Free Rides, Always?

In recent years, there have been efforts to increase transit ridership through programs such as Car Free Days, which encourage public transportation agencies to provide free rides for individuals willing to get out of their cars. The problem, of course, is that while ridership does increase - often substantially - gains made during those few days usually are erased by the fares charged when the free transportation ends.

Some bus transit providers, such as Chapel Hill Transit in North Carolina (which includes University of North Carolina busses) have decided to make all rides free, all year. The town's bus patronage, as a result, is quite high, though it's important to remember that because Chapel Hill is a university town, it already has a very high number of residents who don't have access to cars, and the presence of the university, which encourages transit usage, only increases ridership.

New Orleans has been operating the nation's largest free bus (and streetcar) system since operation resumed after the devastating effects of Hurricane Katrina, but services will again cost money starting August 6. It's hard to tell whether free rides have encouraged usage, because the city's population is far lower now than it was before the storm, especially among the poor. So, lower ridership now could have been much lower had the federally-subsidized Regional Transit Authority been charging.

The success of free transit days in San Francisco - which have added on average between 15,000 to 30,000 riders per day on Bart trains - have led some to suggest that the entire system, along with Muni bus and streetcar, go free. The problem, of course, is that San Francisco transportation agencies collectively get over $500 million of their funding each year from fares. Losing that money would mean a new source of revenue would have to be found somewhere else.

Mass transit, of course, is a public resource, like libraries or parks, so some would argue that there's no reason not to fully subsidize an already-subsidized service. On the other hand, municipal funding is always a question of priorities; couldn't that $500 million be better used for transit expansion and improvement programs in the city, as long as the municipalities already supporting the services added $500 million to the services' collective budgets? And while it's important to encourage easy mobility for all of a city's inhabitants, should all rides, for leisure and for work, be free for everyone?

Limiting fare increases, such as New York City recently did, is an important way to ensure that transportation costs don't get out of control. For now, a $2 fare for a subway ride really isn't that bad of a deal, even for the city's poorest. We can all agree, in the end, that the most important role of transit is to provide efficient, convenient, and relatively cheap transportation for everyone; making rides free would probably result in decreases in efficiency and convenience and is therefore a poorly thought-out idea.