I was about to get on the Green Line when I discovered that my Charlie Card was missing from my wallet. My brother had borrowed it without asking. Despite my commitment to supporting public transit, I decided that just this once, I would use it without paying. After all, fare avoidance was commonplace on the T, and my friends rarely paid their fare. Going to the front of the train to pay was inconvenient, and enforcement was nearly nonexistent. This time, however, the conductor decided not to let it slide. After an embarrassing confrontation, I was allowed to ride, but not without a good degree of humiliation.
A year earlier, I had the opposite experience. I was headed home on the Green Line during rush hour, and the train car was packed. I got on at the front so I could tap my card. This time, I did the morally right thing but was once again berated by the conductor. He’d wanted me to board at the back of the car because it was so crowded.
In recent years, fare evasion has become a major issue for the MBTA. I see plenty of people not paying their fare on the Green Line, and it seems like the problem isn’t just that people don’t want to pay (though that will always be true). The problem is that avoiding the fare is often more convenient than paying it. If your Charlie Card lacks funds, you have to refill it at a kiosk, which most above-ground stations lack. You could pay with cash, but you will not receive change for the very specific fare of $2.40. It is easier to get on without paying, saves everyone time and comes with few consequences. Worst case, you will be scolded by the conductor like I was, but even this is rare. Many conductors understandably cannot be bothered to enforce a broken system that rewards people who go against it.
MBTA administrators have begun to address this problem with the “Fare Transformation Project.” It would make paying much easier and would eliminate many of the inconveniences that encourage fare evasion. The project’s cost, however, is quickly approaching $1 billion at a time when the MBTA is already faced with crippling debt with no end in sight. It also fails to address riders who simply refuse to pay, whether that’s because they can’t afford it or because they feel no responsibility to in the absence of real consequences. As the T attempts to patch the holes in its revenue system, it ultimately pushes the cost on to future generations, through more borrowing and ever-increasing fares. As someone deeply invested in the future of this city, I see it as our only option to move towards a fully tax-funded transit system.
In her 2019 op-ed, then-city councilor Michelle Wu elegantly outlined the social and economic benefits of eliminating MBTA fares. But five years on, Ms. Wu is mayor of Boston and little progress has been made. Brian Kane, executive director of the MBTA advisory board, is quoted in a New York Times article explaining the main obstacle to a free MBTA: “There’s no such thing as free, someone has to pay,” Kane said. “Boston has the highest-paid bus drivers in the country. They’re not going to work for free. The fuelers, the mechanics — they’re not going to work for free.” The reality is that any reduction in fares would have to be offset by a tax increase.
It makes sense that the T would be funded by those who ride it, and those who don’t may be hesitant to support a tax increase. After all, why should my taxes pay for the T if I don’t ride it? Some would say that we simply must make sacrifices for the common good. Leaders like Michelle Wu and Ayanna Pressley have spoken in the past about the many economic, social and environmental benefits of increased public transportation access and ridership. But as much as everyone stands to gain from it, voters will always be skeptical of such promises.
When weighing the value of public funding for the T, we have to consider the costs, and I suspect they would be lower than you think. According to the MBTA’s budget for fiscal year 2025, less than 15 percent of revenue comes from fares, and more than 50 percent comes from the dedicated sales tax, with much of the rest coming from other government sources. Even with federal funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill, the budget deficit is still 10 percent, and bridging that gap with fares seems unlikely.
It remains to be seen how effective the fare transformation project will be, and while I don’t doubt the benefits will outweigh the costs, I am skeptical that it will represent any real progress in fare enforcement. Many have become accustomed to skipping the fare and will continue to do so if there are no consequences. Lowering fares increases ridership while raising them leads to more evasion and limited access for low-income communities.
By contrast, an increase in state funding with a corresponding tax increase could immediately and reliably reduce the deficit, saving future generations from the burden of growing public debt. To go one step further, by eliminating fares entirely, the MBTA would save on the costs of fare-related infrastructure, potentially resulting in a decrease in total operating costs.
Eliminating T fares would solve the problem of enforcing fares while also being a cost-effective way to promote social welfare and environmental justice. For me, though, this issue is personal. Growing up in Brookline, the T has been a staple of my childhood. When my non-driving grandmother took me to see a play downtown, we took the T. When my dad and I had an early-morning flight and no one was awake to drive us to the airport, we took the T. When my friends and I went downtown to explore the beautiful city, we took the T. As a 17-year-old, I haven’t learned to drive because I know the T is a safer and greener option. Over time, the T has become increasingly unable to fund itself. If we don’t all chip in, we could lose it forever.
Besides, the satisfaction of reminding New Yorkers that our metro is cheaper than theirs will be worth every penny.
