Paved Over: How Corporations Derailed Public Transportation in the U.S.A.

At the dawn of the 20th century, most American cities of over 10,000 residents had their own, privately owned streetcar company. The trolley lines were built by real-estate developers to entice buyers to purchase homes and to increase the value of the homes they were selling. During the late 19th Century, this was the primary mode of interurban transit. With the advent of transcontinental railroad service in 1869, folks could travel across the region, state, or country by taking their neighborhood streetcar downtown and boarding a long-distance train. And so began the golden-age of rail transportation.

GM and the Removal of Rail-Based Transit

In 1922, with Ford’s Model-T having made inroads in the still nascent automobile market, there were still vast numbers of people relying on streetcars as their sole means of transportation. General Motors (GM) President and CEO Alfred P. Sloan saw an enormous money-making opportunity and established a special company unit charged with replacing streetcars with cars, trucks, and buses. By converting streetcar lines into bus routes, knowing the lack of appeal of bus riding, he counted on huge numbers of people buying cars.

Origins of the Highway Lobby

Sloan courted oil companies, tire manufacturers, and anyone having to do with motorized transportation to create the National Highway Users Conference in 1932, an enormous umbrella association with more Washington lobbying power than any other interest group. This group was the beginning of what we know today as the highway lobby, the powerful interest group responsible for keeping the country in automobile dependency.Pushing America into Automobile DependencyThe prime vehicle for pushing America into automobile dependency was the GM front company National City Lines (NCL), according to many accounts. NCL was a bus company reorganized in 1936 by GM into a holding company with the express purpose of acquiring and converting streetcar companies into bus routes. NCL began by purchasing 13 transit companies, including two recently improved streetcar lines in Butte, MT and Beaumont, TX, and by 1947 had acquired more than 100 streetcar systems in 45 cities.Case-in-Point: The Destruction of Los Angeles Streetcar LinesThe Los Angeles Railway was sold to NCL in 1945 and renamed Los Angeles Transit Lines. In its heyday, there had been over 1200 trolleys serving more than 20 streetcar lines. Rather than simply replacing streetcars with buses in the beginning, NCL used deceptive tactics such as the ‘slow and painful’ method of cutting service by gradually reducing service frequency. Streetcars appearing every five minutes would now only appear every 10 minutes, then 12; and after awhile, the 12 minute frequency interval would be reduced to 15 minutes, then to 20, and then to 30 minutes. Frustrated passengers would stop riding the streetcars, giving NCL a financial reason to replace them with buses, much of which they did in the late 1940’s to early 1950’s. This type of scenario was repeated in many cities across the country, despite much public outcry.Replacing Private Transit with Publicly Funded HighwaysIn 1949, GM and others were convicted in federal court for conspiracy to monopolize interstate commerce. Nonetheless, the streetcar systems continued to be bled dry and replaced by belching, pollution-spewing diesel buses. Moreover, the highway lobby gained a substantial White House foothold with the 1953 appointment of GM President Charles Wilson as secretary of defense. Wilson pushed for a nationwide, freeway building program, saying it was essential for national security. This claim played conveniently into the defensive, cold-war narrative of the era. That same year, Francis DuPont, whose family owned the largest share of General Motors, became the chief administrator of the federal highways. He was the key to Congress passing the largest public works bill in history, the 1956 Federal-Aid Highway Act – a gargantuan $25 billion, 41,000 mile highway building project to be paid for with a gas tax. More highways meant more driving, then more taxes, then more roads, in a perpetual cycle which continues today.The Return of Rail to American CitiesIn automobile dependent Los Angeles, the nation’s second most populated city with a large, sprawling land-mass, rail transit is today making a comeback, if not fast enough to start tearing down some of the freeways built over old streetcar lines. Much of the credit for the city’s growing rail-based transit system goes to former mayor Tom Bradley, who in the 1990s pushed hard to build a high-quality transit system, one that could transport far greater numbers of passengers than buses. This revival is not unique to Los Angeles. Portland, Oregon has developed one of the nation’s most successful light rail systems with its MAX Light Rail, which began operation in 1986 and now spans over 60 miles with 97 stations. Denver’s RTD Light Rail has expanded significantly since its 1994 inception, now covering 58.5 miles of track and serving as a vital transportation artery for the growing metropolitan area.In the Northeast, cities like Boston have maintained and expanded their historic subway and trolley systems. The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) operates the nation’s oldest subway system, which continues to serve as a crucial part of the city’s transportation infrastructure. Meanwhile, Washington D.C.’s Metro system, opened in 1976, has grown to be the third-busiest rapid transit system in the country.Perhaps most notably, Salt Lake City—a traditionally car-centric western city—has developed an extensive light rail system called TRAX since 1999, demonstrating that rail transit can succeed even in less densely populated areas when properly planned and executed. Similarly, Phoenix’s Valley Metro Rail, operational since 2008, has exceeded ridership projections and sparked transit-oriented development across the metropolitan area.These examples illustrate a growing recognition among American cities that robust rail systems are not merely nostalgic throwbacks but essential components of modern urban transportation infrastructure.Building the Future: Policy Steps for Transit RenaissanceFor American cities to fully realize the benefits of comprehensive public transportation, several key policy initiatives must be prioritized. First, federal funding mechanisms must shift from heavily favoring highway construction to providing sustained investment in public transit infrastructure. This requires revising funding formulas that have historically allocated 80% of transportation dollars to highways and only 20% to public transit.Second, state and local zoning laws need reform to encourage transit-oriented development—higher density, mixed-use communities around transit stations that generate consistent ridership while reducing car dependence. Cities like Arlington, Virginia have demonstrated how strategic density along transit corridors can create vibrant communities while preserving nearby single-family neighborhoods.Third, regional transportation authorities must be empowered to coordinate seamless connections between local transit, regional commuter rail, and emerging high-speed rail corridors. The fragmentation of transit governance has historically undermined efficiency and user experience.The benefits of these policy shifts would be transformative. American cities would see reduced traffic congestion, saving billions in productivity and fuel costs. Environmental impacts would decrease significantly, with lower greenhouse gas emissions and improved air quality. Economic development would flourish around transit nodes, creating jobs and increasing property values. Most importantly, transportation equity would improve as car-free mobility options expand for elderly, disabled, low-income, and youth populations.The interconnection of local transit with regional and high-speed rail would create a transportation ecosystem where Americans could conveniently travel between and within cities without requiring automobile ownership—a return to the freedom of mobility that characterized the golden age of rail, but with 21st century technology and efficiency. This comprehensive approach represents not just a transportation strategy, but a vision for more sustainable, equitable, and economically vibrant American cities.