Can we tax for transit?

New transportation proposals to ease energy dependence

Posted by Eric de Place (Guest Contributor) at 4:57 PM on 16 Jan 2008

This is one of those weeks when it feels like things are changing fast. Here are two stories that caught my attention:

A panel organized by Congress -- the melodically-named National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission -- just called for higher federal gas taxes. In fact, they recommend a 40-cent-per-gallon hike. It sounds like the tax would go mainly to repair and maintain current road infrastructure rather than road expansion. The panel also recommended a bevy of other fees, including tolling, congestion pricing, weight fees, and so on. And they recommended big investments in transit and other alternatives too. (Via Erica at Slog.)

Meanwhile, British Columbia continues to lead. Not only is the province considering a carbon tax, but the provincial government just released a $14 billion transit plan. That's $14 billion just for transit. In fairness, however, not everyone in B.C. is thrilled by the proposal. As Andrew points out on the Livable Region blog, the transit projects may be delayed until after some major road-building work is completed.

For story: Can we tax for transit?
9 Comments | Post a Comment

Roads and public transit catalyse income

and should be funded from income tax revenues. When transit is funded from gasoline tax, transit operators' task is to keep the buses and trains empty and the cars full.

If any large part of government is funded from gasoline tax, government will diligently impede gasoline thrift and gasoline alternatives. That's not just common sense, it's experience.

How shall the car gain nuclear cachet?

by GRLCowan at 6:19 PM on 16 Jan 2008

Overall...

...the proposals were fairly good, though they did call for streamlining and editing the environmental review process, which wasn't exactly good nes accordin' to the Sierra Club.

But some of the other proposals are good.

There was serious opposition to the gas tax though, so i doubt that'll go through, 'specially given the current administration and the public's reaction to any rise in gasoline prices.

by Tasermons Partner at 9:41 PM on 16 Jan 2008

Gas Taxes for Transit is a Proven Solution

To be honest, GRLCowan, is tha Europe has proven high gas prices and taxes and good transit and cycling facilities will encourage people not to drive and use smaller cars. Its just common sense.

Your comment regarding transit operators keeping trains empty and cars full seems to be not what happens in the real world.

And to clarify. People in BC are thrilled by the transit announcement. We just aren't thrilled about the province's road building plans.

Thanks Grist for covering some good transit news!

by racc at 1:12 AM on 17 Jan 2008
[ Parent ]

A tax to get behind...

Well, it's about time! American consumers may talk about how they want to "go green" but when it comes down to purchase-time, how many actually buy that fuel-sipping economy car? How many opt to carpool, take public transportation when it is available or (heaven forbid!) walk? Even with prices above $3, gas is still too cheap to warrant a fundamental shift in driving and purchasing habits. An additional tax on gasoline could be the incentive needed to bring about this change.

by outdooraccessory at 7:51 AM on 17 Jan 2008

Personal Transit

Mass transit is an unworkable anachronism.

Personal transit is the future...whether a Volt, a bike or a Segway.

The Texxi system a manifestation of this.

Take all the people in "mass transit" bureaucracies and make them drive cabs...really green cabs with batteries and solar panels.

by jabailo at 9:43 AM on 17 Jan 2008

cars are a burden

If transit was good enough to ditch the car, that's hundreds of dollars per month saved on car payments, fuel, insurance, repairs, a driveway and garage. I think we could afford the tax. What better way to convince Bubba to give up his F150 than $6.50/gallon?

a liberal in redsville

by birdboy at 10:37 AM on 17 Jan 2008

Missing the point

The idea of a 25-cent federal fuel tax has been around for decades. Perhaps that cost is now 40 cents due to inflation but the motivation is that our highways, bridges, and mass transit are in bad shape from an engineering point of view. We need to fix our infrastructure or more bridges will fall down and other calamities will occur.

Money sent to the federal gas tax fund are then allocated to each state depending on a complex formula and yes, this fund does allow for mass transit - which makes me wonder about the title of this thread. Many southern states get back about 80 cents on each dollar collected, while old states with old mass transit systems such as New York get about $1.20. While these proportions have narrowed in more recent years, the fact remains that the federal gasoline tax is still a massive redistribution of wealth and that wealth is going to mass transit in older cities.

In spite of these massive infusions of cash, it is not enough to maintain what we have today, never mind what we envision for tomorrow. The fact remains that the more money we throw at maintaining our highways and mass transit, the worse they get!

I am shocked and ashamed by the recommendations of an expert panel which says that we should continue on this exact same course, only to add more money to the pot. Clearly, we need to think outside of the box and stop the madness. -sammie

Onward through the fog

by Sam Wells at 12:50 PM on 17 Jan 2008

Transit and Cycling are a Great Combo

John

I certainly agree with you about cycling but the Segway, come on, no one is using them.

Regarding transit, I suggest getting out of the US every once and a while. Cities all over the would are investing massive amounts in rapid transit. In Hong Kong, everyone uses public transit. The key is making public transit really convenient. Problem with the US is that they have spent the last 100 years making it really easy to drive and not easy to do anything else, so it is not surprising that everyone is forced to drive.

Actually, cycling and rapid transit make a great combination. In Japan and Germany, they have massive bicycle parking facilities with thousands of bikes by train stations. San Fran just opened up a bicycle parking station.

North America is way behind the rest of the world. We need to catch up really quick.

Richard

by racc at 1:10 PM on 17 Jan 2008
[ Parent ]

Meanwhile back in the US ...

Why go elsewhere when the problem we seek to solve is here? Hong Kong has no match anywhere else in the world; so what if everyone takes mass transit there?

The problem is charging gasoline users a tax to fund mass transit - let's be honest here. As long as gasoline users pay it, the money will go to highways, plain and simple.

The economics seem so upside-down in the US, though. If one was to charge exactly what rides on mass transit cost, it would be almost as expensive or more expensive than taking the car. The salient point is that in places like New York City, you literally cannot drive downtown because you'll sit in traffic for hours. Try the experiment if you like - I did.

Then consider some very good projects in places like LA and Dallas involving mass transit rail. Great idea, heavily funded, and by golly it worked. Was there a concomitant reduction in highway VMT? No, no, and no. In fact, highway usage increased.

In conclusion, I strongly recommend living in the US and working on practical solutions for solving what is a massive problem that not only involves a corrupt Congress but corruption at every level, from the construction to the operating unions. Oh, did I say that? Shame on me!

Onward through the fog

by Sam Wells at 2:05 PM on 17 Jan 2008

ADVERTISING POLICY

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.