Unclear what point you’re making. Is your contention that removing the fares would not degrade service further? If more transit funds were made available, should it go to improving service or subsidizing fares? I side with my fellow LA metro riders by saying the former.
LA Metro's 25 budget shows bus fares significantly up(although fares still only 1.9% revenue). Has there been a commensurate improvement in bus service, or are they proposing further service reductions?
Would there be more or less proposed service reductions if they lost 1.9% of their operating revenue do you think.
I haven't seen evidence it would have any effect. Best evidence so far is that they try to cut bus service, as the single largest operational cost, as much as they can get away with politically, and then they sort the rest of the budget accordingly after that rather than start from 1.1% of revenue.
I think there is as much or less evidence that they'd raise train fares, reduce parking subsidies, raise or implement parking fees, cut the highway assistance program, or kill the microtransit program if they lost bus fares as there is evidence for assuming they would further cut bus service.