Comments on: Doug Wright – Stuck on the Freeway

By: » Utah Gas Tax Hike Possible - Rickety

» Utah Gas Tax Hike Possible - Rickety — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 00:38:44 +0000

[...] Almost all of the commenters to the Deseret News story “As gas prices plunge, gas taxes may rise” were opposed to any tax increase. One rickety respondent felt that “the Legislature should implement congestion pricing instead.” Regular readers of my blog already know I am opposed to a congestion tax. However David Miller has reasonable arguments in favor of congestion pricing. [...]

By: David

David — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 20:27:10 +0000

Admittedly the gas tax has an established collection mechanism while congestion pricing would require new overhead. Still, no matter how far we raise the gas tax we still have to come up with new mechanisms as alternative fuels become more widespread (and they will).

I wish I had some details about what administrative overhead would be involved in implementing congestion pricing, but I don’t think it would be any greater than whatever is in the works to start electronic monitoring of the toll lane we already have.

By: Rick

Rick — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 12:44:42 +0000

The drop in revenue per vehicle mile traveled is easily fixed by raising the gasoline tax. I don’t see revenue as a problem. And we are agreed that congestion is what we want cured.

Perhaps I have missed the discussion but are there any specifics on how congestion pricing would be implemented? How much administrative overhead would be involved?

By: David

David — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 06:20:51 +0000

The problem is that the efficiency of our vehicles is increasing over time which means that – contrary to the increasing cost of maintaining our roadways – the revenue per vehicle mile traveled is dropping (less efficient SUV’s etc. notwithstanding). I have enjoyed various means of mass transit since starting to work downtown (I’m too close to make use of FrontRunner) and transit, like tolling and telecommuting, should be an element of our overall solution.

By: Rick

Rick — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 05:50:44 +0000

I can see there is some benefit from a toll, namely an uncongested road. When I used a toll road in Florida I was struck by how empty the road was as compared to a nearby road headed in the same direction that was not a toll road. I had the same experience in California.

On each occasion it seemed such a waste of a road. I view toll roads as an inefficient waste of resources. The same as the HOV lane, a waste of a lane. Although the gas tax doesn’t solve congestion it seems a fair way to fund roads. Drive a big SUV, you pay more tax. I don’t see funding as a problem. A congestion tax would hit those who are mandated to drive at a certain hour (employees). There has to be a better way. Perhaps FrontRunner? Interestingly, on the days my wife has to go into work she has been using FrontRunner and really likes it. Recently it has become so congested (no empty seats) that she has started to drive again. Perhaps a seat tax for FrontRunner at peak times?

It does show that if commuters are given reasonable alternatives they will be utilized.

I might mention that I drive north from Kaysville to go to work so I would not be affected by congestion pricing. So I can be convinced of the folly of my ways.

By: David

David — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 04:59:21 +0000

If it’s any comfort, I stepped forward on both of your invitations (to pay the congestion pricing and to telecommute) – I’ve done toll roads before, and I have telecommuted for much of my employment and I found both of them to be beneficial from the standpoint of the consumer/employee.

By: Rick

Rick — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 04:39:14 +0000

Hmmm, a congestion tax is a big fat stick about anyway you look at it. You can test it this way: volunteers to pay a congestion tax step forward. Volunteers to telecommute step forward.

What is interesting here is why my wife’s company decided to allow telecommuting. Price of gas? No. Employee benefit? No. They did it because they are short of office space. Prior to the space shortage there was no reason to allow employees to work from home except that the company didn’t want to do it. Everything is in place to allow it, it is just that companies will not do it because it is the employees that bear the commuting burden in money and time.

By the way, my son-in-law who has a degree in city planning agrees with you. And what is even more annoying is that he can back up his arguments very well with an education that my daughter helped to pay for.

I agree that congestion pricing could be implemented a lot quicker and would help to prod companies into looking at telecommuting.

By: David

David — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 04:22:56 +0000

If it’s 20% now, how does that adjust as population continues to increase? I like the idea of moving 1′s and 0′s rather than people, but that only works where 1′s and 0′s are concerned.

I can accept your desire to use carrots in preference to sticks. I don’t think that congestion-pricing is necessarily a stick – depending on your perspective it could be viewed as a carrot to entice people to drive outside the congested times.

By: Rick

Rick — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 03:51:48 +0000

One approach would be to estimate by what percentage of the commute would need to be reduced so that traffic is at an acceptable level. Suppose that percentage is 20%. That 20% should be easily obtained with telecommuting. Anyone who works in front of computer would be a candidate for telework. For example, out of my family of seven, six of us could telecommute. The seventh installs fences so his destination is different every day.

So agreed, telework can’t get every worker off the road but it can work for a goodly portion. I like to put it this way: move the 1′s and 0′s and not the people.

But back to the topic (apologies). I don’t like the concept of a congestion tax because it uses a stick when there are carrots a plenty to tempt the toiling peasantry.

By: David

David — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 03:16:45 +0000

Rick,

I absolutely agree that telecommuting is a good idea and would address this issue. I think where you and I disagree is that I don’t believe that telecommuting is enough to eliminate the problem because many jobs are not conducive to telecommuting even part time (of course, I don’t think that congestion pricing all by itself can solve this either – we need a milti-pronged approach to our traffic crowding).