UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs

The federal government, along with many states, has adopted policies favoring the provision of public transit by the private sector. During the 1980's, this turn to contracting to halt rising operating deficits prompted several studies into the impact of contracting on operating efficiencies.

Most research found that service contracting saves 10 to 60 percent over publicly operated services. However, no research has yet examined the long-term cost trends of private contracting vis-a-vis public operations. The evaluations done to date often make inappropriate comparisons between small single mode private carriers and large multi-service transit authorities with greater political and social obligations. As a result the findings from these studies are certain to show dramatic savings, yet do not address the underlying dynamics driving transit costs such as political pressures to provide service.

This study examined cost efficiency trends for 142 transit operators providing fixed-route bus transit between 1989 and 1993. This analysis produced no evidence that fully contracted operations cost less per revenue hour than publicly operated services doing no contracting. Vehicle and driver scheduling inefficiencies were found to contribute the most unit costs. Estimated elasticities indicate that a 10 percent reduction in vehicle scheduling inefficiency may produce a 19 percent improvement in cost efficiency. A 10 percent improvement in operator scheduling efficiency shows a 6 percent reduction in operating costs per revenue hour. These findings indicate that transit service contracting may not produce cost savings over the long-term and that strategies of decentralization and changes in the craft structure for labor may be more appropriate ways for relieving the fiscal crisis of public transit.

Over the course ofthis century, public transit systems in the U.S. have lost most ofthe market share ofmetropolitan travel to private vehicles. The two principal markets that remain for public transit systems are downtown commuters and transit dependents- people who are too young, too old. too poor, or physically unable to drive. Despite thefact that transit dependents are the steadiest customers for most public transit systems. transit policy has tended to focus on recapturing lost markets through expanded suburban bus, express bus, andfued rail systems. Such efforts have collectively proven expensive and only marginally effective. At the same time, comparatively less attention and fewer resources tend to be devoted to improving well-patronized transit service in low­ income, central-city areas serving a high proportion of transit dependents. This paper explores this issue through an examination of both the evolving demographics ofpublic transit ridership, and the reasons for shifts in transit policies toward attracting automobile users onto buses and trains. We conclude that the growing dissonance between the quality of service provided to

inner-city residents who depend on local buses and the level of public resources being spent to attract new transit riders is both economically inefficient and socially inequitable. In light of this. we propose that transportation planners concerned with social justice (and economic efficiency) should re-examine current public transitpolicies andplans.

This article examines an emergent research program aimed at the complete automation of science, analyzing how various automation projects funded by DARPA and others are working to replicate traditionally human scientific competencies. Rather than directly attempting to create fully autonomous robot scientists, these projects break down complex scientific work into discrete, automatable “tasks.” While individual projects often preserve some role for human scientists, collectively they reveal a comprehensive blueprint for scientific automation. Through interviews with 26 DARPA contractors, program managers, and others involved in scientific automation, the authors demonstrate how automation efforts target three key domains of human scientific expertise: insight (hypothesis generation and pattern recognition), embodied knowledge (experimental procedures and techniques), and judgment (evaluation of scientific claims). Instead of simply trying to replicate human capabilities, these initiatives are actively reshaping scientific practice to be more amenable to machine intervention through initiatives like standardized ontologies and machine-readable data formats. Although full automation faces significant technical and institutional challenges, this emergent program portends major changes in scientific practice and careers while raising important questions about the future role of human knowledge in scientific discovery. The article contributes to ongoing debates about artificial intelligence in science while challenging existing sociological accounts about purportedly uniquely human scientific abilities.

Importance: Immigrants without US citizenship, or noncitizens, disproportionately endure poverty, labor exclusions, and inadequate health care access-structural drivers of adverse cancer outcomes. While screening is critical for preventing cancer deaths, and cancer is the leading cause of death among noncitizens, little is known about citizenship status and its potential influence on cancer screening. Objectives: To examine cancer screening inequities associated with citizenship status, evaluate whether these inequities vary across states, and determine whether structural factors mediate these inequities. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used nationally representative data from the National Health Interview Survey (2010-2023). Eligibility for cancer screening and the timing and types of tests considered appropriate were determined using US Preventive Services Task Force guidelines. Data were analyzed from May to August 2025. Exposure: Citizenship status: noncitizen (regardless of documentation), naturalized, or US-born. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes included colorectal, cervical, or breast cancer screening. Potential mediators included socioeconomic and health care factors (eg, poverty-to-income ratio and insurance), whereas clinical factors (eg, cancer history) were considered confounders. Mediation analysis using nonlinear multiple additive regression tree models was performed to evaluate associations between citizenship status and cancer screening and to identify mediators. Results: The sample included 131 501 participants eligible for colorectal (3687 [5.1%] noncitizen, median [IQR] age, 61.1 [55.0 to 67.0] years, 39 040 [47.8%] male), cervical (6812 [10.2%] noncitizen, median [IQR] age 41.1 [30.0-52.0]), or breast (1815 [5.1%] noncitizen, median [IQR] age 60.8 [55.0-66.0]) cancer screening. In 2023, noncitizens had significantly lower colorectal (43.6%; 95% CI, 38.7%-48.4% vs 75.5%; 95% CI, 74.6%-76.5%), cervical (57.1%; 95% CI, 53.1%-61.0% vs 71.6%; 95% CI, 70.3%-72.8%), and breast (73.0%; 95% CI, 66.4%-78.7% vs 80.1%; 95% CI, 78.8%-81.3%) cancer screening rates than US-born citizens. These citizenship-based disparities were observed throughout the study period and were present in many states. Noncitizens had significantly lower odds of receiving colorectal (OR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.32-0.38), cervical (OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.38-0.44), and breast (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.52-0.62) cancer screenings than US-born citizens, with socioeconomic and health care factors jointly mediating these inequities (proportion mediated, colorectal cancer: 56.6%; 95% CI, 49.1%-64.2%; cervical cancer: 39.6%; 95% CI, 32.3%-47.0%; breast cancer: 97.1%; 95% CI, 87.1%-107.1%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this nationally representative study, noncitizens had lower rates of cancer screenings, an inequity largely explained by socioeconomic barriers and inadequate health care access. Efforts to increase cancer screening and reduce preventable cancer mortality among noncitizens should focus on improving their health care access.