<body><div><figure><img src="https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?type=thumbnail_580x000&amp;url=0RrQpk_1EBZ3TMR00" alt="https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?url=0RrQpk_1EBZ3TMR00" width="1933" height="1261" ><figcaption>Downtown Spokane is really spectacular, by the way. Photo by William Jacobs vs Pexels.com</figcaption></figure>In many US cities, voters will soon be asked to invest in public transit, if only to sustain services as operating costs rise. So it might be useful to look closely at the just-completed battle in a very “purple” place, i.e. a place with plenty of Democrats but also lots of Republicans. What’s interesting is the specific arguments that the opposition made. You can expect these arguments when this issue comes up in your community. This post provides some responses to them.Spokane, Washington’s transit agency faced the voters on August 4 in a special election in order to renew their 0.2% sales tax. This renewal does not let them expand the total quantity of service very much, but it does ensure that they can maintain the current level of service well into the future. The measure looks like it has passed although the State of Washington takes a long time to confirm, but it was a nail-biter — currently 51.5% in favor. (You can follow the results here.)Again, the Spokane metro area is not an especially progressive place, although there are concentrations of progressives especially in the City of Spokane and the college town of Cheney. It is in a safe Republican congressional seat. Spokane County (85% of whose population is in the transit agency boundary) voted 50.6% for Donald Trump in 2024 and 54.6% for the Republican candidate for governor the same year.Knowing that, it’s striking that the leading opponents of the measure all emphasized how much they support public transit. You’ll see that in<ul><li>This public television debate between a prominent supporter and a prominent opponent.</li><li>The Spokane Journal of Business editorial in opposition.</li><li>The Downtown Spokane Partnership statement.</li><li>The statement of the Greater Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce (representing a suburban area east of Spokane but within the transit district)</li></ul>The Downtown Spokane Partnership statement gives the essence of these business-based arguments:<blockquote>After careful consideration about fiscal priorities and timing, the DSP Board voted to oppose Proposition 1 on the August 2026 ballot. Consistent feedback from DSP members and the broader community indicates that the community’s highest priorities remain focused on addressing urgent public needs that affect safety, economic vitality, and quality of life. The DSP believes those priorities should remain the primary focus of new public revenue commitments at this time.The’s DSP’s opposition to Prop. 1 is not a reflection of the value of public transit, or the quality of the services STA provides. Our position reflects the reality that taxpayers are being asked to fund a growing number of important public needs at a time when available resources are limited. In this environment, difficult choices must be made about which investments should take precedence.</blockquote>None of the leading business arguments claim that transit is unimportant, or that it’s obsolete because we’ll soon have driverless cars. Instead, they affirm how much they support transit, and then give these arguments, which we should expect in city after city:<ul><li>“There are other more urgent priorities.” They emphasize other obvious needs — help with public safety, homelessness, etc. This gives opponents the opportunity to give speeches about those problems as though the transit agency has anything to do with them. This is going to be a common issue. In city after city, transit seems to be everyone’s seventh priority. Business leaders are going to keep saying “this isn’t the right time,” as though they would be more supportive at some other time. Other urgent priorities are not going away, and at some point it’s going to be necessary to deal with this one even though those others are still urgent too.</li><li>They think that the agency doesn’t need the money. In some places you’ll hear opponents imply that transit agencies should just crush their labor unions and pay people less. Some senior workers are certainly highly paid, but overall the current salaries of bus drivers and mechanics are mostly market-driven and reflect the difficulty of hiring those positions. In Spokane, thanks to years of responsible management, the agency has a substantial reserve. Opponents demanded that the agency spend down that reserve, moving the system closer to the real fiscal cliff that many agencies face.</li></ul>What can we learn from this near-disaster? First, the opponents of the measure were smart: they focused their message entirely on the swing voter. Their political base includes people who think transit is evil because it brings crime or communism or immigrants, but their message ignored those people. Instead, they spoke to people who think transit is good but are worried about taxes. Every part of their argument is talking to that person.If you are an urban progressive socializing mostly with other urban progressives, you must remember that even in your city, your social circle is unlikely to make the difference in a transit election. The swing voter is someone who supports transit but worries their taxes are too high. Be ready with responses like the ones I’ve given above. Above all, don’t talk about transit as though it were a progressive thing. Don’t talk about free fares or structural racism or overthrowing capitalism when you’re trying to get people to vote for transit, unless you’re 100% sure that everyone who hears you cares about those things. Emphasize instead the diversity, including political diversity, of the people who find it useful.In most communities (yours may vary) the swing voter is politically moderate and often respectful of local business leadership. In Spokane, this swing voter probably voted for Trump but cares about their community and is open to taxes that provide efficient investments that deliver outcomes they value. In this election, Spokane Transit’s good management and a careful “yes” campaign appears to have won the day over very well-organized, well-funded, and strategically savvy opposition. It will be a victory worth learning from.</div></body>

Show less about: Donald Trump

Block Source: humantransit.org

Misinformation

Clickbait

Old or repetitive news

Explicit content

Location not relevant

In many US cities, voters will soon be asked to invest in public transit, if only to sustain services as operating costs rise. So it might be useful to look closely at the just-completed battle in a very “purple” place, i.e. a place with plenty of Democrats but also lots of Republicans. What’s interesting is the specific arguments that the opposition made. You can expect these arguments when this issue comes up in your community. This post provides some responses to them.

An Instructive Win for Transit in Spokane

NewsBreak

In many US cities, voters will soon be asked to invest in public transit, if only to sustain services as operating costs rise. So it might be useful to loo

An Instructive Win for Transit in Spokane

Comments / 2