This page was last updated on June 1, 2010.
Tough calls; Editorial; Beaver County Times; June 1, 2010.
Bottoms up; Editorial; Beaver County Times; June 1, 2010.
These are simply the latest in a string of similar editorials over the past several years.
As I’ve noted previously, the ASCE is not exactly an independent observer. I’m not saying the ASCE assessment is incorrect, but we need to keep in mind low grades help the ASCE because low grades mean more civil engineering projects and this benefits ASCE membership. Over the last several years, the Times has used the ASCE at least 29 times as a source for its infrastructure-related editorials, yet I believe you’ll find the Times never mentioned the possibility of a conflict of interest. Among the previous editorials were “Woe are we,” “Sound the alarm” (a companion to “Woe are we”), “Falling down,” “Cutting corners,” “Look ahead,” “Attack of the E. coli,” “Looking ahead,” “Future shock,” and “Failing grade.” At least three of the editorials conjured up images of a “Third World” country.
The editorial keeps up the Times narrative that “the federal government’s rejection of the state’s plan to impose tolls on Interstate 80 … blew a $472 million hole in PennDOT’s budget.” The proposal never had a chance because it violates federal law and everyone knew it. Something the Times continues to fail to note is the U.S. DOT likely would have approved tolling I-80 as long as the tolls would have been used only for the “care and feeding” of I-80 as required by federal law. That wasn’t enough for PA, however. The Governor, General Assembly, and the Times wanted I-80 tolls to be used to transfer wealth from I-80 drivers to users of other roads and government-owned and run bus systems like BCTA and PAT.
The editorial says, “ASCE said possible solutions include a state sales tax on fuel, tolling additional highways, tolling at the state line, a state sales tax on vehicles, a vehicle-miles-traveled fee and the removal of state police funding from the motor license fund. (That latter would free up $576 billion a year.)” This paragraph has a few apparent errors. First, there is already “a state sales tax on fuel” ($0.312/gallon for gasoline and $0.381/gallon for diesel). Second, there is already “a state sales tax on vehicles;” it’s the same as the sales tax rate [6%, 7% (Allegheny County), or 8% (Philadelphia)] as for other goods subject to the sales tax. Third, “$576 billion a year” should be “$576 million a year.” Note, the Governor’s 2010-2011 budget has this figure at $533 million.
As for “tolling additional highways,” I’ve written previously I’m all for placing tolls on all limited access highways where practical. We’d use the toll revenue collected for a road or bridge only for the “care and feeding” of that road or bridge, however. For example, tolls collected on the Monaca-Rochester Bridge could not be used for the Vanport Bridge. This isn’t farfetched. Those of us old enough to remember will recall the Monaca-East Rochester Bridge was tolled from its opening in 1959 until 1973. As was the case with I-80, however, the Governor, General Assembly, and the Times would want tolls to be used to transfer wealth to users of other bridges/roads and government-owned and run bus systems like BCTA and PAT.
Without more info, “tolling at the state line” sounds like a mess and not a particularly friendly face to put on the state. The “vehicle-miles-traveled fee” is yet another invasion of privacy.
Another proposal mentioned “the removal of state police funding from the motor license fund.” If “the motor license fund” completely funds the state police, this is wrong. The only state police funding provided by the motor license fund should be for services directly related to traffic law enforcement on the appropriate state highways. The remainder of state police funding for law enforcement should come from the general fund, other funds, and municipalities using the state police in lieu of their own police officers.
© 2004-2010 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.