Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You have approximately $31 Billion Dollars from gas tax collected revenue.
You have plans to build a $500 Million stretch of freeway in an area that is developing quickly to meet commuting demands - these have been longstanding plans and its time to put them to work.
Instead, politicians reallocate approximately $9 Billion of that $31 Billion for ulterior motifs / purposes that have nothing to do with infrastructure, almost 1/3rd of your budget.
The remaining 2/3rds of your budget are allocated for road maintenance throughout the state, you can't skimp on those otherwise bridges fall out of the sky and roads turn to rubble.
The area that needs that $500 Million stretch of freeway is growing fast, despite you no longer having the money to allocate toward it...you still need to build something quickly to satisfy demands...
You build a toll-road.. ..This does not come out of your reserves or gas tax, it is entirely user supported by fees..
Yes.... the toll-road isn't using the tax revenue to support it, but people who are buying gas are paying taxes as if it were because 1/3rd of the tax budget that is supposed to go toward the new infrastructure (that was supposed to be free) is now missing but they have already paid for it. So you technically are paying tax for a free road that was never built, and tolls for the road they replaced said planned free road that you already paid for with.
You make a compelling argument, except that even if there were no diversions of gas tax away from projects that don't directly serve personal motor vehicles, supposedly there's not near enough $ to fund both the backlog of maintenance around the country (including TX) and build new facilities. This is at least partly because the tax hasn't been raised in forever and isn't indexed to inflation. Also, vehicles are more fuel-efficient (or increasingly don't use gas at all).
I'm generally against the federalization of infastructure anyway and think all the tax revenue and spending system for transportation should generally never leave the state level. And ideally we'd find a way to tax based on vehicle weight, miles driven, and use of non-locally-funded facilities, which would be the ultimate way to tax efficiency and eliminating the incidence problem, though there are some, um, privacy issues (though people don't seem to freak out about cell phone usage or going through toll booths).
I'm generally against the federalization of infastructure anyway and think all the tax revenue and spending system for transportation should generally never leave the state level. And ideally we'd find a way to tax based on vehicle weight, miles driven, and use of non-locally-funded facilities, which would be the ultimate way to tax efficiency and eliminating the incidence problem, though there are some, um, privacy issues (though people don't seem to freak out about cell phone usage or going through toll booths).
That works for big states like Texas.
But consider Wyoming which has I-80 running across it which is the biggest trucking route between the east and west coasts. Wyoming would only need some decent 2-lane roads to handle all the local traffic in Wyoming. The two largest cities are Cheyenne at 65K and Casper at 55K and after that the next biggest towns are in the 30K range. Most of the highway infrastructure is to support through-freight service between the east and west coasts. Of course if you expect Wyoming to pay for it all, they'll just put up a $50 toll for transiting the state with out-of-state plates and the rest of the country pays for it anyway.
When you live in Texas it is easy to develop a state-centric mindset because frankly every single bordering state is poorer, less developed, and worse than Texas. And you have to go a thousand miles to find cities like Atlanta, Los Angeles, or Chicago that are the economic equivalents to the big Texas metros. And there is very little need for Texans to ever leave the state unless they want to go skiing or find better beaches. That isn't the case for most of the rest of the country which is much more inter-connected and inter-dependent.
Yea, federalization of infrastructure keeps everything uniform. Also the primary objective of the interstate highway system isn’t for commuting or even interstate commerce, but defense.
But these are almost without exception expansions of existing state highways (from 2 lane to 4) rather than brand new highways. Most toll roads around big cities are brand new highways.
Like for example, Highway 6 between Waco and Houston has been gradually expanding to 4-lanes over the past two decades. Most of it is now "freeway" but it isn't a new highway.
Yea, federalization of infrastructure keeps everything uniform. Also the primary objective of the interstate highway system isn’t for commuting or even interstate commerce, but defense.
Except that the Interstate system is done. All the expenditures are for maintenance of existing and for local expansions due to LOCAL conditions. States and metro areas should handle that on their own. Including Wyoming, West Virginia, Mississippi, New Mexico etc. that otherwise claim "poverty."
And the new facility wouldn't exist at all without tolls, unless the state and feds were willing to increase the gas tax (and end diversions, but as mentioned earlier, that's nowhere near enough).
Except that the Interstate system is done. All the expenditures are for maintenance of existing and for local expansions due to LOCAL conditions. States and metro areas should handle that on their own. Including Wyoming, West Virginia, Mississippi, New Mexico etc. that otherwise claim "poverty."
The conditions of development and/or maintenance needs within each perspective 'local jurisdiction' are not as relevant as you believe in this context. I will agree that local conditions do IMPACT the system (and many municipalities are addressing this with tolled / managed lanes or alternative tolled routes), but they are not the PURPOSE of the system. These roads were designed and planned around both rural and urban conditions knowingly that they would change after their conception and that expansions and maintenance would be necessary to keep those roads optimal. They also all exist within the same federal borders and is literally no different than a German Autobahn route between Berlin and Munich, obviously it may pass through some areas in between that would not otherwise be able to pay for the road on their own without national funding, but does not take away the need for funding to keep the system complete and optimal for its intended NATIONAL use. The road in its entirety is a national road which optimizes travel for all national purposes and its intended function is not limited to a local level, which is why federal funding is still necessary to make improvements on those roads to keep it optimal as a national road. We ALL benefit from that road whether we are using it or not using it as it also aids in interstate commerce and national defense, obviously to serve those purposes adequately, even if a municipality grows and clogs or congests it, it 'is' the responsibility of the Federal Highway Administration, who conceived the route to address its feasibility - that doesn't ALWAYS equate to relieving congestion, but it DOES equate to ensuring the route remain optimal for its intended purpose.
The interstate system was designed as apart of the national defense system and must retain certain standards of operation to retain interstate level routing, those roads also 'must' exist as apart of the interstate highway act in order for it to be complete. If 'federal roads' were suddenly to become a 'local responsibility' and Wyoming were suddenly to be unable to pay for I-80 - they could shut down the road, sure... ...but the USA would not then be able to complain about not having a feasible route between New York City and San Francisco CA if it were entirely on a local state level to manage... The state would then see the road as no different than a local state route and design it entirely for the purposes of their budgeting and local needs only.. ..even if there are non-local impacts such as interstate traffic.. see the problem in this?
The interstate system was also initially designed around the needs of each metropolitan area it passed through, albeit - the initial concept of the interstate system was not to pass through major cities but to avoid them, that was changed by lobbyist and Congress who saw the roads as an opportunity to drive commerce which I will agree was probably not the best idea for core areas of major metropolitan areas, although I feel that it could have been done a bit better to avoid separating urban districts (thats a whole nother topic)
If you were to bring up this argument about a STATE route, or a route that was not conceived by the Federal Highway Administration and a route that was ONLY designed to serve for LOCAL PURPOSES, I would then agree.. ..but Federal Roads serve more than just local purposes, they are only impacted by local demands - but that does not alter their purpose.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LocalPlanner
And the new facility wouldn't exist at all without tolls, unless the state and feds were willing to increase the gas tax (and end diversions, but as mentioned earlier, that's nowhere near enough).
Increasing fuel tax would do alot of good to the system of roads we have as it has not been adjusted for inflation and especially more economical vehicles. It should be increased as justified by the increase in fuel efficiency, the amount of vehicles on the road, their affects to infrastructure... This argument is completely ignoring the impacts that EV's will have on highways in the future, is basically a principality argument.. ..in terms of EV's things get more tricky and tolling is probably a better solution that won't look into the specifics of where each and every individual is traveling... That or a variable national infrastructure tax... people forget that even if we do not directly use a road, does not necessarily mean that we do not benefit from its presence.
Last edited by Need4Camaro; 01-21-2022 at 06:44 PM..
I constantly see highways built all over Texas
But in Houston where 6 million people live (20% of Texans) = we don’t have money for highways, they have to be toll road
Complete BS
If that’s true, stop building highway in other places
There are a lot of scams in Texas. People here don't want to pay higher taxes but they seem to be okay with having toll roads all over the place. I'm sure if we could raise the gas tax a few cents, there wouldn't be a need for toll roads. And I dislike that the answer to dealing with the population growth is to just "build more highways" rather than building a functional public transit system.
The "pick your own electric plan" is another scam. They marketed it as a way for consumers to save money but in reality all it does is make more corporations who leech off of people.
Increasing fuel tax would do alot of good to the system of roads we have as it has not been adjusted for inflation and especially more economical vehicles. It should be increased as justified by the increase in fuel efficiency, the amount of vehicles on the road, their affects to infrastructure... This argument is completely ignoring the impacts that EV's will have on highways in the future, is basically a principality argument.. ..in terms of EV's things get more tricky and tolling is probably a better solution that won't look into the specifics of where each and every individual is traveling... That or a variable national infrastructure tax... people forget that even if we do not directly use a road, does not necessarily mean that we do not benefit from its presence.
I fully agree with your assertions about the limitations of the gas tax. And all of us who buy stuff (meaning, everyone) benefits from inter-regional highways, even if we don't drive. The privacy issue is the main obstacle to a truly efficient way of taxing for public roads, which would consider vehicle weight and miles driven on those roads. But, we may have to get over it. If "mobility as a service" ever becomes a dominant thing, that may lessen the privacy issue (at least as far as what the government would know).
There are a lot of scams in Texas. People here don't want to pay higher taxes but they seem to be okay with having toll roads all over the place. I'm sure if we could raise the gas tax a few cents, there wouldn't be a need for toll roads. And I dislike that the answer to dealing with the population growth is to just "build more highways" rather than building a functional public transit system.
The "pick your own electric plan" is another scam. They marketed it as a way for consumers to save money but in reality all it does is make more corporations who leech off of people.
TBH I see both good and bad in Toll Roads and am not 100% sure which way I lean on them. I like them because they typically provide a fast and effective means of beating traffic and many of them in TX have high speed limits which kind of justifies the cost.. ..that and they're typically better maintained than most freeways in TX.
...The bad though is 'if' citizens are paying tax for free roads that are not getting built and instead tolled highways are built in place of roads that would have otherwise been free, there's a level of corruption that needs to be addressed - unrealistic yea but still. They are also not very affordable means of commuting longer distances on a weekly basis. I typically expect to pay in the ballpark of $200 in tolls per month. It's still totally doable for me but I don't expect that the average commuter could easily foot that ontop of other expenses.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
