Should public transit be free?

“The 360” shows you diverse perspectives on the day’s top stories and debates.

What’s happening

All bus rides in the nation’s capital will soon be free as part of a plan approved by the Washington, D.C., Council earlier this month. When the plan goes into effect next summer, D.C. — with a population of more than 700,000 — will become the largest city in the U.S. to permanently eliminate all fares on public buses.

Until recently, the concept of free public transportation had been widely viewed as unfeasible by policymakers. The few experiments that had been conducted in major urban areas — such as trials in Denver in the 1970s and in Austin, Texas, in the ’80s — were quickly abandoned.

In 2020, some cities began offering no-cost transit in response to the coronavirus pandemic to protect staff from potential infections and ensure that residents hit hard by the shutdowns still had a viable mode of travel. Those short-term trials have mostly ended, but they’ve led lawmakers in a number of cities to consider whether public transit should always be free.

Bus rides in Kansas City, Mo., have been zero-cost since March 2020 and city leaders say they have no plans to reinstate fares. Alexandria, Va., made all buses free late last year. A long list of other cities have tried out the idea at a smaller scale, offering free rides either for a short period of time or on a few select bus routes. A number of high-profile political figures have advocated for free public transit in their constituencies — including Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, Boston Mayor Michelle Wu and new Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass.

Several countries in Europe, including Spain and Germany, have also offered free or nearly free transit rides on a limited basis. Two small European nations — Luxembourg and Malta — have dropped all public transit fees.

Why there’s debate

Advocates say the benefits of making public transit free far outweigh the cost of missing out on revenue from tickets. They argue that eliminating the expense of transit fares would relieve a financial burden that falls disproportionately on low-income residents and would reduce inequality. Drivers typically do not pay to use public roads, and public subsidy for road construction maintenance is much greater than for mass transit, they note. “Fare free transit is a racial equity issue,” Wu told Politico in June. Many supporters also say no-cost rides will convince more people to choose public transit over driving, a step they believe is absolutely critical to avoiding the worst impacts of climate change.

Skeptics say the biggest thing keeping more Americans from using public transit isn’t the expense, but the low quality of service. They argue that the best way to increase public transit use is to fix the unreliability, crowding, run-down infrastructure and massive service gaps that plague the U.S. transit system — an incredibly expensive project that would be even more difficult to complete if cities stopped collecting ticket revenue that could help fund it.

There are reasons to question the potential climate benefits of no-cost transit. Studies from a number of cities in the U.S. and abroad show that ridership does increase when transit is made free. However, those additional riders tend to be people who would have otherwise walked or ridden bikes, meaning the number of drivers isn’t reduced.

Perspectives

SUPPORTERS

Widespread free transit really would reduce emissions

“Universal fareless transit would also have an outsize climate impact. … And that alone makes a very good case for keeping buses free.” — Alissa Walker, Curbed

Public transit should be considered a basic freedom every American deserves to have

“Setting aside figures about costs and statistics about ridership, there’s another way to look at it: Public transport should be considered a human right, alongside access to health and education.” — Nicole Kobie, Wired

Removing cost barriers will convince more people to see public transit as a viable option

“Free is good. It’s a come on, of course. Checking out this new way of travel won’t cost anything, at least for now. Try it, you might like it, and you may see the possibilities of public transit. The hope is to morph what begins as novel into a new normal.” — Editorial, Tampa Bay Times

Society’s most vulnerable would be the biggest beneficiaries

“On the surface, abolishing bus fares is about improving transit access and easing the financial burden of transportation on poor residents. But more than that, the fare-free bus program is about government taking a small step toward providing people with the dignity they deserve. No one should be denied a ride because they can’t afford it. No one should be made to feel ashamed for having to ask a bus driver to let them on. And no one should have to choose between paying for a bus fare or getting a couple of extra items at the grocery store.” — Abdallah Fayyad, Boston Globe

No-cost transit must be a piece of a much broader campaign to overcome inequality

“Free public transport can help people. But it needs to occur alongside other strategies to help lift people out of poverty. Otherwise, it’s just another thing that benefits those with the most advantages.” — Cate Lawrence, Next Web

SKEPTICS

There’s no evidence that free transit would reduce car emissions

“In a world of volatile gas prices and urban traffic congestion, offering a free bus ride seems like a no-brainer way to shift people out of cars and into the cleaner alternatives — but it probably isn’t.” — Dave Levitan, Grid

Money should be spent making transit more effective, not cheaper

“Fare-free transit sounds great in theory, but American bus networks are far behind global leaders in offering good service. Focusing on zero-dollar rides is like overseeing a library system stocked solely with out-of-date self-help books in crumbling buildings and wondering if a fresh coat of paint will improve morale.” — Jerusalem Demsas, Atlantic

There are better ways to help poor people without gutting public transportation budgets

“It will help some very poor people save some money. But if you want to give them money, you could honestly just give them money, and they could use it for bus fare or whatever else they need. Like a lot of half-baked ideas, [free transit is] sort of caught betwixt and between an idea for improving public services and an idea for redistributing income, and it doesn’t make a ton of sense as either.” — Public policy journalist Matthew Yglesias

Ending Americans’ reliance on cars will take a whole lot more than free bus tickets

“Serious efforts to entice drivers to become transit riders won’t come cheap; local leaders must allocate significant dollars and political capital toward expanding transit service and curtailing the preferential treatment of cars. Fare-free transit may look like a tantalizing shortcut to decarbonize urban transportation. But that image is illusory.” — David Zipper, Bloomberg

Is there a topic you’d like to see covered in “The 360”? Send your suggestions to the360@yahoonews.com.

Photo illustration: Yahoo News; photos: Getty Images