The Times has a big and prominent story on the national increase in transit ridership. Emphasis on national. Numbers are up in Washington, New York, and Boston, but they’re up more in other places without a long history of transit use or particularly comprehensive systems. This, at a time when the broader economy would typically be leading to reduced ridership, and when national vehicle miles traveled are falling. Eventually, it will begin to register with political leaders that this is something which should be expanded, and that expansion can be a political winner.

I have a problem with part of the Times piece, however:

But meeting the greater demand for mass transit is proving difficult. The cost of fuel and power for public transportation is about three times that of four years ago, and the slowing economy means local sales tax receipts are down, so there is less money available for transit services. Higher steel prices are making planned expansions more expensive.

This would be the part of the story where one should note a few key things. First, transit’s greater efficiency means that rising energy costs impact systems less than they hurt individual drivers. Second, construction and steel price increases are hurting road projects, as well. And third, the biggest difficulty in expanding transit projects is that they’re significantly underfunded by a federal government that is actively antipathetic to the very idea of transit. That’s kind of important.

If federal transportation funding were more balanced, meeting the demand for transit would prove much easier.