Federal funding feeds Metro’s mismanaged policies, contracts

Re: “Funding Metro is a good investment for the federal government,” letters, July 27

Congressman Davis’s indirect attack on my recent Heritage Foundation article — H.R. 3496: The Biggest Pork Barrel Earmark in History? — reminds me a lot of how some American tourists try to get by in foreign countries: Unable to speak the language, they attempt to communicate by speaking loudly. So instead of a thoughtful rebuttal directed at the key points in my paper — Metro’s pervasive management inefficiencies and excessive operating costs — Davis provides a series of irrelevant bromides more typical of a congressional floor statement.

I could address each of his contentions, as well as his novel views on federal budgeting, by repeating my previous points, but readers seeking solutions to the Metro mess deserve better, and I’ll endeavor to provide it by elaborating on just one troublesome aspect of the system’s excessive costs: Metro’s employee pay scale. Metro’s wage scale is available at the Web site of the American Transit Union. A quick review reveals that the system’s lowest paid job classification is, not surprisingly, its janitors. But “lowest paid” is a relative concept and valid only in comparison to the system’s mechanics, station managers and other employees.

But compared to many school teachers, college instructors, most other janitors, and the typical family in many states, Metro janitors are very well paid. Earning $19.43 per hour after six years — or $40, 400 per year (plus benefits, equal to about 33 percent of salary) — Metro janitors earn more than public school teachers in 20 states, full time instructors at 23 Virginia colleges, and exceed the average per capita personal income of residents in all but four states. They also earn twice as much as janitors nationwide, according to the BLS.

This is not to pick on the system’s overpaid janitors, but it is illustrative of Metro’s mismanagement and contempt for the taxpayer, as well as the opportunity for cost savings that would obviate the need for government bailouts bigger than the massive one it already receives. In its unaudited operating budget for fiscal 2005, Metro reports that wages, salaries, fringe benefits and other labor costs amounted to 77 percent of all (cash) operating expenses, exceptionally high for any enterprise. The same budget also reports that these labor costs are $250 million higher than total fares paid by passengers. As a result of these and other expenses, Metro will require a government subsidy of about $400 million this year just to provide the current level of mediocre service. Apparently, Mr. Davis and the Metro employees believe this is too small and want it increased by another $300 million per year, half from the federal budget.

A better solution is to do what many of the communities in the service area (Fairfax, Montgomery, Stafford, Prince William and the District (the Circulator)) have done already: use competitive contracting with the private sector to operate the system at lower costs and better service.

Unfortunately, such an option or requirement appears nowhere in Mr. Davis’s flawed legislation, and taxpayers and riders will pay accordingly. Instead, Mr. Davis trots out his proposal for a Metro inspector general, a position limited to ferreting out fraud and abuse, not incompetent management policies or overblown labor contracts.

As such, his plan to save money amounts to little more than a rearrangement of the cushions on a deck chair.

Dr. Ronald Utt
Herbert and Joyce Morgan
Senior Research Fellow
The Heritage Foundation
Washington

Parenting is hard without help from friends

Re: “Parenting: It’s a wail of a time,” August 1

Malcolm Fleschner, grow up. Who needs the assistance of “magic grocery gnomes” to stock the refrigerator with favorite foods or wait for laundry “elves” to pick up underwear off the floor, launder it, and no doubt return it tidily to the appropriate dresser drawer? You are creating a lot more problems for your wife than the care of a colicky baby.

When I was in the middle of a similarly difficult time, a friend once told me that parenting is the hardest job you will ever have. She was right.

You and your wife will need all the help you can get — from relatives, neighbors, religious leaders, school teachers, coaches, your child’s friends, and yes, even concerned folks in the grocery store. With all kinds of help, whether solicited or not, Rafferty may one day be able to write his own column.

Margaret Moore
Reston