White House Wants to Lift Ban on Interstate Tolls

[Mavric]

Drivers on the nation’s Interstates could soon be paying more to travel.

 

A transportation proposal sent to Congress by the Obama administration on Tuesday would remove a prohibition on tolls for existing Interstate highways, clearing the way for states to raise revenue on roads that drivers currently use at no cost. Congress banned tolls on Interstates in 1956 when it created the national highway system under President Dwight D. Eisenhower.

 

The administration said lifting the toll ban would help address a shortfall in funding to pay for highway repairs. The tolls, along with other changes, could provide an additional $87 billion for aging roadways, tunnels and bridges, the administration said.

New York Times

[Landlord]

But interstate tolls already exist...

[Mavric]

But interstate tolls already exist...

I'm no expert on this but I realize some do have tolls. From the article:

Some Northeastern states, like Delaware and New Jersey, were allowed to keep tolls on existing highways that became a part of the national system. Other states were allowed to charge tolls on highways that were added to existing Interstates, but that revenue can be used only for repair and maintenance of those roads.

[lo country]

Let's see. I already pay taxes for road improvements. I pay some of the highest gas tax in the SE. Companies transporting goods on the open road will "pass" this expense onto their consumers.......Not to mention the article states the monies can be used for other projects. No thanks. Quit looking for ways to raise revenue and find ways to cut spending.

[carlfense]

Drivers on the nation’s Interstates could soon be paying more to travel.

 

A transportation proposal sent to Congress by the Obama administration on Tuesday would remove a prohibition on tolls for existing Interstate highways, clearing the way for states to raise revenue on roads that drivers currently use at no cost. Congress banned tolls on Interstates in 1956 when it created the national highway system under President Dwight D. Eisenhower.

 

The administration said lifting the toll ban would help address a shortfall in funding to pay for highway repairs. The tolls, along with other changes, could provide an additional $87 billion for aging roadways, tunnels and bridges, the administration said.

New York Times

Have to pay for those massive tax cuts somehow, I suppose.

 

Whenever Democrats propose new legislation that requires additional spending, Republicans demand a spending offset. But the GOP has finally found something they covet so much that they're willing to break that rule: tax breaks for big business.

. . .

Earlier this month, Democrats on the Senate Finance Committee passed a two-year extension of all 50-odd extenders with no spending offset. It would increase the deficit by $85 billion. On Tuesday afternoon, Republicans on the House Ways and Means Committee approved a bill to expand six of these tax breaks and make them permanent. The legislation would increase the deficit by $310 billion over the next decade, plus an additional $68 billion in interest costs.

 

Compare that to the $25 billion spent annually (http://cdmsmith.com/en-US/Insights/Funding-Future-Mobility/Exit-6-Aging-Interstates.aspx) on interstate maintenance . . . and I'm sure the House will get right around to funding to avoid state tolls, right? Or will that, unlike more handouts to big business, require an offset?

[carlfense]

Quit looking for ways to raise revenue and find ways to cut spending.

There's more than one way to increase a deficit . . .

[deedsker]

Let's see. I already pay taxes for road improvements. I pay some of the highest gas tax in the SE. Companies transporting goods on the open road will "pass" this expense onto their consumers.......Not to mention the article states the monies can be used for other projects. No thanks. Quit looking for ways to raise revenue and find ways to cut spending.

I am a rather conservative fellow, but transportation and infastructure are two areas that don't need to be cut. The deficit in these areas is already bad enough.

[EbylHusker]

I'm sure there are places that excesses could be cut (and should be), but in the end, we just need to put more money into keeping the infrastructure in decent shape. If this is something that'll help get it done, go for it.

[VectorVictor]

One of the things I remember reading some time ago is how I-135 was meant to be connected to I-80, but they ran out of funding. I would be okay with interstate tolls to finish roads like I-135 to I-80...but as soon as they're paid for, the tolls are gone and maintenance is baked into the budget going forward.

 

Then again, that was supposed to be the deal for the North Dallas Tollway and the George Bush Tollways in Dallas...and instead of ending the tolls, they kept them going and sold off the rights to the tolls to a third party (foreign, at that) company who keeps jacking them up.

[darkhorse85]

One of the things I remember reading some time ago is how I-135 was meant to be connected to I-80, but they ran out of funding. I would be okay with interstate tolls to finish roads like I-135 to I-80...but as soon as they're paid for, the tolls are gone and maintenance is baked into the budget going forward.

 

Then again, that was supposed to be the deal for the North Dallas Tollway and the George Bush Tollways in Dallas...and instead of ending the tolls, they kept them going and sold off the rights to the tolls to a third party (foreign, at that) company who keeps jacking them up.

 

This rustles my jimmies very much.

[Junior]

One of the things I remember reading some time ago is how I-135 was meant to be connected to I-80, but they ran out of funding. I would be okay with interstate tolls to finish roads like I-135 to I-80...but as soon as they're paid for, the tolls are gone and maintenance is baked into the budget going forward.

 

Then again, that was supposed to be the deal for the North Dallas Tollway and the George Bush Tollways in Dallas...and instead of ending the tolls, they kept them going and sold off the rights to the tolls to a third party (foreign, at that) company who keeps jacking them up.

 

This rustles my jimmies very much.

 

 

Chicago did the same with their parking meters.

[BigRedBuster]

Chicago put in their tolls while selling the idea to the public that they would be taken out when the road construction was paid for. Well...that was decades ago and the road has long been paid for.

 

This really riles up some locals when they know how corrupt the local politics is. It isn't out of the realm of possibility that those tolls are simply going into the pockets of transportation executives, their contractor friends and local politicians.

 

I know some people who believe that I-80 through Nebraska should be a toll road. There is a large amount of the traffic through Nebraska that doesn't spend any money in Nebraska other than stopping for Gas (only if they have to). Much of that is truck traffic that tears up the roads more than cars. This would help pay for road repairs.

 

Not saying I agree with it but it's an interesting idea for Nebraska.

[deedsker]

Chicago put in their tolls while selling the idea to the public that they would be taken out when the road construction was paid for. Well...that was decades ago and the road has long been paid for.

 

This really riles up some locals when they know how corrupt the local politics is. It isn't out of the realm of possibility that those tolls are simply going into the pockets of transportation executives, their contractor friends and local politicians.

 

I know some people who believe that I-80 through Nebraska should be a toll road. There is a large amount of the traffic through Nebraska that doesn't spend any money in Nebraska other than stopping for Gas (only if they have to). Much of that is truck traffic that tears up the roads more than cars. This would help pay for road repairs.

 

Not saying I agree with it but it's an interesting idea for Nebraska.

If you are a Nebraska resident, you could then theoretically get a percentage refund on what you paid in, due to the regular state taxes owed.

[carlfense]

If you are a Nebraska resident, you could then theoretically get a percentage refund on what you paid in, due to the regular state taxes owed.

I'm not sure if they could do that . . . I don't think that a state can specifically tax out of state people/goods/services without the same tax rate applying within the state.

[deedsker]

If you are a Nebraska resident, you could then theoretically get a percentage refund on what you paid in, due to the regular state taxes owed.

I'm not sure if they could do that . . . I don't think that a state can specifically tax out of state people/goods/services without the same tax rate applying within the state.

I am sure there are loopholes. Just because it has a different name doesn't mean it holds a different purpose.