Rail Transit Initiatives Unpopular at Ballot Box
Many public transit advocates claim that citizens want rail transit as a transportation option and point to public support at the ballot-box as evidence. High-profile rail-transit initiatives approved by popular vote include Charlotte, Denver, Dallas, and Portland.
An analysis of ballot initiatives since 1988, however, reveals that voters reject rail transit more than 75 percent of the time. [1] Moreover, rail transit advocates outspend opponents by more than 12 to one. [2]
Rail Transit at the Ballot Box
At least 37 rail transit-funding initiatives have gone to the ballot box since 1988. Only 21.6 percent of the initiatives passed. On average, these initiatives were opposed by 55.5 percent of the voting public. Four of the sixteen rail transit ballot initiatives on local and statewide ballots since 1988 passed (Charlotte, Denver, Phoenix, and Salt Lake City). [3] While this is a marginal improvement, three quarters of the initiatives failed at the ballot box. While more than two-thirds of the voters in Denver and Phoenix voted for the rail initiatives, more than 60 percent of voters defeated initiatives in San Antonio, Kansas City (MO), Miami (FL), and Los Angeles.
Some of the recent defeats have been high profile. Portland, Oregon, for example, is often heralded as a national model for rail transit in other cities. Nevertheless, voters defeated proposals to fund expansions of the light-rail system in 1995, 1996, and 1998. [4]
Advocates Outspend Rail Opponents
On average, rail proponents spent $785,000 supporting their initiatives, while opponents spent $56,000. [5] Rail advocates spent $1.8 million on an initiative in Miami (FL), only to see 68 percent of voters reject the proposal on election day. Opponents of the Miami rail initiative spent $126,700. During Portland’s most recent attempt to secure funding at the ballot-box for its rail system, proponents spent $1.1 million (while opponents spent $130,000), but 52 percent of Portland area voters rejected the proposal.
Notes
[1] Data compiled by transportation consultant Wendell Cox available at
http://www.publicpurpose.com/ut-railvtab.hm. All data in this policy note are derived from this Web site unless otherwise noted.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Detailed breakdowns of the initiatitives are available at http://www.publicpurpose.com/ut-railv.htm.
[4] The 1995 vote was restricted to Clark County, Washington, which is in the Portland metropolitan area, and the 1996 vote was a statewide ballot for rail transit funding. Clark County defeated the rail initiative by two to one, and 53% of the voters in Oregon defeated the statewide ballot. More than 80 percent of Oregon’s population, however, lives in the Portland area.
[5] Data were available for fourteen initiaitves.
