Katie Porter And Public Transit: How Her Post On X Exposed Much Larger Problems

For nearly a week, a huge question has been raised of former Congresswoman and current Gubernatorial candidate Katie Porter: Does she have any idea how trains or public transit works?

That concern comes from an X post last week where Porter, while in San Francisco, took the BART. Porter was so thrilled about it, saying how quick and cheap it was.

“From Oakland to San Francisco for $12.65 in 35 minutes,” posted Porter. “And less than 3 minutes of waiting. Try transit!!”

Naturally, this post became the subject of ridicule and even became something of a minor meme. Comments on social media were equally critical, pointing out the surprising number of flaws Porter managed show in only a few sentences. Here’s a quick highlight reel:

“It’s 2$ from SF to Oakland did you get a dimebag on the way the math is incorrect.”

“Have you ever even used BART? My suspicion is you’ve never been to California.”

“Yeah, round trip is over $25, cheaper to drive a car. I’ll pass on transit.”

“But ur [sic] against having a bullet train”

“Imagine $12.65 two times a day to commute to work. Bart should be free!”

“That’s my hourly wage after taxes…”

“I ride Bart five days a week. You forgot to add on *weekly delays, no seats, crowded, and witnessing occasional violence.”

“I could have sworn it was like 4 dollars”

“$12.65 ??? That doesn’t sound right! (I travel from Oakland to SF everyday!)”

But was Porter really off base with this claim? $12.65 from Oakland to San Francisco in 35 minutes? The answer is yes. Obviously. But it’s how she got it wrong that shows a real lack of understanding of public transit, and more broadly, rail travel in California.

First off, Porter didn’t say exactly where she was or where she was going. Commenters were generally right, as a hop from downtown Oakland to downtown San Francisco on the BART is $4.25 and takes only 13 minutes. The ferry isn’t much more at only $4.70 one way, but considering that option takes up to 25 minutes, it’s at least closer to Porter’s estimate.

What’s more likely is that Porter flew into Oakland and took the BART to the Civic Center/UN Plaza Station, which is the station closest to the San Francisco City Hall. This one costs dead on $12.65, but takes way more than the 35 minutes (32 minutes plus 3 minutes of waiting) that Porter claimed. Without waiting of any kind at the station, the minimum time is 41 minutes, and that is if there are no delays whatsoever. In talking with a few frequent BART users, that route can sometimes take over an hour, especially if there is a game at the Coliseum or other major event. Even on a given day, delays of 10 minutes or more isn’t uncommon.

In any case, even if Porter managed to make the trip in just over 30 minutes because the system decided to just skip all the Oakland stops, her post points out an even more worrying issue than not understanding public transit: Being a hypocrite about it.

The post shows Porter to be a major supporter of BART, even though BART is facing a “financial cliff“. Pre-Pandemic, BART had about 70% of funding coming from fares and parking fees, with the rest coming from governmental assistance. Today, that assistance amount is around 70%, as BART is only taking in about 25% of it’s operating budget from fares and other charges. While they managed to avoid a $35 million deficit this year thanks to cuts, ongoing structural deficits ranging from $350 million to $400 million per year are to come up in 2027.

So that is what Porter is supporting. But at the same time she is against California High-Speed Rail (CHSR). With current costs at $135 billion plus a recent $10 billon to $14 billion funding gap that needs to be addressed, CHSR is extremely divisive. And amongst gubernatorial candidates, it’s becoming a losing issue to support. Nonetheless, Porter has been pretty much the only Democratic candidate to say that she wouldn’t support it.

“Increasingly, the evidence is showing that this project is not going to be able to be completed remotely on budget or remotely on time. I think we’re already past those benchmarks,” said Porter earlier this month. “That’s why I don’t think we should BS California voters. They have noticed that we don’t have a high-speed rail. And they have noticed we’ve spent money on it. If this high-speed rail project can get done, then let’s get it done. If it can’t get done, then stop.”

She’s not picking a lane on the transit issue. Granted, virtually every mass transit rail system in California has a deficit problem of some kind. The L.A. Metro is facing a $2.3 billion deficit through the end of the decade. SacRT in Sacramento has yearly deficit issues. And the San Diego MTS is about $100 million in the red.

But for someone who wants to be Governor and has to take on rail and mass transit issues, Porter doesn’t seem to understand it and is all over the place in terms of what she’s backing. Say what you will of Governor Gavin Newsom, at least he isn’t all over the place when it comes to his stance on mass transit.