Excuse Me, Is That Your Blog?

Like many businesses in this dismal economy, Metro is strapped for cash. Even with recent fare hikes and a surge in new riders due to high fuel costs, Metro’s financial situation is bleak. The deluge of tourons that descended upon our nation’s capital in January for The Obama’s inauguration, or the Cherry Blossom festival this month, may have provided a temporary boost in profits, but to survive in the long-term Metro will have to find another source of funding. I have a solution that will not only provide revenue, it will improve the quality of commuting for the half million riders in the DC area that depend on public transportation: Fine people who play their Ipods too loudly and people who wear too much cologne and/or perfume. These ignorant, inconsiderate, and quite frankly, disgusting people should be targeted with the same tenacity with which we are encouraged to report unattended bags.

Granted, the Metro brings out the worst in even the most sophisticated of men and women. We clamor and claw at one another to get on a certain train, knowing full well that another will follow approximately 2 minutes later. We curse at the oblivious tourists (and sometimes denizens) who stand in the left lane, jam the turnstiles because they can’t figure out how to put their damn fare card in the machine, and meander about aimlessly on the concourses, blocking us from the path to catch our connecting trains. But I believe that these reactions are a simple byproduct of the workaholic, competitive nature of DC residents. Once we actually board the train, we return to relative civility. We open up the Washington Post or a New York Times bestseller, and fall back into the comfort of our own invisible pods of self-absorption. Unfortunately, there are several among us who threaten the peaceful harmony that flourishes within the Metro trains, often making the atmosphere within the cars as chaotic and unpleasant as the struggle getting to the cars.

The first type of offender is the person who plays his/her Ipod at an unreasonably loud volume. They are called “personal” music devices for a reason: they are meant to be enjoyed privately without imposing on other people. One is not supposed to fire thunderous blasts of T.I. or Nickelback into the ears of other passengers. That’s right folks, as if it weren’t bad enough that I am distracted from my reading by the strident sounds from peoples’ headphones, the music is invariably in poor taste. But to be fair, and to set a good example, I believe that all Ipod/Walkman listeners should refrain from noise pollution and keep their music to themselves. It is disruptive to people trying to read, relax after a hard day at work, or even carry on a simple conversation. The other day I read the same paragraph 4 times because I could not concentrate with the shrill reverberations bursting forth from some asshole’s headphones. It was as if I had a boombox on my shoulder, but without the breakdancing. More importantly, noise pollution is pernicious to the health of others. In this respect it is similar to second-hand smoke. As a society we have agreed that if a person wants to contract lung cancer, then that is his or her right as an American citizen. But that person should not force others to bear the negative consequences of his or her unhealthy behavior. Likewise, if a person wants to render oneself deaf, he or she is entitled to do so. But that person should not destroy the hearing of others in the process. It is literally painful to bear the monstrous sounds sometimes; I can almost feel my ears bleeding. Noise pollution is a threat to peace of mind and the stability of the auditory senses.

The second type of Metro menace is the excessive cologne/perfume wearer. On what planet is it appealing to ward off a full-front assault on the olfactory system? A subtle dab of cologne, perfume, scented lotion, etc is acceptable, perhaps even attractive. But to douse oneself in a pungent substance like one bastes a turkey for Thanksgiving dinner is absolutely repulsive. It is literally nauseating, especially for people like me with allergies and asthma who have heightened sensitivity to strong, chemical-based odors. I had to leave a train last week because I was sick to my stomach, faint, and suffering a headache from one of these buffoons. It was as if the man swam 75 laps in an Olympic-sized swimming pool filled with Polo. I’ve had this happen on planes and elevators before, but the air pressure and filtering systems generally eliminate the noxious effects on planes, and elevator rides are short. Neither of these mitigating factors applies to the Metro system, at least not to us poor schleps who have to travel from Takoma Park to Arlington on a regular basis. I can’t imagine how one could completely lack awareness and/or concern for the fact that he or she is inducing nausea in fellow passengers. Olfactory pollution is a serious offense, and should be punished as such.

So what is Metro to do to thwart the reckless behavior of noise and olfactory polluters? It should do the same thing the federal government does with manufacturers that pollute the air and water: Tax Them! This solution is based on the simple economic concept of externalities. A firm takes its production costs and consumer preferences into consideration when it produces goods, ideally reaching a market equilibrium in which supply equals demand. But the firm does not account for the social costs of manufacturing which harm consumers, such as pollution. Therefore the actual consumer demand, and thus the socially optimum equilibrium, is lower than the privately optimum level. To make up for this difference – the externality imposed by the firm – the government charges a tax that reflects the difference between the socially and privately optimal prices. The tax revenues are then distributed back to the consumers via improved government services or tax cuts, which compensates for the noxious pollution they have to endure. Meanwhile, the burden of the tax deters firms from producing excessive pollution. Everyone is happy and the world is a better place.

Similarly, Metro should tax noise and olfactory polluters for the social costs they impose on other passengers. The tax should be equal to the difference between the socially and privately optimal levels of sound and smell. In an ideal situation, the offenders would pay these taxes at the time they purchase their cologne, perfume, or Ipod. However there is no way to predict a priori who will “pollute” and who will use these products responsibly, and we cannot rely on polluters to self-identify. Therefore I propose that Metro fine those who wear too much cologne and perfume, and those who listen to their Ipods too loudly. The fine should be equal to the average fare per rider * the average number of riders per train during high traffic hours (Approximately 8 AM-9PM). This is the fairest way to force polluters to take into consideration the comfort and welfare of other passengers. The process I envision is simple, though it will require some upfront costs. Here is the plan:

1) Metro assigns a “pollution policeman” for every train in service during high traffic hours.
2) The pollution policeman conducts regular “rounds”, patrolling up and down the center aisle of each car to listen and smell for polluters
3) If the pollution policeman can distinctly smell cologne or perfume, or hear noise from any headphones, he or she issues a ticket to the offender and takes a photograph of the offender.
4) The offender pays the ticket within 30 days, after which the fine increases and/or penalties are imposed.
5) Metro keeps a record of offenders with photographs and payment records. If any person has not paid within the 30 day window, Metro pollution policeman are authorized to order the offender to leave the train at the next stop, and alerts all other Metro policeman to look out for the offender and prevent him or her from riding any train. The offender will not be allowed to ride any Metro train until fines are paid.
6) The offender can appeal in a process similar to the traffic court process, but only with credible witnesses that testify under oath.

Of course this plan is not perfect, and like any public policy, there will be people who try to circumvent the law. But it is the most feasible and fair way to promote responsible and considerate commuting in DC. It will require hiring dozens of new staff, but it will also generate a considerable amount of income for Metro. After an initial round of reliable enforcement, the negative behavior will decrease and Metro pollution policemen can simply serve as a deterrent to maintain order in the Metro system. Eventually, Metro will be able to cut back on the pollution police force. At that time, the economy will have improved and/or Metro will have increased ridership and pollution policeman can be reassigned to expand services. After an initial surge in revenue from fines, income will decrease and plateau once people understand that Metro is serious about enforcing the pollution laws. However, the decrease in additional income will be offset by the corresponding increase in ridership, as commuters will be more likely to ride the train knowing the atmosphere is pleasant, as well as the adjustments in staff.

We the commuters of DC, in order to form a more perfect Metro, must take back our trains and rid them of unnecessary noise and smells. I urge you to contact your city councilperson immediately, write to Metro, and melodramatically demonstrate disapproval toward auditory and olfactory polluters. YES WE CAN go to work and return home headache and nausea free!