Monday’s online debate on conservatives and public transportation was billed as a back-and-forth on why the ideological right should embrace public transportation. While differences persisted between our conservative and libertarian panelists about the impact of transit investments, another schism developed over how big a role buses should play.

Monday’s debate hosted by Transportation for America centered around the book Moving Minds: Conservatives and Public Transportation, written by conservatives William Lind and the late Paul Weyrich.

Lind used his opening remarks to summarize the book and refute the oft-repeated right-wing argument that public transportation requires government subsidies while automobiles and the roads required to support them are somehow a free-market outcome.

“In fact, the dominance of the automobile is a product of massive government intervention in the marketplace,” Lind said, citing decades of federal support for the interstate highway system as streetcars remained privately operated — resulting in crushingly unfair competition. “Conservatives above all people should know what happens when you subsidize one competitor and tax the other.”

“You’re either investing in (both highways and transit) or subsidizing both,” agreed panelist John Robert Smith, president and CEO of Reconnecting America and former mayor of Meridian, Mississippi. “You can’t have it both ways.”

Sam Staley, director of urban and land use policy at the libertarian Reason Foundation, was the designated mass transit critic of the debate, which he conceded was “probably accurate” but in need of further clarification. Staley is skeptical about the ability of transit to drive economic development or result in major lifestyle changes.

“I definitely think that transit has an important role to play,” Staley said, “but I think we need to be paying a lot more attention to the conditions under which transit works and when it doesn’t.”

Staley cited the Washington D.C. Metro’s Orange Line, saying transit has succeeded in dense, developed areas like Ballston in Northern Virginia but is less effective when those conditions are missing in places like New Carrollton, on the Maryland side of the District. (Didn’t the changes along the Orange line in Virginia come about largely due to that transit investment?)

Despite his misgivings about mass transit in general, Staley found himself in the unlikely position of defending buses from Lind’s attacks. Lind argued most Americans “don’t like riding buses” and that only trolleys or streetcars would persuade choice-riders to give up their cars, to which Staley responded: “If we discount buses, we’re really doing a disservice to transit generally.”

The final panelist, American Public Transportation Association (APTA) president Bill Millar, also defended buses, saying the industry is rapidly adopting new technologies like bus rapid transit and dedicated lanes, which will appeal to drivers.

Panelists answered a number of interesting questions from listeners on topics such as public-private partnerships, rural transit needs and winning over anti-tax conservatives. Overall, despite differences over the role of buses and transit’s ability to influence broader change, panelists agreed on the general importance of public transportation and the need to make practical decisions not rooted in partisanship.

Smith put it well: “As mayor, I never found a pothole or a railroad crossing that identified as a Democrat or a Republican.”

If you missed the webinar or want to listen again, you can do that with any of the links below, or on the webinars page:

• Audio/video of session with presenter slides (click to launch in a new window)
• Full audio file (.mp3)
• Full downloadable video file (.mp4)
• Read more about the Moving Minds book.
• Buy the book from Reconnecting America

This is the final post in a three-part series on Moving Minds: Conservatives and Public Transportation, the subject of an online debate later today (at 3 p.m. Eastern, register now!) Panelists include co-author Lind, mass transit critic Sam Staley, director of urban and land use policy at the Reason Foundation; John Robert Smith, president and CEO of Reconnecting America and former mayor of Meridian, Mississippi; and Bill Millar, president of the American Public Transportation Association (APTA).

The authors identify four elements to their conservative vision for good public transport: coverage, frequency, ease of connection and a preference for rail over buses.

In a previous post, we noted the community-building element of public transportation and how that exemplified a conservative value few would fault. There is also the element of preserving — or, in some cases, reviving — what has worked in the past. Many of America’s greatest cities not only have a tradition of robust transportation infrastructure, but they also contain a historic built environment with untapped potential.

“As conservatives, we want to revive America’s older, industrial cities,” the authors note. “Older cities have lots of infrastructure that can be built on. Conservatives prefer building on what exists to creating vast systems from nothing (at vast cost).”

While lining up with many traditional conservative principles, the notions of preserving resources, building on existing traditions and making good use of what we have are goals most can support.

As conservatives, Weyrich and Lind do not speak the language of visionary social programs and even say they “desire no new technology.” Yet they reach the same conclusion as others in increasing public transportation investment as a means to achieve both economic and social ends.

We hope you’ll join us at 3 p.m. today.

UPDATED: This session has been rescheduled for 12/14. If you already signed up with the link below, you won’t need to do a thing, and should get an email from us.

“As conservatives, our first principle is the reality principle,” wrote William Lind and the late Paul Weyrich in Moving Minds: Conservatives and Public Transportation. “Public policy must be based on reality, not on the fairy-tale wishes so beloved by liberals.”

Left-leaning transit advocates need not be insulted.

The authors are simply trying to talk about public transportation in ways that appeal to right-of-center allies. If your interest is piqued, you’ll definitely want to join us for an online debate next Monday, December 7, December 14th in which a handful of experts, including co-author Lind, will discuss — and debate — the ideas contained in the book. Register for the debate here.

Reality-based planning can find appeal across political persuasions because everybody relies on America’s transportation system in one form or another. Even people who don’t use public transportation on a regular basis receive numerous benefits from its expansion, the authors point out. The reason? More rail passengers means less traffic congestion and faster commute times, a win-win.

In Salt Lake County, Utah, for instance, supporters of a referendum on light rail developed a campaign aimed at non-transit riders with the simple message: “even if you don’t ride it, you use it.” One ad focused on an automobile wheel moving along faster because of less crowded roads, while another emphasized the advantages of less traffic congestion, the authors noted.

They offer three concrete reasons in the book for why transit is good for non-riders. The first is the reduction in road gridlock. The second is “the big football game” or the car being in the shop or some other circumstance that creates the need for an alternative. The third reason is that lower congestion and better transit access actually raises property values and improves quality of life.

The authors make several peripheral points as well, such as the influence of heavy subsidies and market distortions on the prevalence of auto-oriented, low-density growth — a concept getting some notoriety in the last week.

“Every urban and suburban area should offer two alternate building codes, one the current ‘sprawl’ code and the other a code that allows traditional neighborhood design, where living, working and shopping are all close by each other,” the authors argue. “Which code will prevail? Let the market decide!”

Weyrich and Lind also reject the oft-prevailing wisdom that the “obvious” solution to traffic congestion is building more roads or lanes. When more lanes are made available, people who would not have driven otherwise make additional trips, inducing demand and resulting in yet more gridlock — the exact problem that the lanes were supposed to solve.

There is no unanimity about public transport among conservatives. One right-leaning mass transit critic is Sam Staley, director of urban and land use policy at the Reason Foundation. He will appear alongside Lind in Monday’s debate, along with John Robert Smith, president and CEO of Reconnecting America and former mayor of Meridian, Mississippi; and Bill Millar, president of the American Public Transportation Association (APTA).

We hope you’ll join us too. Register today.

UPDATED: This session has been rescheduled for 12/14. If you already signed up with the link below, you won’t need to do a thing, and should get an email from us about the change.

Everyone has to get from point A to point B at some point each day. Though most people don’t rate it as one of their most important issues, transportation is something that affects everyone, whether we realize it or not.

If you are not convinced that the need for transportation reform is an issue that transcends labels and partisanship, you’ll definitely want to join us for what should be an interesting online debate/discussion on Monday, December 7 December 14. A handful of experts from differing perspectives are going to discuss the viewpoints shared in a recent book by William Lind and the late Paul Weyrich called “Moving Minds: Conservatives and Public Transportation.”

William Lind, one of the book’s co-authors, will be expanding on the arguments made in his book; that public transportation is something conservatives should embrace, because it can protect national security, promote economic development, support tight-knit communities and reduce congestion; and how many libertarians and conservatives often ignore the fact that our interstate highway system has been a massively subsidized project, made possible only through heavy government intervention.

Sam Staley, a critic of mass transit who serves as director of urban and land use policy at the libertarian Reason Foundation, will provide an alternative perspective to Lind. We’ll also have John Robert Smith, president and CEO of Reconnecting America and former mayor of Meridian, Mississippi; and Bill Millar, president of the American Public Transportation Association (APTA).

Join us online for the debate on Monday, December 7 December 14 at 3:00 p.m. (Eastern)

The tone of the book by Lind and Weyrich, published jointly by the Free Congress Foundation and Reconnecting America, is perhaps best captured by former Wisconsin Governor Tommy Thompson, a Republican, who writes in the forward: “why do academic conservatives seem to believe that all transit is bad, when as a real-world conservative, I know it isn’t?”

Weyrich and Lind do a thorough job of knocking down myths peddled by some right-wing groups, like the “decline” of bus and light-rail. Many of these numbers are attributable to policy choices that gave preference or hefty subsidies to the automobile. Building codes and tax policy, for instance, have effectively subsidized auto-oriented growth for decades.

The authors are also unafraid to take a jab or two at some of the libertarian think tanks that regularly oppose funding for public transportation. Many of these critics decry support for light rail and bus systems as “subsidies,” but when offering their own proposals, often ignore the evidence that building more interstates or highways requires massive government support as well.

While critics like to label light rail projects as social engineering, it is hard not to look at our current transportation system without coming to the same conclusion, Weyrich and Lind argue.

“In no other society in history have places to live, places to work and places to shop been separated from one another, separated so widely that you need a car to get from one to another.”

There’s a old argument that transit must be a waste of money, because it carries only a small percentage of all trips. As Lind points out in the Streetfilms video below, the critics are disingenuously comparing apples to oranges. 1/2 of all Americans have no access to transit. And of the half that do, 1/2 of those say that the service is inadequate or unsatisfactory. If you break it down to a corridor where transit is available as a viable option to automobile travel (“transit competitive trips, as Lind calls it”), public transportation may be carrying a number closer to 40% of the total trips.

Weyrich and Lind make a thorough economic case for public transportation, offering superb guidance for making a compelling case to a conservative for supporting public transportation. But they also introduce a cultural element that is equally compelling. To them, reviving downtown streetcars or beefing up bus service does more than bring people to their destination and fuel development. It adds “flavor” and lifeblood to urban centers, spawning community. This may be a conservative sentiment, but it’s one that appeals to a broad audience.

Streetfilms had a chance to interview William Lind at the recent Rail~Volution conference in Boston about his book and produced this terrific short video that is a must-watch.

Stephen Lee Davis contributed to this post.

Join us as we discuss the connections between transportation and economic opportunity tomorrow, Friday, April 29 from 1-3 p.m. EDT.  Speakers will explore how the transportation sector drives the economy and creates employment opportunities for American workers. Topics will include the transportation sector’s ability to create good jobs and sustain global growth, and the use of transportation as a driver of neighborhood revitalization.

A panel of experts on economic opportunity will lead our discussion, including Carmen Rhodes, Executive Director of FRESC, Mac Lynch, Program Associate at Apollo Alliance, Peter Skinner, Director of Transportation & Land Use at Silicon Valley Leadership Group.  The session will be moderated by Dena Belzer, President of Strategic Economics.

Registration is free and open to the public — visit www.t4america.org/webinars to register today.

Transportation for America hosted the fourth webinar in the ongoing series last Thursday, April 30. More than 270 people signed up to hear from health, safety and active transportation experts on the effects of our transportation policy on public health and safety.

Following up on the webinar, we’ve released the 5th in a series of policy papers, focusing on public health and safety.

• Policy Brief: Transportation, Public Health and Safety (pdf)
• Audio and video recording of the entire webinar
• Podcast audio file (.mp3)
  
• Podcast video file (.mp4)
• Questions asked and answers (DRAFT)
• Sign up for more sessions on the webinars page

Our current transportation system puts our health and safety in jeopardy by contributing to sedentary behaviors, hazardous pollution levels, difficult access to health care, and preventable injuries and deaths.

As our panelists demonstrated, we need federal leadership to help make the critical link between health, safety, and transportation policies and create communities that promote active living, reduce pollution levels, increase accessibility, and ensure safety for all transportation users.  Our panelists also addressed the transportation needs among older Americans, minorities, low-income residents, and people who live in both rural and metropolitan areas — all of whom deserve safe transportation that improves health outcomes.

Dr. Robert Cervero, Professor of City and Regional Planning at Cal Berkeley, provided an overview of research studies that show the health benefits of active transportation and the built environment that facilitates active living, and listed congruous evidence-based policy recommendations.

Dr. Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association, expounded on the connections between transportation, health, and safety and described how Transportation for America’s policy recommendations would improve health, safety, and equity outcomes.  Jackie Gillan, vice president of Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, reviewed how laws, policies, and safety standards can improve safety and reduce mortality rates for transportation users.

Jana Lynott of AARP’s Public Policy Institute elaborated on the diverse transportation projects that can safely move a growing number of older Americans, while helping increase their physical activity levels and provide access to shopping, services, and community centers. And Barbara McCann of the National Complete Streets Coalition described the health, safety, accessibility, and economic benefits of “complete streets” for all transportation users, and reviewed adopted policies and pending or passed legislation across the country.

Webinar resources:

• Policy Brief: Transportation, Public Health and Safety (pdf)
• Audio and video recording of the entire webinar
• Podcast audio file (.mp3)
  
• Podcast video file (.mp4)
• Questions asked and answers
• Sign up for more sessions on the webinars page

Register now!

Please join Transportation for America’s next interactive webinar on May 14 at 2 p.m. EDT to learn how federal leadership can reform transportation systems to benefit those in small cities, towns, and rural regions, and transform these smaller communities into centers of economic vitality, improved health, and livable places.

A companion policy brief on transportation in small cities, towns, and rural regions will also be released on this date,  available online following the webinar with our other policy briefs.

Our discussion will be led by a panel of experts on rural transportation and related issues:

• Matthew Chase, Executive Director of the National Association of Development Organizations,
• Dale Marsico, Executive Director of the Community Transportation Association of America,
• Dee Davis, President of the Center for Rural Strategies and Chair of the National Rural Assembly, and
• Janice Brown, Executive Director of the Yellowstone Business Partnership.

Lisa Ballard, President of Current Transportation Solutions, will serve as the moderator, and will provide an overview of how T4 America’s transportation policy recommendations will boost local economies and achieve better quality of life outcomes in non-metropolitan areas.

Registration is free and open to the public. Register today and be sure to sign up for our other webinars being held over the coming months at t4america.org/webinars

Our third webinar took place last week, and almost 300 people attended the session to hear from development experts on the connections between transportation policy, real estate development, and affordable housing.

• Policy Brief: Transportation and Housing (pdf)
• Policy Brief: Transportation and Development (pdf)
• Audio and video recording of the entire webinar
• Podcast audio file (.mp3)
  
• Podcast video file (.mp4)
• Sign up for more sessions on the webinars page

With economic crisis putting jobs in jeopardy, homes in foreclosure and entire communities in peril, Americans are facing extraordinary challenges in finding affordable and accessible housing options. Now more than ever, we need federal leadership to help make the critical link between our housing and transportation policies and creating revitalized communities where people can find good places to live and convenient ways to get around.

Shelley Poticha, President and CEO of Reconnecting America and the Center for Transit Oriented Development moderated the discussion and provided an overview of the Transportation for America Campaign.

Christopher Leinberger, Visiting Fellow at the Brookings Institution and Partner of Arcadia Land Company; discussed the benefits of walkable urbanism and the linkages between land value and transportation systems. Ann Norton, Senior Staff Attorney at the Housing Preservation Project, provided a snapshot of Blueprint planning from the Minneapolis / St. Paul Metropolitan Area that links up transportation and land-use planning. Finally, John McIlwain, Senior Resident Fellow at the Urban Land Institute discussed policy options for locating housing around transportation nodes and creating compact, mixed use, mixed income neighborhoods.

There are still more webinars on tap. The next session is April 30 on Transportation, Public Health and Safety.

Sign up on the webinars page.

With the economic crisis putting jobs in jeopardy, homes in foreclosure and entire communities in peril, Americans are facing extraordinary challenges in finding affordable and accessible housing options. Now more than ever, we need federal leadership to help make the critical link between our housing and transportation policies and create revitalized communities where people can find affordable places to live and convenient ways to get around.

In this webinar, real estate development professionals and affordable housing advocates will explore the linkages between transportation and housing development, the shift in housing and real estate preferences and value, and the creation of affordable mixed-use development near jobs and transit.

Panelists will include:

Shelley Poticha, President and CEO of Reconnecting America and the Center for Transit Oriented Development; John McIlwain, Senior Resident Fellow at the Urban Land Institute and J. Ronald Terwilliger Chair for Housing at the Urban Land Institute; Christopher Leinberger, Visiting Fellow at the Brookings Institution; Partner of Arcadia Land Company; and Director of the Graduate Real East Development Program at the University of Michigan; and Ann Norton, Senior Staff Attorney at the Housing Preservation Project.

Registration is free, so sign up today for this great session at t4america.org/webinars.

Nearly 150 transportation practitioners, environmental advocates, and green energy supporters signed up for our second webinar yesterday, focusing on Transportation and the Environment.

Transportation is the second largest and fastest growing source of greenhouse gas emissions. In addition to producing many other benefits, public transportation, rail, and bike and pedestrian infrastructure already help reduce greenhouse gas pollution by millions of CO2 tons each day.

Transportation for America held this online discussion to explore how building the second half of our transportation system and reforming our local, state and federal transportation policies can help conserve oil and contribute to meeting the nation’s energy goals.

Deron Lovaas, Federal Transportation Policy Director for the Natural Resources Defense Council, moderated the discussion and provided an overview of the greenhouse gas reductions possible from the transportation sector and the potential benefits of a U.S. cap-and-trade system.

John Holtzclaw, of the Sierra Club’s 21st Century Transportation Committee, discussed the costs of sprawl versus the benefis of compact, walkable develoment patterns. Joshua Saks, with the Chesapeake Bay Foundation presented an overview of the impacts of transportation on water quality. Finally, Michael Replogle, Transportation Director for the Living Cities Program at the Environmental Defense Fund, discussed the impacts of the transportation system on climate change and opportunities to ensure a low-carbon transportation system is possible in the future.

For those of you who attended the session, check out the Transportation for America Policy Brief on the issue and view a transcript of the presenters’ responses to your questions. This policy brief (available for download now), Transportation and Climate: A Critical Linkage, covers three basic ideas:

1. The transportation system no longer supports the American Dream – a dream of livable communities free from pollution with less time spent in traffic, less oil use, and less global warming.
2. Poorly planned transportation spending out of step with local needs has restructured America’s landscape and put enormous pressure on our natural resources
3. While federal legislation has done much to mitigate environmental degradation, the benefits of these efforts — especially in air quality and water quality — are gradually being overtaken by growth in motor vehicle traffic and urban sprawl.

Download it now and feel free to pass it along to friends and colleagues. And be sure to join Transportation for America to help us tell Congress that smarter transportation investments should be part of any climate solution.

Webinar resources:

• Audio and video recording of the entire webinar (click to launch in a new window)
• A summary of the questions asked and responses (pdf)
• T4 Policy Brief on Transportation, Climate and Energy (pdf)
• Register for more upcoming webinars