Evening star., 1952-06-20
Controversial Transit Report

The Lands report on Capital Transit opera
tionS aims its guns at the Public Utilities Com
mission in way that will have the unfortunate
effect OF undermining public confidence in the
commission. The public should be told, however,
that most Of the ammunition fired is not of the
secret or new-weapon variety. It came from the
P. U. c. itself-from public orders and public
reports issued by the commission openly and
without apology. It is natural to assume there
fore, that the p. U. G. is prepared to defend
its record If given fair chance. The Kennedy
subcommittee of the House District Committee
should give the commission better opportunity
to reply than it's chairman received from Senate
committee Tuesday.
The average person will be confused by the
technical terms and the mass of statistics which
Mr. Lands included in his controversial report.
The net effect of 1t all, however, is to give the
riding public the idea that it has been taken for
a ride by the P U. c. as we'll as by the transit
company Mr.. Lands chief criticism was directed
at a war-years Federal tax refund which, he salo,
should have been used "for the benefit of the
public instead of the stockholders But, as The
Star pointed out in an editorial yesterday, the
refund was not used to pay dividends--as the
company could have elected to do. 1t was used,
with p U. C. approval 1or debt reduction. The
P. u c. contends that the public benefited
! through this strengthening of the company's
fiscal position Anyway, the commission had no
authority to tell the company how to use this
money. It could not have prevented distribution
of the refund among the stockholders, if the
Merrill management had chosen that perfectly
legal course
Mr. Landis was on firmer ground when he
commented on broader aspects OF the public
transportation problems of Washington and vi
cinity The report conceded that it is difficult
to operate profitable transit system here in
the face of such adverse influences as relatively
cheap taxicab fares, group-riding by Federal
workers. traffic congestion, expensive under
ground streetcar rails and movement Of popula-
ton into the suburbs. No panacea for these
transit troubles was offered, however. Although
one part of the report represented the transit
company as making excessive profits, another
section said that passenger income has been fall
ing of recently.
The Lands report indorsed the proposal for
q Washington Metropolitan Area P. u. c. or
variation thereof One variation suggested was
a District-Maryland commission to control Capt.
tai Transit operations in the two Jurisdictions.
This could be expanded, it was stated, 10 Include
Virginia provided that State wanted to be IN
cluded The interstate compact method of SettlT
I'D such body was favored because it would
cover intrastate operations as we'll as cross
boundary runs. But the report saw some merit
I'm the shortcut plan for creating area P. U. C..
by act of Congress, as proposed in the pending
johnson bill The section of the report relating
tn regional transit difficulties contains material
and recommendations that should be helptul IN
arriving at practicable co-ordinating program.