Perhaps you socialize with more people in the public transportation industry than I do.  For you, discussing matters relating to public transportation may not be the #1 way to end a conversation at a cocktail party. For me, such attempts usually end with, “Oh, look!  Tom and Liz have arrived.  Excuse me!”

You do a great job of educating me on the issues that affect your market space. But let’s face it, these issues are not accessible to the general public.   I am always interested in how to communicate to the world the obscure issues you know about that affect all of us every day.  Like anything that has to do with infrastructure, it’s only provocative when it doesn’t work.  Since you do your jobs so well, it’s usually working, right?

In the case of highways, there are certain regions in which the system is generally considered “broken,” as defined by really bad traffic congestion.   Funny thing is, you in the industry can determine when any given system is likely to “break” and plan for it.  However, when the plan requires money, and funding options include toll roads or – gasp! – privatization, the public’s lack of understanding leads to an emotional uproar.

What is causing this unrest?  Is it a market that has not reached its threshold of pain or is it a lack of information?  Both?  Would communicating these matters in a more accessible, non-politically-motivated way be helpful?  These are questions which always interest me; can you tell me what you think?

What is your opinion of this video, produced by reason.tv and hosted by Drew Carey?  Do you think it is too one-sided to be effective?  Do you think it is successful in presenting its pro-privatization point of view?

I am a little confused by these objections, because I recall that the pricing for the HOT Lanes was to be congestion based/variable, which, if managed appropriately should preclude a “back up at the HOT lanes terminus.”  On the other hand, I can absolutely understand Arlington’s desire to access the operational projections so that they can plan accordingly for the traffic which may flow into their streets as a result of the project. (It’s only mildly ironic that a more highly functioning interstate highway might cause inner city traffic engineers some panic.)

As for the perceived competition the Capital Beltway HOT Lanes will present for mass transit (and carpooling) proponents, isn’t one of the requirements of the project that high occupancy vehicles get to ride the HOT lanes at reduced cost (and in the case of transit vehicles, at no cost)? Is roadway P3 really in competition with Mass Transit?  I’d really like to know how much of this controversy is based on valid concerns and how much of this bruhaha is political fear-mongering.  Anyone on the inside care to chime in?