The issue of a light rail “Purple Line” for DC’s northern suburbs is likely to be an issue in the coming election. With Maryland’s budget problems (and the record federal deficit), it seems strange that anyone would support such a fiscally irresponsible idea as building more light rail in Maryland, but it appears the Purple Line has support from many policymakers. Of course, if Maryland’s policymakers were fiscally responsible our state would be in much better shape, so I guess it’s no surprise that they would support a boondoggle like the Purple Line.

A light rail system is one of the most expensive ways to move people around. As rail transit scholar Randall O’Toole points out, “The average mile of light-rail line costs two to five times as much as an urban freeway lane-mile. Yet in 2007 the average light-rail line carried less than one-seventh as many people as the average freeway lane-mile in cities with light rail. Do the math: Light rail costs 14 to 35 times as much to move people as highways.”

The high expense of light rail necessitates huge taxpayer subsidies. In a detailed report, O’Toole illustrates how much taxpayers pay in order to subsidize the small number of people who take rail transit. Baltimore’s light rail system is a huge drain on taxpayers, with riders paying only 19% of operating costs and 7% of total costs. The most fiscally efficient light rail system, in Boston, only receives 59% of its operating revenue and 37% of its total revenue from those using the system. Taxpayers kick in the rest.

As O’Toole points out, there is also no evidence that light rail creates economic growth, reduces pollution, or leads to less congestion. In short, the Purple Line will likely be a drain on taxpayers and the general public will get nothing in return for the huge investment it will be forced to make. But politicians and planners love rail transit, even though the public overwhelmingly chooses to get around by car.