WMATA’s proposed service increase may not be perfect. But the proposal has exposed transit opponents lurking in the shadows, and will force elected officials to show their true colors too.

After 7pm on weekdays, when rush hour-level service currently ends, this is what WMATA's train arrivals often look like. The agency's proposed FY 2020 budget would extend rush hour service through 8:30pm. (Photo courtesy of Greater Greater Washington)  

Earlier this week, WMATA General Manager Paul Wiedefeld unveiled his agency’s proposed FY 2020 budget. The budget leaves many of the DC area’s transit shortcomings left unsolved – track work will continue disrupting rail service on weekends, bus routes and late night rail service cut over the last couple of years won’t return, and most buses will continue mixed operation with automobile traffic at inadequate frequencies.

But for the first time in years, tangible transit improvements are within our region’s grasp. The proposed service increases, which include rush hour-level frequencies later into the morning and evening, restoration of Yellow Line service to stations that currently are badly underserved, and complementary access to the bus system for rail monthly pass holders, will greatly increase the utility of our existing transit infrastructure.

These service increases may not generate the excitement of a glistening new rail line. But if the WMATA board approves the proposed budget – including the funding needed to implement the improvements – the transit system will be a step closer to becoming a serious way people get around the DC region, rather than just fodder for happy hour jokes.

The budget proposal’s first accomplishment: exposing DC’s anti-transit Tweeters for what they are

Residents of the DC region aren’t happy with existing, inadequate transit options, and have been forced to find ways to healthily vent their frustration. Anonymous Twitter feeds focused on WMATA’s shortcomings have been among riders’ most popular outlets for this.

For years, the Tweeters managed to play the region like a Ressikan flute, helping shape how people use, perceive, and discuss transportation. Be it at work, bars, or parties, everyone seemed to repeat the same manufactured taglines and buzzwords when talking transit, making productive public discussion incredibly difficult.

But today, the tide has turned, and the flabbergasted Tweeters’ reaction to the proposed service increase may seal their fate.

Unsuck DC Metro, the most infamous of the bunch, reacted to the news with a libertarian tweetstorm, doing his best to echo Randal O’Toole. However, he was unable to maintain the laid-back demeanor of the Cato Institute senior fellow, referring to WMATA as a “mugger” and calling the Washington Post a “shill for Metro” because the paper bothered to publish a story describing the proposal.

The operator of another account, called 20 TRAINS PER HOUR, ALL OF THEM 8 CAR TRAINS (yes, all caps; the handle for this account is @HeadwaysMatter), ripped WMATA for proposing to run more…eight car trains. (WMATA’s trains range from 6 to 8 cars in length and the shorter consists, which also tend to be made up of older railcars, can get uncomfortably crowded). 

Update (11/2/2018): shortly after I posted this article, @HeadwaysMatter changed their Twitter name to "100% 8 car trains running on 3 minute headways." The name is no longer all caps, and may change again in the future.   

While these accounts may still have a following in anti-transit circles, people who want DC’s transportation system to improve are on to them. A long thread started on October 30 in the Columbian Memes for Congressionally Disenfranchised Teens Facebook group, a DC-area spinoff of New Urbanist Memes for Transit-Oriented Teens (NUMTOT), demonstrates how Unsuck has lost the transportation community.

One group member, Simone Rai, stated in the thread that “I don’t know how I ever liked unsuck DC metro [sic], but now I’m proudly blocked by them because they can’t take people liking tweets that are mildly critical of them.”

“I think I stopped following [Unsuck] because they were so negative,” member Laura Labedz wrote. “I’m glad I did.”

No one came to Unsuck’s defense.

        

Next to be tested: elected officials

Exposing the Tweeters for what they are may feel gratifying, but they’re not the decision-makers who will determine whether or not the proposed transit improvements become reality. Rather, this will come down to the members of the WMATA board, who will do exactly as those who appointed them – our elected officials – tell them to do.

WMATA’s battle for dedicated capital funding, which wasn’t won until earlier this year, demonstrated how challenging it can be to convince the leaders of DC, Virginia, and Maryland to back transit and work together. But in the end, the funding passed with bipartisan support in all three jurisdictions.  

The dedicated capital funding was essentially a do-or-die for mobility in the region – without it, it would have been extremely challenging for WMATA to develop a long-term maintenance plan, and our transit infrastructure would have continued to crumble. Legislation associated with the dedicated funding also bolstered oversight of WMATA, helping the agency better manage its finances.

While the dedicated capital funding is helping make the transit system safer, more reliable, and more sustainable, it didn’t come with any promises to expand what riders consider most when choosing their transportation mode for any given trip: service frequency and extent.

Wiedefeld’s proposal puts some of the service increases riders need on the table but, like WMATA’s capital projects, will require financial commitment from the three jurisdictions.

This time, the very survival of usable transit in our region is not at stake. Instead, the decision our leaders make will signal whether they’re serious about making multimodal transportation viable for all, or instead are satisfied with perpetuating today’s mediocrity.

No matter what they decide, they’ll be required to own up to their choice, just like the Tweeters.