Orphan Road

Apparently, I'm the first to post this article. Crosscut's David Brewster has a good article on what the dangers of Prop 1 failing this year might be.

There's a good chance the Proposition 1 ballot measure to expand light rail will fail, stalling for years comprehensive transportation planning in metro Puget Sound.

It's a scary thought that this really may be our last chance!

I did have to laugh to myself about the first comment: the poster in opposition to the measure wants to sound like he knows completely what he's talking about, but he references "Sound Move?!"

[via Crosscut]

Sometimes it's hard to be a supporter of "19th-century choo-choo trains." You read enough goofy op-eds and nasty blog comments, and you start to wonder, "am I crazy to think that improving America's rail infrastructure would be a smart way to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and create more livable communities?" After all, in just the last few years, Seattle voted to kill both the Monorail Project and Sound Transit 2.

But slowly, finally, things seem to be looking up. Global warming, $4 gas, and increasing traffic and airport congestion have made our pundits and politicians slowly realize that something needs to change. Even better, they're making the realization that solving these problems will require a holistic approach, involving not only new and improved transit systems, but better neighborhood planning as well.

I don't want to get ahead of myself, but it occured to me today that we may wake up on the morning of November 5 to a world in which:

• Califonia has voted to begin construction on SF-to-LA high-speed rail
• Seattle has voted to begin construction on the next phase of Sound Transit, and
• America has voted to elect an Amtrak advocate to the Vice Presidency

All in all, not too shabby.

Now in internet form. The web site's pretty bare-bones right now. I hope they take a page from Honolulu's playbook.

This time, commisssioned by Sound Transit, and starring your well-informed electorate:

Among the poll participants who had voted no on Proposition 1, three-fourths cited "no cost control" and "cost too much" as major factors. However, only 5 percent of all those polled could accurately guess that the price fell somewhere between $10 billion and $100 billion. Most couldn't say what it would have cost them personally (roughly $200 to $300 a year, for an average household.)

Also interesting is that MVETs and gas taxes are viewed more favorably than sales taxes.

There are some differences here with the Sierra Club's poll from a few weeks ago, but the overall point still applies: people. want. transit. They just don't really want to pay for it.

With Prop. 1 defeated, the debate is underway to define what it all means.

First up is the Sierra Club, with an exit poll that they claim shows that the roads portion was the real drag on the ballot. Erica Barnett cites pollster Tom Riehle's statement that "what was unique about this election was the decisive role of a small group of voters." Riehle and the Sierra Club's main data point is the 20% of "no" voters -- 11% of all voters -- who cited global warming as a reason for voting "no." That's theoretically enough to tip the election.

It's an interesting argument, but there's a few major caveats to keep in mind. First, in a close election, one could plausibly claim that any small group was the "decisive" one. Second, they oversampled Seattle and King County voters. Based on provisional ballot data here and here, I'm guessing an oversample of King County (esp. Seattle) by 8 points and an undersample of Snohomish by about the same. That could explain much of the global warming answer.

Still, I wouldn't call it bogus, necessarily. Groups tend to hire pollsters who will reaffirm their agenda. After all, that's why there are Democratic pollsters and Republican pollsters.

It's biased, sure, but there's still some interesting data.

First, people really didn't seem to want that Sea-Tac-to-Tacoma light rail! One could reasonably conclude that that project alone nearly sunk the whole package (if my math's right, 5% of all voters cited it as their No. 1 reason). Duly noted!

Second, among the "yes" voters, there were many more "transit only" supporters than "road only" ones. 35 vs. 11. That can't be explained away by the Seattle oversample. People. Want. Transit. And not just buses. They want rail, especially North and East, and they're willing to pay for it. That's a good thing.

I hope we see more exit polls in the near future, from different pollsters. A sample of 5,000 voters is pretty revealing, despite the flaws.

Update: Scotto in the comments offers a plausible explanation for the alleged oversample.

Surprise! Pierce County may decide to build those roads anyway:

The defeat of Proposition 1 would allow Pierce County to break away from King and Snohomish counties and present its own road package to voters, although that’s not an option county officials are embracing just yet.

“I think it is something one would think about,” said Pierce County Councilman Shawn Bunney, chairman of the three-county Regional Transportation Investment District. “But I’m not sure our transportation problems lend themselves to a single-county solution.

...

Bunney, a likely candidate for county executive in 2008, said his main concern is making sure Pierce County tax dollars are spent in Pierce County. He also wants work to proceed on the extension of Highway 167 from the Port of Tacoma to Puyallup.

Well, last night was certainly disappointing. I have to hand it to the "no" campaign. They were outspent and outgunned and still they won. I was naive to underestimate their ability to corral everyone into a circular firing squad. It was surprisingly effective.

The "yes" folks, meanwhile, were clearly caught flat-footed, as the TNT's Joe Turner notes:

“The No campaign created enough confusion over the cost, and that’s how you win,” said Pierce County Executive John Ladenburg, chairman of Sound Transit. “They put us on the defensive and we didn’t recover.”

He said it’s unlikely anything will happen on the regional transportation front before 2009.

“We’ve basically delayed the solution two to four years and driven up the cost by about $25 billion,” Ladenburg said.

The next fight will be the fight for public opinion. As the P-I writes, that's still largely up for debate:

Before doing anything, some want to examine the election results more closely, possibly using surveys to figure out what voters didn't like about the plan: Was it the taxes? The road versus transit squabbling? The specific projects proposed?

As state House Transportation Committee Chairwoman Judy Clibborn, D-Mercer Island, put it, "I don't know what a no-vote tells me."

That fight is now underway. Already Danny Westneat, a light rail proponent, is saying we should give up on big projects like light rail for a while, since the voters don't seem to want to foot the bill. The state may be forced to kick in more money for a new 520 floating bridge, everything else is up in the air.

In the meantime, this is now our official regional transportation policy. Sweet!

Well, since I lumped him in earlier with The Stranger's no-on-Prop-1 endorsement, it only seems fair to note that Dan Savage is quite assuredly voting yes on Prop. 1, and he's got the photographic evidence to prove it.

Unfortunately he doesn't wield the kind of semi-corrupt dictatorial control over his paper's editorial voice that Frank Blethen appears to have over the Times. (I'm kidding!)

Most people have probably mailed in their ballots already, but in case you haven't, you should go to the polls and vote today.

Our Prop. 1 coverage can be found here. Vote yes!

Erica Barnett links to a new poll out from UW, including, among other things, more Prop 1 polling!

It looks like it's going to come down to the wire, but it also looks more favorable than the King 5 poll from last week. Prop. 1 leads 49% - 38% among likely voters, with 13% undecided.

I'm a little unclear (as is Barnett) about the poll's methodology, which claims to include "600 statewide voters." Presumably they didn't ask people in Spokane about Prop. 1, so I'm not sure what subset of the 600 were asked, whether that neatly lines up wiht the RTID/ST2 borders, and finally how that affects the margin of error.

In other words, caveat emptor.

Update: Also worthy of note is that Democrats are 2-to-1 in favor, Republicans 2-to-1 against.