute (TTI) released its annual Urban Mobility Report. The short of it is this: Congestion just keeps getting worse. More people are spending more time in traffic than ever before, across more cities. In the 437 United States urban areas, the average individual traveler loses 38 hours a year to congestion, and 26 gallons of gasoline. Nationwide, that is 4.2 billion hours, and 2.9 billion gallons of fuel, and $78 billion dollars. Which is about three times worse than it was in 1982, when the TTI first started putting out these reports. (Providence commuters lose a combined 19.5 million hours a year and waste 11.6 million gallons of gas in traffic, ranking Providence 37th and 38th in the nation, respectively; Boston commuters lose 93.4 million hours and 62.5 million gallons of gas, ranking Boston 12th and 13th in the nation, respectively).

But that’s just the hard numbers. How do you measure the emotional strain of sitting there, helplessly pounding the steering wheel, watching your life waste away in a bizarre pile of steel and exhaust, with nothing even worth listening to on the radio (just commercial after commercial telling us about all the great sales events we need to drive to). Then add in the time lost to recovering from the excruciating commute, all the anger and hostility that now needs to be defused (or taken out on somebody), and, of course, the heart attacks (according to the New England Journal of Medicine, being stuck in a traffic jam more than doubles the risk of a heart attack in the ensuing hour), and you begin to wonder: So this is what all our prosperity has brought us, then? More three-car pile-ups? Choking on our own affluence, are we?

In many ways, our modern traffic dilemma is a perfect triumph of individual rationality over collective rationality. Sure, many of us in urban areas could take public transportation to work, but the bus doesn’t come that often, and it takes longer, and worse, you are then stuck sitting with the great unwashed masses. To relinquish the car is to relinquish control, freedom, and all those other cherished values that made this country great. Of course, if everybody took the bus, the buses would run more often, and be nicer, and get there faster (because there would be less car traffic). But who goes first?

And what of the other solutions? Carpooling? Four out of five commuters now go it alone, up from three out of four just a few years ago. Who can spare the time it takes to pick up an extra person? And besides, who wants to give up that valuable alone time. Telecommuting? Never became acceptable. Living closer to work? Great if you can afford to live somewhere nice downtown, but what about the schools, and the peace and quiet? And what if your spouse works somewhere else? Shopping locally? But can you really get everything you’ve come to expect, and all the best deals?

And so it goes. We know what we should be doing, but pity the local politician who tells people how to live their lives, and punishes them with heavy fines if they don’t comply. After all, what could be worse than sitting in traffic? Why, having the mayor suddenly tell you that if you want to drive into the city by yourself during peak traffic time, well, that will be $100, please.

And yet, how else will this traffic problem solve itself without some courage on behalf of our public leaders? The incentives are all misaligned. Even if the traffic is bad, the other options are still worse for most people. So slap on some congestion pricing, as Michael Bloomberg is proposing to do in New York City. And use that money to improve public transportation, and to subsidize urban redevelopment so more people can afford to live closer to work. But pity the politician.

This does not happen overnight. But the situation we are in did not happen overnight either. Sixty years ago, federal lending policies encouraged mass suburbanization by basically making financing a home in an urban area untenable. General Motors bought out trolley lines in almost 50 cities so it could rip them up and then sell more cars and buses. And all that wonderful propaganda about the American dream on half-acre lots. . . .

So, here are the consequences: suburban snarl. And what comes of global competitiveness, when we can’t even get to work without getting an ulcer anymore? Maybe we ought to try this for global competitiveness: maybe someday soon, Los Angeles can compete with Lagos for the most congested city in the world.

Lee Drutman, a frequent contributor, is the co-author of The People’s Business: Controlling Corporations and Restoring Democracy.

No comments: