Washington, DC's Capital Bikeshare: Tax $$$ for Rich, Educated, White Riders

Capital Bikeshare, which rents bikes at more than 165 outdoor stations in the Washington D.C. area, serves highly educated and affluent whites.

There's nothing wrong with that, of course, except that the program has received $16 million in government subsidies, including over $1 million specifically earmarked to "address the unique transportation challenges faced by welfare recipients and low-income persons seeking to obtain and maintain employment."

The program is part of a recent explosion in taxpayer-subsidized bike rental services, which have also hit the streets of Chicago, Philadelphia, Boston , Denver, Boulder, Houston, Minneapolis, Broward, Madison, Omaha, San Antonio, and Des Moines.

Capital Bikeshare's latest user survey finds that 95 percent of its regular patrons have college degrees, 53 percent have a Masters or Ph.D., and 80 percent are white. Fully 0 percent have only a high school diploma and just 7 percent make less than $25,000 a year. More than 90 percent were employed and 14 percent reported they were college students, suggesting that very few welfare recipients are using the service.

Capital Bikeshare is run by Portland-based Alta Planning + Design in partnership with four jurisdictions: Alexandria, VA; Arlington, VA; Montgomery County, MD; and the District of Columbia. So far, the program has received $15.9 million[*] in state, local, and federal subsidies.

Why are affluent, educated, and employed whites riding taxpayer-subsidized bikes?

ReasonTV Correspondent Kennedy investigates.

[*]: Government funding for Capital Bikeshare is collected separately by each jurisdiction, and breaks down as follows: District of Columbia ($10.3 million), Montgomery County ($3.1 million), Arlington ($1.9 million), and Alexandria ($600 thousand).

Produced by Jim Epstein, with production help from Joshua Swain and D.C. Pedicab.

About 2 minutes.

Go to http://Reason.tv for downloadable versions and subscribe to ReasonTV's YouTube Channel to receive automatic updates when new material goes live.

• Category

  News & Politics

[reviewguy12]

The big problem your claim reason TV is that your not showing the facts. It costs 16 million dollars to set up but it isn't free. It has a usage charge and this is what will add up over time to pay it of, and according to the data it will pay off! Last year it got a 97% payback on investment. It will go into a profit! This is an amazing payback, no other government project gets returns like this. Biking reduces green house gases, makes cities livable, and makes the population healthy CARS CANT

[reviewguy12]

Bike share station in parking space or cars?

Cars-

Takes up a disproportionate amount of space on the street

Encourages driving in a city already polluted and congested

creates an anti social and unlivable atmosphere in the space

Bikeshare

Encourages a green and healthy form of transport

More bikes fit in parking spaces than cars

Creates a less cluttered and people friendly atmosphere in the spaces

[reviewguy12]

Why is it that Reasontv goes after a mere 16 million dollar subsidy for a program that will payback and encourages somthing good but they don't go after billions of dollars in subsidies to big oil companies. Im just say it seems very hypocritical. If Reasons TV's main goal is to cut the US budget why on earth would they spend their time on a relatively small program and not go after the big big subsidies to these huge corporations. GE got a 1 billion dollar subsidy, where were you reasontv?!

[Charles Denison]

ReasonTV, perhaps you should look at highway funding under the same scrutiny. What's the subsidy there that goes to letting affluent white people drive into the city in that case? Are drivers paying the true cost of the roads?

[likeminas]

reason tv is a mouth piece for the koch brothers. you can see from the outset that the interviewer wanted to find "something" to criticize it but failed to report on the facts. why the reporter didn't mention anything about the fees or locations of the bike racks? dishonest political tv at its worst

[sojournemper]

finally we get something.



[benwoo]

Government can and does spend tax money on public quality of life projects, like free parks, free swimming pools ect, especially here in NYC. Having a bike share system is a great idea because, especially in huge cities, its getting very expensive to ride subways and busses, you can't drive anywhere, and bike theft is RAMPANT. The ability to promote a healthier happy population that will be more productive by providing a service instead of taking liberty away is a great thing.

[reviewguy12]

The reason for bike share wasn't to help poor people it was to encourage bicycling in the city. I, a supporter and researcher of bike share, have actually never even heard of the argument that one of the benefits of it is that it would help poor people, so the argument reason TV is making is flawed from the start. Bike share was made to help the city move in a more sustainable direction and to give commuters another option for getting around and it has been been hugely successful in doing that.

[apburner1]

Let's look. The welfare folks are on welfare and have nowhere to go and have no desire to find a job. Why would anyone rent anything to those people when the odds of getting it back or back in one piece are slim?