More On MTA Turnstiles

Why did several members of the MTA Board invoke "protection against terrorists" to justify the installation of turnstiles at train stations? I wrote last night that it might have something to do with a newly elected democratic majority in congress trying to bring some federal spending to democratic districts. What other reason would the Department of Homeland Security have for paying for capital improvements to a mass transit system?

I re-read the MTA's press release and saw that the contractor the MTA is hiring is named "Cubic Corporation". Fine. Cubic Corp.

I plugged that name into Google and this came up:

Do you see the double decker bus? Look to the right of it - yep, a dude with a machine gun.

Cubic Corporation is a defense contractor that also installs transit gates. They'll get to operate the gates (on a lease) for 10 years - apparently reaping a profit after the the fourth year. What is going on, exactly? You can check out Cubic Corporation's take on this deal in their press release:

"Cubic and Los Angeles County Metro Team to Demonstrate New Smart Card System to Transportation Officials"

There isn't much in the Cubic press release that has to do with "scofflaws" riding MTA trains without paying.

MTA board members claim that open platforms "lose" money every year, and this system of turnstiles will allow them to reap more money from riders on their trains. First, this idea of "losing" money because of scofflaws who don't buy a ticket before getting on the trains (and risk a $250 ticket) seems a bit specious to me.

The MTA is a public entity that is designed to run in the red in order to move people. If it were up to me, they would reduce fares to increase ridership - and thus efficiently move more people, take cars off the road, and allow our economy to benefit from that change.

Second, wouldn't turnstiles increase operating costs because of the need to maintain a turnstile system? Every time I read about this topic this point won't go away: the increase in revenue from the fare box will not pay for the costs of operating fare boxes. I don't know the numbers (or projected numbers), so I'll have to leave it at that.

The creepiest part of this whole scheme, for me, has to do with how the MTA wants us to pay for transit. They'd like us to use a "TAP" card - which would personally identify you every time you pass through a transit gate (using a radio frequency chip in your TAP card). This is the worst part of the whole thing.

Some creep can easily create their own radio chip scanner, and find out your name, home address, and credit card number. This is not me being paranoid - RFID scimmers are a reality.

The TAP system is where the Department of Homeland Security money starts to make sense. Imagine being able to personally identify every rider of a bus or train in Los Angeles.

If someone has a warrant out for their arrest, and they use their TAP card - send the Sheriffs, the Feds, or your choice of publicly paid stalker out to respond. Suppose you are on the no-fly list that the Transportation Security Adminstration has been compiling, and your name pops up on a list of people using the train - maybe you'll get a chance to ride in the FBI partyvan, or maybe your card will not be accepted because you are seen a security risk by a machine.

I feel safer already. Cubic Corporation will be working hand in glove with the government to "protect" me the next time I decided to take the train. I guess I'll just stick to riding my bicycle for now.