Dear Editor,
I wish to correct some misperceptions and faulty reasoning in your editorial published Thursday, Nov. 19, entitled "MBTA needs to get back on track." First of all, the MBTA is not "refusing to address" the safety issues in the system highlighted by the recent report. The MBTA has also not, in your words, committed "a glaring oversight." It is aware that the problems exist, and I doubt that executives are simply ignoring the issue. The MBTA system is much larger than the few pieces which Tufts students use or know to exist. Likewise, the T's finances are far more complicated than fares in, trains out.
Two of the MBTA's largest expenses have been debt service and pension obligations. The latter has already been primarily addressed as much as it can be; in June 2009, Gov. Deval Patrick signed a landmark transportation overhaul bill that reformed how pensions are disbursed and how transportation is organized statewide. The former issue is more complex; as the Big Dig went forward, the MBTA was saddled with certain obligations — by law and not its own choosing — to change and expand its system in order to mitigate the Big Dig's environmental impact. Although the MBTA did not bring this upon itself, it was still saddled with the debt. In an op-ed published in the Boston Globe on Nov. 18, Stephanie Pollack, associate director of the Dukakis Center for Urban and Regional Policy at Northeastern University, revealingly wrote, "In five years, yearly debt service costs will grow to $525 million — for a transit agency that costs roughly $1 billion annually to operate."
In other words, the debt has not, as the Daily says, been "steadily accrued." It was heaped upon the system. In an ideal world, fares and the portion of the state sales tax that are earmarked for the T would fund it fully. This is not the case. Fare increases were ruled out this summer by Gov. Patrick himself. Unbelievably, then, the Daily goes on to say, "If after an earnest attempt the MBTA simply cannot make its operations profitable, the state must step in with a more reasonable tax revenue source." Firstly, there are few modes of transportation in the entire world that are profitable. Secondly, a reasonable tax revenue source is already provided — over 20 percent of state sales tax revenues. Its budget should be dedicated to buses, trains and boats — not the Big Dig.
Referring to the state of public transit in Massachusetts as "reeling" is hyperbolic, considering that Boston boasts one of the highest rates of transit ridership in America, the busiest light rail line in the country (the Green Line), the fourth busiest subway and the third highest commuter rail ridership of any city in the nation. While the Daily is correct that there are worrying safety issues on the MBTA, its anger is misdirected, and this editorial went too far in lambasting what is, for many, a true lifeline and reason to be grateful that we live in Massachusetts.
Respectfully,
John Peter Kaytrosh, LA '12
Judaic Studies
