By James Baxter, NMA President

The proponents of toll roads and the use of variable pricing to mitigate congestion seem to be sending mixed signals.

Not very long ago the use of new technology to charge motorists a fee every time they hit the road was being touted as the cure for every ill known to man, including congestion, energy depletion, dirty air, and inadequate infrastructure.

If the roads became too crowded the price for using the roadway would shoot up and vehicles would evaporate from the highway, and traffic would roll along, unimpeded.

The concept was pretty simple; lots of people want to use the road at the same time, raise the price until the cost drives the cake eaters off the system. When traffic density declines, the prices are reduced so the unwashed masses can get to their jobs, go shopping, see the doctor, and visit friends at times that don’t inconvenience those of us with places to go and people to see, and for whom cost is no object.

Just when our elected keepers were warming to this idea, high fuel prices and a tanking economy took a real nick out of traffic congestion. People just aren’t traveling as much as they were, for obvious reasons.

But, maybe we’re in luck as far as the toll roads are concerned, those good folks who were going to reduce charges if traffic was light? You know, use lower prices to attract traffic when the system is being under-utilized.

That’s what competitive private businesses do, when customers are few they reduce prices to attract customers back to their shops and businesses. Haven’t we been repeatedly told that toll roads are the private sector utopian answer to poorly maintained and congested public highways?

But wait, wait, something is wrong. The toll road operators are not lowering their prices to spur demand for their facilities. They’re raising their prices because traffic is down!

How can this be? Real private competitive businesses don’t raise their prices when demand is down.

The only institutions that have the leverage to raise prices when revenue is down are governments and government-sponsored monopolies.

Does this mean toll roads really aren’t private enterprise in action? Is the tooth fairy really dead?

• EZ-Pass Or EZ-Cash? Why Toll Roads Are A Bad Idea
• Fuel Economy & Toll Roads: Using One Problem To Solve Another
• Funding Our Highways
• Hot Under The Collar Over HOT Lanes
• Report Gets Frosty Reception From Transportation Community

By James Baxter, NMA President

The Bush administration just released another version of their plan to shift responsibility for highway funding to the “users.” This isn’t a bad idea, except that’s exactly the situation that has largely existed for most of the last century and all of the current century.

The users, namely motorists and commercial trucking firms, have paid for the construction and maintenance of our major highways (and not so major highways) through fuel taxes, registration fees and sundry other devices. Even local streets and roads often receive a portion of these fees to add to local taxes that provide access to private property, like our homes and work places.

What the administration really means is that users need to pay MORE fees and taxes and they don’t have the political will to justify increasing traditional funding resources.

They correctly sense that the public feels the existing funds are being wasted and misappropriated for the benefit of someone else, other than the users who paid the fees in the first place.

I know our organization would seriously consider supporting an increase in traditional user fees if we were assured that the money would be used to build and improve highways — versus funding light rail projects, buying laser guns by the gross, or paying for monuments that glorify members of Congress.

However, there is a middle ground between turning our freeways into toll road monopolies and the status quo. That middle ground would require that they federal government reduce and confine its reach to constructing, maintaining, and improving our Interstate highway system. All existing federal gas taxes would be devoted to this one function.

They wouldn’t be used to fund urban mass transit systems, holiday enforcement binges, NHTSA regulations, state and local highways, residential streets, public service announcements for safety programs, trucking regulations, parklands, or recreational trails. This isn’t to say the federal government shouldn’t be involved in many of these functions, but the funding source should not be motorist user fees.

The states and local governments will have to pick up the slack for state and local roads. On the flip side they will have no responsibility for funding the Interstate system and they can contract with the feds to provide maintenance and enforcement functions.

The interests that have seen motorist user fees as a cash cow for trails, busses, trains, property value enhancement and economic development projects will either have to come up with their own user fees or stand in line for a share of General Program Revenue. Seems fair to me, and a lot better than being robbed at the toll booth or whacked with a surcharge because I drove my car into the city.

Image Credit

• EZ-Pass Or EZ-Cash? Why Toll Roads Are A Bad Idea
• Why Don’t Politicians Care About Transportation Issues?
• Fuel Economy & Toll Roads: Using One Problem To Solve Another
• Why Haven’t Toll Road Charges Been Reduced?
• Watch Your Wallet When Driving Through These 10 States

By NMA President, James Baxter

In the February issue of Car and Driver Magazine there were two articles that, in their own way dovetailed together to answer a question no one is asking, but perhaps they should be.

Csaba Csere, Editor-In-Chief, started out with a lament on the futility and pointlessness of the new federal Corporate Fuel Economy law. This is the political answer to reducing energy consumption and as Csaba points out, changing fuel economy standards does not change fuel economy.

Cutting to the chase; in the short and mid term the only way fuel consumption will be reduced is if we consumers change how we use this fuel. We can drive smaller and/or lower powered vehicles or we can drive less. Sure, there will be small improvements around the edges in terms of improved power plants and different fuels, but these techno fixes will not turn a 6000 pound SUV into a fuel sipper.

As far as driving less, it has never been our first (or second or third) choice.

The universal “motivator” and “attitude adjuster” is money. As fuel costs increase motorists look for ways to lower those costs; i.e. buying a more efficient vehicle. The cost of motor fuels will naturally increase if demand crowds supply; the prominent reason for today’s three plus dollars a gallon cost.

The other way to increase fuel costs and thereby reduce consumption is the European approach, levy an onerous tax on gasoline and diesel fuel. Mr. Csere indicates some sympathy for raising taxes with the caveat that they be raised on all energy sources, given that transportation only accounts for 20 percent of energy consumption.

Normally, this is where we would part company. Giving the government more money has one guaranteed result; we get more government. We don’t need more government anymore than we need more foreign adventures, more IRS regulations, or more traffic laws.

But, then came Editor at Large Pat Bedard’s editorial on toll roads.

Pat described how our benevolent governments climb in bed with toll road operators to maximize toll road profits. This is primarily accomplished by making sure that the “free roads” (the roads we motorists have already paid for) are sufficiently crippled with poor maintenance, detours, traffic lights and lowered speed limits such that they cannot be a viable alternative to the toll road system.

These humanitarian gestures take the form of “no compete” agreements that effectively give the toll road operators a monopoly on functional transportation—all competitive public highways are rendered dysfunctional.

The bottom line is that toll roads and effectively managed public roads cannot coexist. The traveling public is ill served by those attempts to blend the two together. Don’t get me wrong; if some corporation wants to build a private highway absent government involvement, regulation, and support, go for it.

However, toll roads, as we know them, are reeking with government involvement, regulation, and support. There’s just no real public accountability.

Then it hit me; over in the Blue corner is Csaba Csere wanting to tax motorists to curtail fuel consumption, and in the Red corner is Pat Bedard railing against the perversions of toll roads and their handmaidens in government.

Here’s the answer to the question that hasn’t been asked: Significantly increase the fuel tax and apply the money to paying off all the toll roads and converting them to freeways. Use some more of that money to:

1. Fix the roads that were destroyed to make the toll roads more profitable.
2. Retime and synchronize traffic signal systems so they move traffic.
3. Fully fund the traffic court system so the judges won’t feel quite so compelled to view traffic tickets as a profit center.

This is starting to sound like a “win win” situation!

• Why Haven’t Toll Road Charges Been Reduced?
• EZ-Pass Or EZ-Cash? Why Toll Roads Are A Bad Idea
• Funding Our Highways
• Tired Of High Gas Prices? Don’t Ask The Government For Help
• Why Are Politicians Trying To Kill The Fuel Tax?

By NMA President, James Baxter

Electronic transponder technology, like E-ZPass, is making toll roads more palatable, but that doesn’t mean toll roads are good public policy.

Toll roads are an inefficient, backwards approach to providing public highways. Worse, they foster corruption, political patronage, and discourage needed improvements on the rest of the highway system.

Don’t be fooled by the references to “free-market principles,” “proper pricing,” “supply and demand,” and “economic incentives” from those selling the for-profit roadways.

The truth is, any resemblance to free-market principles is more illusion than fact.

A real market-based system has willing sellers, willing buyers, and reasonably unfettered competition. Any highway of consequence falls flat from the get-go, when it comes to market principles.

First, highway corridors are not assembled by willing buyers in competition with other willing buyers. The state identifies the corridor it wants, establishes what it considers to be a politically and judicially acceptable price, and condemns the land of those sellers who disagree. This is market principles at the end of a gun barrel.

Toll road advocates argue that those who use the system the most will pay the most. Fair enough, but who determines what the buyers should pay? It isn’t competing sellers of similar services.

Highway users do not have viable alternatives to buy highway services from other sources.

For all practical purposes, there are no other sellers competing for the motorists’ business and realistic alternatives don’t exist. Toll roads are literally a monopoly that is sanctioned and protected by the state. Yet, the state’s citizens and other highway users have no channel to influence toll road management and pricing decisions.

Upgrades and improvements to any highway viewed as competing with the toll road are likely to be postponed or ignored.

Unnecessary congestion, underposted speed limits and arbitrary enforcement on alternative roads are silently condoned by transportation officials and elected officials. Think about it, toll roads can’t compete without the presence of congestion and motorist inconvenience on the public highway system. Are congestion problems going to be corrected if they threaten the income of the toll road?

Motorists found this out the hard way in Orange County, Calif., when a clause in the model contract for the 91 Freeway Express Lanes prevented expansion of the freeway’s regular lanes. As a result, congestion got so bad that in April 2002 the Orange County Transportation Authority paid $207.5 million to buy out the toll lanes that originally cost just $139 million to build.

A major retardant to the expansion of toll roads, besides arbitrary tolls, has been the inconvenience of the toll-paying systems. Little is ever mentioned of the human carnage, property damage, air pollution, and inconvenience attributable to toll-booth systems.

In exchange for removing toll-booth inconvenience, accidents, and waste, motorists are being asked to accept higher tolls and invasive surveillance technology that can monitor the movement, location, speed and operation of any vehicle on any highway or road.

While this type of surveillance will not be confined to toll roads, it is on toll roads where its use will be most easily rationalized.

Compare that to our system of fuel taxes that charge users of the highway system based on fuel consumption.

No charge cards, no electronic surveillance, no toll bureaucracy, no cameras, no roadside monitoring (no automated enforcement!), not even any toll booths! That is, apparently, way too efficient and user friendly.

Toll road proponents are fond of referring to the “new money” that will flow to highway projects. That new money comes from the same tired old wallets that pay existing highway-user fees. The difference is the highway users will pay twice; once in taxes and again in tolls.

There are billions of gas-tax dollars being siphoned off for non-highway purposes, or covering government deficits. Anyone who thinks tolls will be any less likely to be usurped for non-highway purposes is not a student of history.

As for building new highways with this new money, most new toll roads aren’t going to be new roads at all. They are going to be existing Interstates or Interstate corridors converted to toll roads — the same corridors and roads for which we have already paid.

• Why Haven’t Toll Road Charges Been Reduced?
• Funding Our Highways
• Fuel Economy & Toll Roads: Using One Problem To Solve Another
• Report Gets Frosty Reception From Transportation Community
• Hot Under The Collar Over HOT Lanes

The list was compiled from items on our site and from www.thenewspaper.com. TheNewspaper.com is an excellent source of news on motorists issues and we encourage anyone who is interested in the politics of driving to subscribe to their news feed.

10) City Rakes In $1,136 In Traffic Ticket Fines Per Resident

The city of Pendergrass, Georgia pulled in $558,020 in traffic fines despite only having 491 residents.

9) Police Wrongly Seize Car From An Innocent Woman

Police in Alexandria, Louisiana seized the car belonging to a motorist who had committed no crime. A pair of police officers ran the license plate on Ruby Wallace’s 1995 Honda Accord and found the department of motor vehicles (DMV) had listed it as canceled. Wallace was without her car for days until the DMV admitted their database was wrong. As fees mounted, neither the Alexandria Police nor the DMV would take responsibility for the mistake or pay the towing company the $430 it demanded before it would return her Honda.

8 ) Texas Toll Authorities Double-Bill 50,000 Drivers & Have No Plans To Stop In The Future

Since January, one out of every 600 vehicles was double-billed on Texas toll roads. Instead of fixing the problem, the authorities were satisfied with only reducing the frequency of the error to one out of every 2000 drivers.

7) Maryland Pushes for $2000 Speed Camera Ticket, Virginia Follows

Officials in both Maryland and Virginia are planning to introduce legislation allowing cameras in so-called highway work zones that would issue automated tickets worth $500 in Virginia and $2000 in Maryland. Lawmakers are following the lead of Illinois which last year introduced $1000 freeway speed camera tickets that have generated significant revenue.

6) Texas DOT Considers Lowering Speed Limit To Boost Toll Revenue

The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) has agreed to consider lowering the maximum speed limit on a stretch of interstate highway that competes with a planned toll road. TxDOT’s agreement with the company collecting the tolls also ensures no improvements can be made to nearby roads unless the agency issues payment to the company with taxpayer funds.

5) Georgia Speed Trap Caught Using Ticket Quotas

A local television station has uncovered evidence that a notorious Georgia speed trap has been using traffic ticket quotas. WGCL-TV reports that DeKalb County Police officers are told during roll call that they must issue 65 citations a month and make 25 arrests.

4) Traffic Court Judges Caught Fixing Tickets

New Jersey Attorney General Anne Milgram announced the filing of corruption charges against nearly half of the Jersey City’s municipal court judges for “fixing” tickets for their friends and family.

3) Wisconsin Appeals Court Decision Grants Police License to Stop Innocent Motorists

The Wisconsin Court of Appeals recently ruled that police do not require a reason to stop a car registered in the name of someone with a suspended license. The court ruled that as long as a police officer makes no attempt to determine whether a spouse or other family member might be behind the wheel, he is free to pull over whoever happens to be driving.

2) West Virginia Looks to Boost Revenue with Court Costs

The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals moved to boost revenue from traffic tickets by warning lower courts that they must collect the maximum possible amount in court costs from each defendant. As a result of the clarification, any motorist charged with, for example, both speeding and failure to signal must pay the $160.50 assessment for court costs twice — for a total of $321 — even though the motorist appeared only once in court.

1) Motorists Forced To Let Officers Draw Blood Samples At DUI Stops

An increasing number of police departments are allowing their officers draw blood samples from motorists under suspicion of a DUI/DWI. The officers have limited medical training and it’s the officer’s choice between a breathalyzer or a blood test.

If you found this list worth reading, please take the time to share it with others. Click the “Share This” button below to email it to friends or submit it to a social news site.

• Maryland Police Refuse To Pay Speed Camera Tickets
• 19 Interesting Driving-Related Legal Rulings From This Year
• Motorists Forced To Let Officers Draw Blood Samples At DUI Stops
• Watch Your Wallet When Driving Through These 10 States
• Michigan Cities Break The Law To Generate More Speeding Tickets

You would think that the authorities would make sure that this kind of thing never happens again, but they haven’t fixed the flaw in the system completely. They’ve just reduced the frequency of the mistakes. The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) estimates that from now on only one out of every 2000 vehicles will be double-billed. This is unacceptable.

The system is already set up to make it difficult to dispute charges and some people may not even realize that they’re being overcharged. Even when the facts are clearly in the driver’s favor, they are still forced to go through a lengthy court process to rectify the situation. TxDOT insists that any overcharge will be refunded, but if they can’t fix the toll system they have in place it’s hard to trust their billing system to do the right thing.

• 9 Ways To Improve Traffic Safety That The Government Will Ignore Because They Are Too Busy Ticketing You
• Why Haven’t Toll Road Charges Been Reduced?
• Watch Your Wallet When Driving Through These 10 States
• EZ-Pass Or EZ-Cash? Why Toll Roads Are A Bad Idea
• Fuel Economy & Toll Roads: Using One Problem To Solve Another