Only a small percentage of mass transportation is privately run. The vast majority is publicly operated. Public transportation ridership increased by 38% from 1995 through 2008. That growth rate was higher than the increase in U.S. population during that span. It also topped the growth in use of the nation’s highways.
The Long Decline
Although use of mass transportation systems reached a peak in the United States in 1946, deterioration of these systems had begun long before. During the 1930s several systems, notably interurban electric railroads and trolley cars, were either abandoned entirely or replaced by buses. In part, this was done because by that time their equipment and power plants, originally put in place before 1920, had begun to wear out and would have required substantial capital to replace. Capital was not available during the Depression. Several major operating systems also passed into the hands of business interests, some of them associated with car manufacturers and oil companies, that had no interest in maintaining rail service. The buses that came into use were generally noisy, polluting, and in most cases slower than the previous service.
With declining ridership, costs rose, and when prices were raised in response, ridership dropped off further. Another practice was to eliminate outlying branches and services that had little traffic. It was expected that a drastically pruned system of trunk lines would begin to pay for itself. What did happen, however, was that as branch lines and small stations were closed, people had to go farther to get to train service, and rather than do this, they acquired cars. The abandonment of public vehicles in favor of private automobiles has affected both local and national transportation systems, in other countries as well as in the United States.
The clientele of mass transportation systems in the United States underwent a change as those who could afford to do so used automobiles. Increasingly, the transportation systems drew their patronage from the poor, the elderly, the disabled, and, in some cases, minorities. The term "transit-dependent" was coined for these population groups.
Another cause of the decline of mass transportation was that in some cases, various portions of a system were originally separate systems -designed to compete with one another and not easily integrated. Rolling stock was incompatible between them, and inconvenient transfers were required, and so ridership fell even further.
The Plight of U.S. Cities
The effects of these trends are well illustrated by the examples of New York and Los Angeles. From the 1880s to 1935, New York acquired an extensive network, first of trolley cars, then of elevated lines, and finally of subways. Beginning in the 1930s, trolleys began to be replaced by buses, and the transformation was complete by the early 1950s. Originally, three subway systems operated under different managements, and transfers between them required double fares in some cases or long walks. Several trolley and bus companies also existed. In the 1950s some elevated lines were closed, as were some commuter lines, including one that could have given rapid access to Kennedy, New York's principal airport.
In the 1960s extensive plans were made to extend the New York subways. However, the increasingly difficult financial situation of the city and rising costs prevented any significant new service from being completed -as, for instance, on a Second Avenue line on which work continues. On the contrary, cutbacks in service frequency and minor closures were made. Though the system is essential to the well-being of New York, it entered the 1980s struggling to survive and facing the prospect of worsening operating problems, caused in part by the poor quality of its latest purchase of subway rolling stock.
The reequipping of New York City's bus fleet also was plagued by difficulties. Its commuter lines, too, had deficits, equipment problems, and long declines in ridership that were somewhat reversed after 1973. These various systems are all under public authorities, but true integration is handicapped by fund shortages and incompatibilities resulting from their original designs.
Before 1930, Los Angeles had acquired a network of trolleys and interurban (private right-of-way) lines that at its peak totaled more than 1,000 miles (1,600 km). The system was entirely eliminated in stages, having been taken over by a private company that did not favor its continuance. The Los Angeles area is now known for its congested freeways and the resulting smog and toxic air. At one point, public transportation was reduced to a bus service that was entirely inadequate. In the later years of the 20th century and into the 21st, support for mass transit grew in Los Angeles. By 2010, bus service within the city connected with bus systems of nearby cities. The Los Angeles County Metro Rail was operating three light rail lines and two rapid transit subway lines. Plans were under way to expand Metro Rail as well. Although the transit system tended to be complex and slow, one could get just about anywhere in Los Angeles by public transportation.
In several other U.S. cities, commuter services and rapid-transit rail lines were eliminated in the 1940s and 1950s. The BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit) system connects San Francisco with Oakland, Berkeley, and Fremont, Calif. It was built at great expense and opened in 1972 -essentially replacing an earlier one eliminated in 1957.
A New Millennium
Mass transit not only experienced increased ridership early in the 21st century, but also its environmental advantages were receiving new emphasis as well. Both gasoline consumption and carbon emissions can be reduced through mass transit. This is particularly true with the introduction of electric buses in some U.S. and European cities. New and expanding transit systems were receiving public support. At the same time, years of underfunding were threatening the benefits of mass transit. A 2005 survey conducted by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Census Bureau revealed that only 54% of U.S. households had access to bus and rail transit.
The streetcar was among the means of mass transit enjoying a renaissance. Portland, Oreg., opened a 4-mile (6.4-km) streetcar line in 2001. Eight years later, ground was broken for a 3.3-mile (5.3-km) extension to the successful line. Other cities -including Tampa, Fla.; Tacoma, Wash.; Little Rock, Ark.; and Seattle, Wash.- followed Portland's example and built new streetcar systems. Plans for streetcars were on the drawing board in other cities as well. Washington, D.C., was scheduled to open one by 2012. Such streetcar lines tend to be less expensive and more environmentally friendly than other forms of transportation.
In late January 2010 the Barack Obama administration announced the awarding of $8 billion to states across the country to develop the nation’s first program of high-speed, intercity rail passenger service. The program would be financed by funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009. The program would establish the groundwork for 13 new, large-scale, high-speed rail corridors. A total of 31 states that would participate in the system received federal funds. They were located in the northeastern, southeastern, midwestern, and western regions of the United States.
