The battle over a fixed-rail transit system for Honolulu is shaping up as the major political issue of this election year.

That's based on the stakes involved (hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars), the social, environmental and land use impact of the system on O'ahu, and the relative lack of any other political race or issue to distract the voters.

For all of that, if the latest Honolulu Advertiser Hawai'i Poll is any indication, the public and the voters are muddled and confused about the project and its effect on their lives. This is obviously in part due to conflicting public relations campaigns being waged by pro- and anti-rail advocates.

Pro-rail folks say the fixed rail system represents salvation for O'ahu and its congestion-plagued commuters. Opponents say this is a multi-million-dollar boondoggle that will do little, if anything to reduce congestion and will waste money better spent elsewhere.

As for the voters? They agree — with both positions.

The Hawai'i Poll found a strong majority declaring they support the rail project and would like it to go forward. But the same survey discovered that folks think the cost of the project is "way to great" and that the money would better be spent elsewhere. A substantial number also agreed that the system would be, well, noisy and ugly.

What in the world does this mean? If you think the project is too costly, obtrusive and that the money would be better spent on other city services, then why would you support it?

The answer, likely, is this: Experts know that people are enthusiastic about mass transit because they think other folks will use it.

The Hawai'i Poll found a substantial number of people, particularly along the proposed route, saying they will use the system once it is built.

Wishful thinking. The number of people who claimed they would get on board was much higher than actual ridership is likely to be, if the experience of other systems is any guide. Mass transit systems typically do not draw legions of people out of their cars and their established habits unless, and until, there is no alternative.

That is the case in congested mega-cities such as London, Hong Kong, Tokyo and elsewhere. For large numbers of people in those cities, there is no alternative to public mass transit.

The question is: Will Ho-nolulu ever reach that point? Opponents say we are just too small to ever generate the numbers and levels of congestion that drive people to transit it as it does in Tokyo and New York.

But what if they are wrong? The pro-build folks make the point that by the time congestion becomes intolerable, our best shot at building an alternative will have long passed.

Jerry Burris' column appears Wednesdays. See his blog at http://akamaipolitics.honadvblogs.com.

Jerry Burris' column appears Wednesdays in this space. See his blog at blogs.honoluluadvertiser.com/akamaipolitics. Reach him at jrryburris@yahoo.com.