Over the last few months, Metro, Washington DC’s subway and bus system, has been threatening a substantial fare increase of about thirty cents per ride. At a time when overcrowding and delays are at an all-time high, the initial unveiling of the plan met with considerable outcry from riders and other groups. The official announcement of the increase came last week, and while it will certainly upset many, it is an important first step in revitalizing the capital’s transit system.

As regular Metro riders, the ASCE Government Relations staff has expressed our frustration in this blog with the train system many times over the past few months, and so as vested interests, we believe we’re the right group to weigh in. Sure, we’d love to take that extra $150 every year (two metro rides a day for 50 weeks) and do something a little more fun, but we realize the system is ailing and needs significant improvements: we all just have to pony up a little more for them.

When you think about it, the fare increases are not that steep and are actually much needed. According to the Washington Post, Metro has not raised fares in over four years, so the fare increase will not match inflation over the same time period. To cushion the blow for the disadvantaged, Metro will be distributing SmarTrip Cards (electronic fare cards) to shelters and social service providers since increases will not be as high if a passenger uses the debit-style payment option. The new revenue will help cover Metro’s sometimes questionable operating costs and keep it from laying-off workers. While Metro’s management problems may still persist, those short term costs are negligible compared to the overall needs to the system.

A Washington Post editorial from this weekend explains the problem best, "The more important and tougher problem for Metro, and by extension for the nation's capital, is how it will pay to expand, renew and maintain the system. That, and not the predictable squabbles over annual budgets and fares, is the $3 billion question. In fact, $3 billion is a conservative assessment of the system's capital needs over the coming decade -- for new rail cars, buses and construction projects -- based on an already three-year-old report that used outdated estimates. But even the $3 billion now is far from assured."

As the editorial rightly points out, the real issue is that the current capacity is inadequate to meet the demands Washington’s commuters put on the system. Metro is the only subway system in the country without a dedicated local funding mechanism and to counteract that deficiency, legislators and local officials in all jurisdictions have made good faith efforts to secure funding to improve and expand Metro service. Northern Virginia Representatives Tom Davis and Jim Moran, joined by senators from both Virginia and Maryland sponsored a bill "The National Capital Transportation Amendments Act" (H.R. 401/S.1446) to secure Metro funding, provided local jurisdictions were able to secure matched funding. Maryland, Virginia, and the District of Columbia each have passed measures to dedicate the funding, and all parties involved seem to agree that this is the best solution to Metro’s financing problems. Since Metro is responsible for transporting many government workers, this plan is an acknowledgement that localities should not have to bear the burden alone – the federal government needs to pay its fair share as well.

So really the questions the editorial brings up are already answered – there is a plan, but it has yet to come to a vote in the 110^th Congress. While all the essential players have come together, final action on the bill is held up because some legislators oppose federal involvement. In the same editorial this weekend, the Washington Post called on the offending Senator, Tom Coburn, R-OK, to release his hold on Metro funding, and help get the region moving again. Metro is a vital piece of the transportation infrastructure that carries thousands of federal workers everyday; it should not be a casualty of a political ideology that starves everyone and feeds no one. A fare increase may not be popular, but it is the only option to keep Metro at least limping along until the politicians get their acts together.

Over the past few months, I have had the opportunity to attend a series of lectures and conferences sponsored by Bernard Schwartz, a prominent philanthropist and scholar, which address the importance of infrastructure to the economy. At today’s session, hosted by the New America Foundation, I finally had the chance to listen to Mr. Schwartz speak himself.

The previous installments of this series have centered on the notion that the nation’s ability to compete in the global marketplace is threatened by decaying infrastructure. Today, Mr. Schwartz furthered his argument by asserting that infrastructure can in fact help speed up economic recovery and fuel growth. Numerous prominent economists on the panel exploring this idea offered their take on the current and future state of the world economy. Crises in the housing markets caused by sub-prime mortgage practices have led to a larger credit crisis, which in turn has affected the global credit and currency markets. In short: experts expect a downturn in the global economy for the next two to three years.

Responding to that, Mr. Schwartz hopes to share an optimistic message: that there are things governments can do to spur growth, create jobs, and spark innovation; he believes infrastructure is a prime part of that. Harkening back to the civil works projects of the New Deal, Mr. Schwartz thinks a new commitment to rebuilding infrastructure can bring disparate groups and philosophies together like nothing else. In his remarks he commented that people often ask him, why focus so intently on infrastructure when there are other worthy causes? His response is that there are so many problems in our society today, but few clear cut ways to solve them. Unlike issues such as education or health care, improved infrastructure is an idea that has a great deal of consensus around it. Mr. Schwartz’s philosophy: learn to work together by solving a problem we can fix, then tackle the stuff we argue about.

With a sensible message like that, I can’t help thinking that solving the nation’s infrastructure crisis is within our reach. When you can think outside the box like Bernard Schwartz and relate it on a macro-level, the need becomes even clearer and more pressing. Let’s hope that he keeps spreading the word, and in the meantime, work to let policy makers know America needs better infrastructure!

Let your lawmaker’s know here. 

For more information on today’s program visit the New America Foundation Website   the program will also air on C-SPAN over the next few days.