Comments on: Fed’s Takeover Move Triggered by Metro Crash

By: Peter

Peter — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 21:30:12 +0000

Although those are good comments, the problem with federal oversight is the various different sizes in Transit Agencies, and Modes. Obvioulsy large cities like DC, Philly, & NY could gain from something like this, but what about the mom and pop systems that dont have the large amount of passengers, and the large amount of funds to bank hiring experts, and people that can run a exstensive SSO program. If a line has 1000 daily ridership, thats not enough to require a in-depth SSO. Thats why Light Rail has never had the reason for Federal oversight. The problem is SSO Authority. Plain and Simple.

By: Tom Bridge

Tom Bridge — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 18:00:12 +0000

@Louise: "given the level of crime in DC?" You mean the violent crime that's significantly down year-over-year? :D

By: Louise Sharon

Louise Sharon — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 16:25:09 +0000

I live in the NYC metro area, an area with fairly good train service that is antiquated occasionally(old trains) but has well lit, bright train stations with safely operated trains, for the most part. I think the DC Metro is not that great a system, compared to NY,Boston, London, Berlin and Chicago(I’m well acquainted with all).

I recently experienced the DC Metro during a one day visit to DC(lvng Arlington Va to go to Union Station) and I must say I found it, frankly, “weird” and slow. Weird, because the stations are dark and backlit! I could barely read the signs! This is strange given the level of crime in DC!

Then there are the trains, which look better than NY subway trains(actually are the same type of train car found in the Berlin Underground) but were somewhat slow. Also the “Charlie Card” system is extremly slow. In NY we swipe to get in, not out and that works quite well, given the volume of people and the speed with which we move(faster than DC).

I think an overhaul might actually make DC Metro more usable.

By: Kate

Kate — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 22:36:00 +0000

Metro needs funding to MAKE the improvements any overseers would require — funding to just make the improvements it already needs and wants to make.

Hooray for better oversight, but until Metro can stop cutting corners and deferring improvements, the lurking danger and apparent malfunctions will continue.

(And I ride Metro anyway — still safer than driving and still a good system.)

By: Karl Johnson

Karl Johnson — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 21:43:44 +0000

Good comment Mike, thanks for posting. Your point is definitely valid about most subways operating solely under state jurisdiction, however if the current regulation is prohibited because of legislation passed in the 60’s, I’m not sure how effectively repealing that law could be seen as unconstitutional. But the fact that something is unconstitutional can only be proven by a court challenge so it’s always theoretical until proven I suppose. Also, this legislation is not trying to regulate aspects of the transportation systems that fall outside of “safety”, so it seems that it would make it much easier for this regulatory power to fall under “general welfare”.

But of course since safety is so far reaching when it comes to transit, gray area abounds.

By: Mike

Mike — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 21:13:44 +0000

“…subways were for some reason seen as unique.”

Why were they unique? Because the vast majority of them didn’t cross state lines. The most stringent federal safety regulations (FAA, FRA) all address transportation systems which cross state lines and therefore trigger Congress’s Constitutional authority under the “interstate commerce” clause.

Regulating subways and light rail (the only multi-state agencies are in Philly, DC and St. Louis- the rest are intrastate) wasn’t Constitutionally practical. Forget the lame excuse about not wanting to inhibit growth. So since the Federal Transit Administration is incorporated under the “general welfare” clause, not “interstate commerce,” the regulatory authority is much more limited.

It’ll be interesting to see how the administration skirts this touchy Constitutional land mine.