Who in their right mind would make public safety reform on mass transit a central priority for municipal public office? When hypersensitivities become woke, the public are typically drawn to headline issues like gun control, criminal justice reform, & immigration. As with any given Election Day, most think about how their preferred candidate will deliver the vote. In America, we seem to misplace the concept of synonymity when it comes to associating politicians with their professed political affiliations. I therefore cannot resist wondering: what came first, the issues or the politicians? Do politicians inspire the issues or the people? Both are inseparable in a representative democracy, but how many public citizens can divorce elected candidates from the issues to gain a big picture understanding of America’s societal needs without lopsided partialities?
As of 2022, findings from the Federal Transportation Administration have identified Twin Cities light rail as the most dangerous in America outpacing light rail networks in major American cities like Houston, Dallas, & Los Angeles. For purposes of clarity, light rail is not in the same category as other major public transit rail networks like the New York City Subway or the Chicago L Train; both are considered heavy rail. This criterion is determined on a basis of ridership per annum, infrastructural capacity, & frequency of service. According to the same body of statistics, from 2018 to 2019, public safety infractions such as assault & larceny rose by 25% on the Twin Cities Light Rail. From 2021 to 2019, a 10% drop was reported, but remains disproportionately high when compared to national light rail ridership averages.
What is wrong with this picture? Minnesota Democrats take more interest in subsidizing endemic problems rather than finding permanent solutions to issues like public safety on mass transit & housing the homeless. Does it serve the common public interest to rebrand late night light rail service as a makeshift sanctuary shelter for the homeless? How does this solve the overarching problem of homelessness in the Twin Cities? Is there a connection with increased breaches to public safety on Twin Cities light rail to homelessness? Our findings may prove rhetorical, but the homeless & light rail riders deserve better. When problems like homelessness are subsidized out of passive acquiescence from insipid yet uninspired business-as-usual politics, things get infinitely worse. It is therefore unsurprising why much of the public discourse struggles to find nonsectarian solutions to transcendent problems. We seem more interested in pushing our political priors first. It is through this polarizing thinking where anything & everything becomes characteristically sectarian.
Democrats, like many of their Republican counterparts, are another kind of plutocrat that equally enjoy first world privileges & protections. In plutocracies, politicians & public officials are generally far removed from the realities they legislate or rule on. After all, on average, how many state representatives regularly commute by bus or light rail via Metro Transit? It is for this reason why policy officials experience routine disconnects when visualizing solutions to reverse diminished public safety on Twin Cities Light Rail. What legislative provisions can both Democrats & Republicans agree to protect against the trappings of plutocracy to preserve representative governance without big money? Politicians generally acknowledge the issues they campaign on are greater than the political offices they seek, but do they truly practice what they preach when it comes to identifying nonsectarian issues to build dialogue with the opposing side? Those issues should include reforming public safety on mass transit or auditing light rail extension projects to ensure deadlines are reasonably met under budget for the taxpayer’s benefit.
In the event of a national emergency, political priors take a backseat to focus on greater existential realities. It is here where Americans rely on systems of checks & balances in government to minimize lopsidedness in political power to maximize public transparency of our elected leaders & public officials. During times of lopsided bipolarity on the issues, every piece of proposed legislation narrowly escapes excessive politicization. The question is: can we expand the meaning of America using common sense bipartisan dialogue turned reform by focusing on everyday issues like public safety on mass transit & accountability turned transparency in public infrastructure projects to transcend politics? Is dedicated bipartisanship on issues related to our shared common interest definitively nonsectarian?
Bridging bipartisanship with nonsectarian reform objectively advances quality of life for all. If people do not feel safe using mass transit, they will become reluctant motorists increasing their carbon footprint on the environment. Likewise, answering homelessness cannot be achieved without expanding access to mental health services & sustainable shelter. Surely, a balance turned compromise can be struck somewhere in the sociological mix.
The New Columnist 