America’s public transit systems are in the midst of a major crisis. Even before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, public transit was already facing budget cuts, underfunding and declining ridership, all of which threatened to upend these crucial systems. 

For many Americans, the vast majority of whom rely on their cars for transportation, the public transit crisis is an abstract issue. New options for getting around, ranging from ride-share apps to rental scooters, have made transit systems feel even less relevant.

But these private options remain out of reach to many people, and a full 11% of Americans rely on public transportation on either a daily, almost daily or weekly basis. Many of these riders are low-income people of color, and they live in the same neighborhoods that are grappling with police violence, poverty wages and a shortage of housing affordability. Now, advocates from these communities are focusing greater attention on the public transit crisis and its intersection with racial and economic justice. While the push for transit justice isn’t new, it may finally be poised to break out as a social movement in its own right. 

What is transit justice?

Transit justice is about much more than how to get people from point A to point B. 

In an ideal world, most people would be able simply to walk most places; in reality, people live further and further away from the places they need to go on a regular basis, such as work, school and grocery stores. 

“Our neighborhoods, our communities, because of zoning laws, they’re not integrated. They’re not well-integrated in the sense that where we live, where we work, where we get our food, our healthcare, all these things are very disparate, they’re separated across our regions,” said Alfonso Directo Jr., advocacy manager for the Alliance for Community Transit-Los Angeles (ACT-LA). “So it necessitates travel with some sort of wheeled vehicle, whether it’s a car, a bike, a bus.”

Urban Habitat, a nonprofit organization based in the Bay Area, further explained that for the people who are most dependent on it, “a strong public transportation means access to education, jobs and healthcare. It connects people to their community and to the region.”

“That’s why transportation justice has been at the heart of the civil rights movement in America—from challenging the notion of ‘separate but equal’ to the Montgomery bus boycotts and the Freedom Riders,” Urban Habitat added.

In addition to ensuring that people are able to access important aspects of their lives, transit justice advocates also seek to make certain that transit works not only for a select few, but also for the communities that rely on it the most. 

For some, driving or owning a car isn’t a possibility. In many parts of the nation, undocumented immigrants cannot obtain driver’s licenses. As of 2021, only 16 states and Washington, D.C., allow undocumented immigrants to obtain licenses. Some advocacy groups in states like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania have made this a priority.

For disabled individuals who cannot walk or ride a bike, public transit is even more essential. 

According to Rooted in Rights, a Washington State-based nonprofit organization dedicated to telling authentic stories around disability, mental health and chronic illness, access to transportation is one of the biggest challenges facing disabled individuals in Washington.

“Our communities have been designed around the automobile as transportation, and for those of us who cannot drive or cannot afford to drive, this creates major barriers for us to access school, jobs, doctor’s appointments, grocery stores, and everything else we need to get to in order to participate fully in our communities,” writes Rooted in Rights.

Transit justice advocates seek to address the “deep systemic disparities” that exist in the nation’s transportation systems, a problem compounded by the fact those who use public transportation the most are routinely excluded from the table. Instead, transportation policy tends to prioritize the construction of roads and highways.

This isn’t a new phenomenon; it’s an integral part of modern American history. According to TransitCenter, “America’s car-based transportation system erects barriers to mobility that reinforce long-term social inequities.” 

Historically, the nation’s reliance on a car-based transportation system has benefitted higher-income and white individuals while harming lower-income and Black and brown people. In addition to mid-century highway and freeway construction, which tore entire communities apart, modern-day transit development has often led to gentrification and displacement. 

Transit justice, therefore, “looks at where disparities exist in mobility,” explains Directo. “The concept of transit justice, from my perspective, is to relieve the burden on our communities of color, who have borne a lot of the brunt… of injustice in mobility and transportation.”

Transit justice’s intersection with racial justice

The majority of those who rely on public transit are low-income residents and communities of color. Pew Research Center found that nationwide, 23% of transit riders are Black, 15% are Latino and 7% are white. Approximately 15% of all transit riders make less than $30,000 annually. 

In cities like New York and Washington, D.C., the racial gap isn’t as prominent. However, In Los Angeles, which, according to Pew, has the second-highest public transit use in the U.S., the racial and wealth gap is significant. 

The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s (Metro) 2019 survey of its riders found that 66% of bus riders are Latino, 15% are Black, 8% are white and 7% are Asian. About 57% of riders reported that they were below the poverty line. The median household annual income for bus riders was $17,975.

In general, more Latinos and low-income individuals ride the bus than take the rail. Although the bus is the second-most used form of transportation in Los Angeles—second only to cars—service has been steadily deprioritized over the years. 

It’s not for lack of funding. In recent years, voters in numerous cities have approved measures to help fund transit systems. In Austin, for example, voters approved the first phase of a major transit investment totaling $7.1 billion, with the final goal of the project being $10 billion. In Los Angeles, Measure M passed in 2016, which is set to generate an impressive $120 billion over the next several decades. 

Los Angeles, however, serves as an example that money isn’t everything. More than four years after Measure M passed, the city has cut spending on its bus systems rather than investing in them. Instead, the city has spent much of its transportation budget on rail projects. The Crenshaw/LAX rail project, for example, began construction in 2014, and its completion has been delayed. Initially budgeted at about $1.2 billion, its cost has increased to more than $2 billion.

“There’s a priority toward building shiny objects versus investing in the workforce of the system, which is our bus system, which carries an overwhelming majority of metro riders. Seventy percent of metro riders come on the buses, not on rail,” said Directo. 

Directo added that focusing on a bus-rail dichotomy isn’t helpful, as rail serves its purpose, but it’s the level of spending and investing in it that’s a problem. If more people ride the bus, then it stands to reason that investing in the bus system should be the priority. 

Transit safety and policing

Safety on public transit is a major issue for riders and a key component of transit justice. Riders, particularly female riders, have cited fear for their safety as the No. 1 impediment to taking public transportation.

According to an in-depth report published by L.A. Metro in 2019, one-third of female rail riders and one-fourth of female bus riders surveyed reported that they had been sexually harassed on public transit at least once during a six-month period. Men, on the other hand, expressed concern over violent physical attacks while riding public transit. 

Numerous cities have sought to address this issue by implementing policing on public transit, either through dedicated transit police forces or by contracting with city police departments. 

In 2017, L.A. Metro signed a five-year, $645.7 million contract with three separate law enforcement agencies—the L.A. County Sheriff’s Department, the LAPD, and the Long Beach Police Department. Combined with Metro’s police force and contracts with private security, that’s a total of $797 million spent on law enforcement.

In 2019, New York’s MTA board approved a plan to hire 500 police officers for its transit system, though the plan was frozen following the onset of the pandemic. Recently, MTA has called for hiring an additional 1,000 officers after a deadly attack on a subway line.

In theory, increased police presence on public transit should keep riders safe, protecting them from harassment or physical attacks. In reality, however, this punitive approach has had negative consequences for riders, particularly the Black and brown riders who rely on public transit the most. 

In light of the nationwide protests against police brutality and systemic racism, many cities are taking a closer look at policing on their public transit systems. Portland’s TriMet system announced last year that it would reallocate $1.8 million in funding for transit police. 

“Hearing the community’s concerns, TriMet shifts security funding to community-based public safety services to keep riders and employees safe,” TriMet wrote.

Last year, a coalition of organizations and advocates, including ACT-LA, sent Metro a letter urging it to eliminate law enforcement on public transit and transition to community-based approaches.

“Spending nearly a billion dollars on policing has come at the expense of transit infrastructure and service improvements, but more importantly, youth, Black and Latinx riders who make up Metro’s core riders have reported feeling less safe and secure due to increased police,” the letter states. “Greater police presence on Metro has resulted in racial profiling, harassment and ticketing of Black riders, criminalization of poverty, and often makes transit riders of color feel uneasy.”

“It’s sort of that police-industrial complex, you know, where it’s really just the lack of, I think, vision among decision-makers to really think about safety for who, safety for transit riders, and what does that look like,” said Directo.

For transit justice advocates, divesting from policing and investing that money into other resources—such as alternative safety programs, better lighting and more frequent bus service—is a better, safer and more equitable approach to transit safety. 

Moving forward

The pandemic has had a major impact on the nation’s public transportation systems. Between decreased ridership and budget cuts, the situation is looking dire. 

An independent study found that without relief, the nation’s transit agencies would face a $39.3 billion shortfall through 2023. Transit groups, including the American Public Transportation Association, Transportation for America (T4America) and the Alliance for a Just Society (AJS) have asked Congress for almost $40 billion in emergency funds.

“Public transit has been devastated by the pandemic, with ridership losses and declining local revenue sources putting this essential service at risk. Without federal emergency relief, many transit agencies and paratransit service providers will be forced to dramatically reduce or eliminate critical service as soon as this spring,” T4America and AJS stated in a press release.

T4America adds that “without continued emergency support, transit will not be able to connect riders—particularly low-income riders and people of color—with the places they need.”

As part of the $1.9 trillion COVID-relief bill, which is expected to pass in the House on Friday, approximately $30 billion would be allocated for transportation.

According to TransitCenter, though, this relief falls short. “Without further assistance, some agencies will have to confront service cuts this spring, before cities begin to recover from the pandemic,” the center said. “Other agencies will have to contemplate cuts in the fall, undercutting a fragile economic recovery.”

Pete Buttigieg’s appointment as Secretary of Transportation has brought much-needed attention to the department. Advocacy groups like T4America explain that while the Department of Transportation (USDOT) cannot make major changes to our transportation system without changing federal transportation policy, there’s still a lot Buttigieg can do.

Among its policy recommendations for Buttigieg, T4America suggests “working with President Biden to reinstate the greenhouse gas performance measure for transportation… streamlining and releasing transit construction grants; [and] encouraging safer roadway design standards,” among others. 

Transit justice advocates are not just seeking increased funding for public transit. They’re also working to ensure that the money is spent in ways that benefit all riders, particularly those from communities that continue to be marginalized. Priorities for advocates include investing in city bus services and alternative methods for transit safety, divesting from policing, and transitioning to a fareless system—all of which will encourage greater equity in public transit systems.

While the pandemic has hit public transit hard, it’s also shed some much-needed light on both its importance for many communities and the inequities that run rampant through it. With all this increased attention, transit justice’s time may finally be here.