Black Transit: When Public Transportation Decision-Making Leads to Negative Economic Development
In 2015, the Governor of Maryland cancelled a light rail project planned for Baltimore City. Around that time, governors in five states had also cancelled federally funded, mass transit rail projects. Each cancellation was similarly justified by claims that the transportation projects were unwise an...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Iowa law review 2021-07, Vol.106 (5), p.2369-2396 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 2396 |
---|---|
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 2369 |
container_title | Iowa law review |
container_volume | 106 |
creator | McFarlane, Audrey G |
description | In 2015, the Governor of Maryland cancelled a light rail project planned for Baltimore City. Around that time, governors in five states had also cancelled federally funded, mass transit rail projects. Each cancellation was similarly justified by claims that the transportation projects were unwise and unnecessary. This trend is concerning because public transportation is often crucial to low- and moderate-income people. The cancellations raise the question whether there should be some circumstances when a state should not be able to cancel transportation projects. The federal framework for public transportation funding allows seemingly unfettered discretion to cancel, while not acknowledging the perverse incentives that now exist to refuse funding for projects perceived as beneficial to stigmatized racial and class groups. Most strikingly, principles of development worked in reverse. Instead of pursuing economic development through guaranteed infrastructure investment and the multiplier potential of construction jobs and transit-oriented development likely to take place, the state decided to reject development under a rationale that such investment would be wasteful. This Essay argues that there is room in the federalism logic of the Spending Clause to ex ante consider pervasive and systemic racial hostility to public transportation and a discriminatory exercise of discretion. Federal mass transportation decision-making should be structured in a way that accounts for the pervasive, consistent, and structural hostility to Black mobility and projects perceived to benefit Black people. Because mobility is crucial to self-determination, economic survival and flourishing, the veto of rail projects like Baltimore's Red Line is an opportunity to consider the limitations of ex post racial remedies such as the equity-infused planning framework and Title VI disparate impact litigation. The Essay considers how racial equity and racial realism principles can inform the obligations of federal public transportation funding decision-making. |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2562271544</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A674880061</galeid><sourcerecordid>A674880061</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-g255t-4919b315de46ee159a24d68ca2d0ad2de2f3845144cfd3e01cc55d55dc4a02f53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkNtqwzAMhnOxwbrDOxh2uwzbsdNkd13bHaA7XHTsMnNtJXWb2l3k9Pln6GAdFAlJ_Hy_BDpJBpRyllIp-VlyjriilIqS80Hydd8qvSbzTjm04Y58LsGR937RWr0Xt74LKljvyAS0xTikL2ptXUNmoAyS4MkrNJHYAZlq7_wmOiewg9ZvN-DCZXJaqxbh6rdfJB8P0_n4KZ29PT6PR7O04VKGVJSsXGRMGhA5AJOl4sLkhVbcUGW4AV5nhZBMCF2bDCjTWkoTUwtFeS2zi-R6v3fb-e8eMFQr33cunqy4zDkfMinEH9WoFirrah86pTcWdTXKh6IoKM1ZpNIjVAMOOtV6B7WN8j_-9ggfw0D8xlHDzYFh0aN1gLGgbZYBG9UjHuI_UauKSA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2562271544</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Black Transit: When Public Transportation Decision-Making Leads to Negative Economic Development</title><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><creator>McFarlane, Audrey G</creator><creatorcontrib>McFarlane, Audrey G</creatorcontrib><description>In 2015, the Governor of Maryland cancelled a light rail project planned for Baltimore City. Around that time, governors in five states had also cancelled federally funded, mass transit rail projects. Each cancellation was similarly justified by claims that the transportation projects were unwise and unnecessary. This trend is concerning because public transportation is often crucial to low- and moderate-income people. The cancellations raise the question whether there should be some circumstances when a state should not be able to cancel transportation projects. The federal framework for public transportation funding allows seemingly unfettered discretion to cancel, while not acknowledging the perverse incentives that now exist to refuse funding for projects perceived as beneficial to stigmatized racial and class groups. Most strikingly, principles of development worked in reverse. Instead of pursuing economic development through guaranteed infrastructure investment and the multiplier potential of construction jobs and transit-oriented development likely to take place, the state decided to reject development under a rationale that such investment would be wasteful. This Essay argues that there is room in the federalism logic of the Spending Clause to ex ante consider pervasive and systemic racial hostility to public transportation and a discriminatory exercise of discretion. Federal mass transportation decision-making should be structured in a way that accounts for the pervasive, consistent, and structural hostility to Black mobility and projects perceived to benefit Black people. Because mobility is crucial to self-determination, economic survival and flourishing, the veto of rail projects like Baltimore's Red Line is an opportunity to consider the limitations of ex post racial remedies such as the equity-infused planning framework and Title VI disparate impact litigation. The Essay considers how racial equity and racial realism principles can inform the obligations of federal public transportation funding decision-making.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-0552</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Iowa City: University of Iowa</publisher><subject>Access control ; Black people ; Decision making ; Demographic aspects ; Economic aspects ; Economic development ; Expenditures, Public ; Federal aid to transportation ; Federal funding ; Finance ; Governors ; Gray, Freddie ; Hostility ; Light rail transportation ; Public transportation ; Racism ; Remedies ; Social aspects ; Stigma ; Transportation planning</subject><ispartof>Iowa law review, 2021-07, Vol.106 (5), p.2369-2396</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2021 University of Iowa</rights><rights>Copyright University of Iowa, College of Law Jul 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>McFarlane, Audrey G</creatorcontrib><title>Black Transit: When Public Transportation Decision-Making Leads to Negative Economic Development</title><title>Iowa law review</title><description>In 2015, the Governor of Maryland cancelled a light rail project planned for Baltimore City. Around that time, governors in five states had also cancelled federally funded, mass transit rail projects. Each cancellation was similarly justified by claims that the transportation projects were unwise and unnecessary. This trend is concerning because public transportation is often crucial to low- and moderate-income people. The cancellations raise the question whether there should be some circumstances when a state should not be able to cancel transportation projects. The federal framework for public transportation funding allows seemingly unfettered discretion to cancel, while not acknowledging the perverse incentives that now exist to refuse funding for projects perceived as beneficial to stigmatized racial and class groups. Most strikingly, principles of development worked in reverse. Instead of pursuing economic development through guaranteed infrastructure investment and the multiplier potential of construction jobs and transit-oriented development likely to take place, the state decided to reject development under a rationale that such investment would be wasteful. This Essay argues that there is room in the federalism logic of the Spending Clause to ex ante consider pervasive and systemic racial hostility to public transportation and a discriminatory exercise of discretion. Federal mass transportation decision-making should be structured in a way that accounts for the pervasive, consistent, and structural hostility to Black mobility and projects perceived to benefit Black people. Because mobility is crucial to self-determination, economic survival and flourishing, the veto of rail projects like Baltimore's Red Line is an opportunity to consider the limitations of ex post racial remedies such as the equity-infused planning framework and Title VI disparate impact litigation. The Essay considers how racial equity and racial realism principles can inform the obligations of federal public transportation funding decision-making.</description><subject>Access control</subject><subject>Black people</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Demographic aspects</subject><subject>Economic aspects</subject><subject>Economic development</subject><subject>Expenditures, Public</subject><subject>Federal aid to transportation</subject><subject>Federal funding</subject><subject>Finance</subject><subject>Governors</subject><subject>Gray, Freddie</subject><subject>Hostility</subject><subject>Light rail transportation</subject><subject>Public transportation</subject><subject>Racism</subject><subject>Remedies</subject><subject>Social aspects</subject><subject>Stigma</subject><subject>Transportation planning</subject><issn>0021-0552</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>N95</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNptkNtqwzAMhnOxwbrDOxh2uwzbsdNkd13bHaA7XHTsMnNtJXWb2l3k9Pln6GAdFAlJ_Hy_BDpJBpRyllIp-VlyjriilIqS80Hydd8qvSbzTjm04Y58LsGR937RWr0Xt74LKljvyAS0xTikL2ptXUNmoAyS4MkrNJHYAZlq7_wmOiewg9ZvN-DCZXJaqxbh6rdfJB8P0_n4KZ29PT6PR7O04VKGVJSsXGRMGhA5AJOl4sLkhVbcUGW4AV5nhZBMCF2bDCjTWkoTUwtFeS2zi-R6v3fb-e8eMFQr33cunqy4zDkfMinEH9WoFirrah86pTcWdTXKh6IoKM1ZpNIjVAMOOtV6B7WN8j_-9ggfw0D8xlHDzYFh0aN1gLGgbZYBG9UjHuI_UauKSA</recordid><startdate>20210701</startdate><enddate>20210701</enddate><creator>McFarlane, Audrey G</creator><general>University of Iowa</general><general>University of Iowa, College of Law</general><scope>N95</scope><scope>XI7</scope><scope>ILT</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20210701</creationdate><title>Black Transit: When Public Transportation Decision-Making Leads to Negative Economic Development</title><author>McFarlane, Audrey G</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-g255t-4919b315de46ee159a24d68ca2d0ad2de2f3845144cfd3e01cc55d55dc4a02f53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Access control</topic><topic>Black people</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Demographic aspects</topic><topic>Economic aspects</topic><topic>Economic development</topic><topic>Expenditures, Public</topic><topic>Federal aid to transportation</topic><topic>Federal funding</topic><topic>Finance</topic><topic>Governors</topic><topic>Gray, Freddie</topic><topic>Hostility</topic><topic>Light rail transportation</topic><topic>Public transportation</topic><topic>Racism</topic><topic>Remedies</topic><topic>Social aspects</topic><topic>Stigma</topic><topic>Transportation planning</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>McFarlane, Audrey G</creatorcontrib><collection>Gale Business: Insights</collection><collection>Business Insights: Essentials</collection><collection>Gale OneFile: LegalTrac</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Iowa law review</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>McFarlane, Audrey G</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Black Transit: When Public Transportation Decision-Making Leads to Negative Economic Development</atitle><jtitle>Iowa law review</jtitle><date>2021-07-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>106</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>2369</spage><epage>2396</epage><pages>2369-2396</pages><issn>0021-0552</issn><abstract>In 2015, the Governor of Maryland cancelled a light rail project planned for Baltimore City. Around that time, governors in five states had also cancelled federally funded, mass transit rail projects. Each cancellation was similarly justified by claims that the transportation projects were unwise and unnecessary. This trend is concerning because public transportation is often crucial to low- and moderate-income people. The cancellations raise the question whether there should be some circumstances when a state should not be able to cancel transportation projects. The federal framework for public transportation funding allows seemingly unfettered discretion to cancel, while not acknowledging the perverse incentives that now exist to refuse funding for projects perceived as beneficial to stigmatized racial and class groups. Most strikingly, principles of development worked in reverse. Instead of pursuing economic development through guaranteed infrastructure investment and the multiplier potential of construction jobs and transit-oriented development likely to take place, the state decided to reject development under a rationale that such investment would be wasteful. This Essay argues that there is room in the federalism logic of the Spending Clause to ex ante consider pervasive and systemic racial hostility to public transportation and a discriminatory exercise of discretion. Federal mass transportation decision-making should be structured in a way that accounts for the pervasive, consistent, and structural hostility to Black mobility and projects perceived to benefit Black people. Because mobility is crucial to self-determination, economic survival and flourishing, the veto of rail projects like Baltimore's Red Line is an opportunity to consider the limitations of ex post racial remedies such as the equity-infused planning framework and Title VI disparate impact litigation. The Essay considers how racial equity and racial realism principles can inform the obligations of federal public transportation funding decision-making.</abstract><cop>Iowa City</cop><pub>University of Iowa</pub><tpages>28</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0021-0552 |
ispartof | Iowa law review, 2021-07, Vol.106 (5), p.2369-2396 |
issn | 0021-0552 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2562271544 |
source | Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; HeinOnline Law Journal Library |
subjects | Access control Black people Decision making Demographic aspects Economic aspects Economic development Expenditures, Public Federal aid to transportation Federal funding Finance Governors Gray, Freddie Hostility Light rail transportation Public transportation Racism Remedies Social aspects Stigma Transportation planning |
title | Black Transit: When Public Transportation Decision-Making Leads to Negative Economic Development |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-05T12%3A04%3A11IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Black%20Transit:%20When%20Public%20Transportation%20Decision-Making%20Leads%20to%20Negative%20Economic%20Development&rft.jtitle=Iowa%20law%20review&rft.au=McFarlane,%20Audrey%20G&rft.date=2021-07-01&rft.volume=106&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=2369&rft.epage=2396&rft.pages=2369-2396&rft.issn=0021-0552&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA674880061%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2562271544&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A674880061&rfr_iscdi=true |