White House slams carpooling, new road fees better (children, minorities hardest hit...)

Reuters ^ | February 12, 2007 | Tom Doggett

[presidio9]

Carpooling won't do much to reduce U.S. highway congestion in urban areas, and a better solution would be to build new highways and charge drivers fees to use them, the White House said on Monday.

ADVERTISEMENT

"It is increasingly appropriate to charge drivers for some roadway use in the same way the private market charges for other goods and services," the White House said in its annual report on the U.S. economy.

While some urban areas have designated roads for vehicles with two or more passengers, those high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes are often underused because carpooling is becoming less popular, the administration said.

Based on the latest data supplied by the White House, only about 13 percent of motorists carpooled to work in 2000. That compared with 20 percent of daily American commuters in 1980.

"This trend makes it unlikely that initiatives focused on carpooling will make large strides in reducing vehicle use," the White House said.

Building more highways won't reduce congestion either, unless drivers are charged a fee, according to the administration.

"If a roadway is priced -- that is, if drivers have to pay a fee to access a particular road -- then congestion can be avoided by adjusting the price up or down at different times of day to reflect changes in demand for its use," the White House said. "Road space is allocated to drivers who most highly value a reliable and unimpaired commute."

Critics of such fees argue that road tolls would make new highways reserved mostly for wealthy drivers, who are more likely to travel in expensive, gas-guzzling vehicles.

But the White House said urban road expansions should be focused on highways where drivers demonstrate a willingness to pay a fee that is higher than the actual cost of construction, allowing communities to avoid raising taxes on everyone to build the roads.

The administration argued that congestion pricing is already used by many providers of goods and services: movie theaters charge more for tickets in the evening than they do at midday, just as ski resorts raise lift prices on weekends. Similarly, airlines boost prices on tickets during peak travel seasons and taxi cabs raise fares during the rush hour.

[kiriath_jearim]

"As a woman, I cannot imagine getting into a stranger's car."

***
Of course, the early 70s song made it sound safe: "I'm the friendly stranger in the black sedan..won't you step inside my car?.... I'm your vehicle, woman...

[colorado tanker]

It is frustrating to see so many carpool lanes so underutilized. The market can provide the solution, and actually provide a monetary incentive to carpool, plus provide additional funds for construction without raising taxes.

[AnotherUnixGeek]

What some of us are saying is most of us would not need them to commute to work, if we had a viable alternative.

I think you're overlooking a basic fact - most people prefer to use them to commute to work, even when they don't need to.

[Married with Children]

Here in Memphis we have a couple of miles of HOV lanes and I as well as most people in this city drive in this lane all the time alone in the car. My taxes paid for that lane and I should be able to use it. I went to L.A. and they have the HOV lane and I couldn't believe during the hellish rush hour that this lane was pretty much open. If that had been Memphis that lane would have been just as full as the others because no one here obeys and it is not very well inforced. While in L.A. I took my chances and jumped in and out of the HOV lane and got on up the road. :)

[RobRoy]

Hey, what a novel idea! They could call these new roads, um, how about, Toll roads!

Man this blows.

Then again, since the HOV lanes in the Seattle area go about the same speed as the other lanes, why carpool?

[Married with Children]

I know of what you speak..couldn't believe no one was in the diamond lane. I got in and out of it a few times but am not from around there and was not sure how heavily that was inforced.

[ROLF of the HILL COUNTRY]

"... but I've been under the impression that the toll road controversy in Texas involves roads that haven't even been built yet."

You're misinformed. The proposals for wholly new toll roads are not opposed for the most part. What really ticks us off in SATx is the heavy-handed way the state is planning to convert major EXISTING roadways to toll roads despite the overwhelming opposition of the people here. These roads have no real alternatives, and they're already paid for! The posting by another Texan shed some light on the subject: in order for the Trans-Texas corridor highway to be profitable, they've got to eliminate the free alternatives to it.

[Atlas Sneezed]

WTF is the WH doing worrying about local traffic congestion?!

[Muzzle_em]

Lol!
I'm sure it would be "inconvenient" for Al as well, although he thinks the rest of us "common folk" should be willing to do our part while he JETS around the country lecturing us.

[Atlas Sneezed]

"The only solution is more freeways."

WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!

"Automobile traffic will expand to fill all space provided to it." - Buckminster Fuller

Another earlier poster was right: we have to get people out of their cars. Rapid rail works, and very well.

---

You are parroting the socialist left.

More capacity is more capacity. Sure, it makes it more attractive to live somewhere when traffic doesn't suck because they kept up with demand, and that will add some more congestion (which can be built for. But having enough freeway lanes in Omaha won't turn it into LA.

(WTF are Bucky's qualifications as a traffic engineer, anyway?)

Oh, and if you like light rail that costs billions, puts good bus routes out of service, and costs $20 per ride to operate it, PAY FOR IT YOURSELF! Don't steal my gas taxes to pay for your toy trolley.

[listenhillary]

It took 56 posts, but BINGO!

[listenhillary]

MANY states are dipping into federal tax dollars to fund their socialist ways.

[Atlas Sneezed]

OK I'll try one last time. Build all the roads you want. Spend the entire US economy building roads. The number of cars will expand to fill all available highways until the entire North American Continent is a vast interlaced parking lot and every square mile not dedicated to highways is growing corn for fuel. Not one car on the highway will exceed 50 MPH because there is no room.

look at every urban area in the US that has built roads over the last 20 years. See any improvement in traffic flow? Is it taking you less time to go from Atlanta to Orlando this year versus in 2000? Doesn't matter how much is spent on highway development or where the money comes from, the rate of increase in the number of cars exceeds the rate at which we can expand the highways.

---

Oddly, though your first paragraph eloquently makes a sarcastic case to show how silly the "you can't build out of congestion", your second paragraph has me in doubt that you might actually believe this nonsense.

But the true solution, in this land of 50 states, is for the feds to butt out, let us keep all our gas taxes, have minimal safety and signage standards, and let the experiment begin. If the socialists want to buy billion dollar rail systems, let them, if other want toll roads, let them. Then, we won't have to listen to the socialists telling us how spending driver's money on the infrastructure drivers use is a dumb idea. We'll have proof one way or the other.

[lentulusgracchus]

The Indiana Toll Road, for instance, essentially serves to move truck traffic from New York to Chicago, ....these people don't pay Indiana taxes, the road exists almost exclusively for their use.

That must not be Gary and Hammond, Indiana, I see near the western end, on my clearly marked map of Indiana.

And that must not be South Bend, home of Notre Dame, in the middle.

Break out the sensitivity curves! Let's slap a really big toll on that sucker!

[Publius]

There is a missing piece of the of the puzzle, which is the degree to which highways (as other transportation forms) are subsidized. We tend to think that all highway building and maintenance expenses are covered by gasoline taxes, which is not true.

A certain FReeper (who shall remain nameless) gave a lunchtime entertainment speech to some Washington state politicos in Olympia two years ago and condensed the speech into an essay. After being cleaned up and edited for print form, TANSTAAFL: A (Semi-)Satiric Look at a World Without Transportation Subsidies maintains its belly laughs but doesn't quite convey the image of state legislators falling on the floor and laughing themselves into insensibility. (The speech should have been videotaped.)

There is a lot more to transportation funding than meets the eye.

[lentulusgracchus]

I went to L.A. and they have the HOV lane and I couldn't believe during the hellish rush hour that this lane was pretty much open.

Yeah, they want to toll on the HOV lanes, make them into "Lexus lanes". Popular idea among flush Lexus owners.

Remember that stupid Nissan commercial years ago? "Oh -- I didn't realize it was you, Bob!"

[UncleDick]

Rapid rail (not necessarily "light") systems are the best solution for our urban-suburban traffic congestion problems,

Rail sucks. Too many points of failure, fixed (i.e. inconvenient) routes, and slow as molasses. If you're talking public transit, buses are the best way to go.

The real solution to the problem is, of course, privatization, but the government (and their loyal private contractors) will never give up on the lucrative transportation racket.

[B4Ranch]

>What in the heck do we pay taxes for?<

Jose, Pedro, Arturo, Maria, all need your taxes and they do say, "Gracias, Amigo". No, don't expect them to learn English because they feel they will need Spanish when they are the majority.

[Rb ver. 2.0]

"Slugging is common in Northern VA. You stand at the bus stop in a line, and cars that need more riders for the HOV pick you up at no charge."

Thanks for the info!

[Ben Mugged]

With some folks it all boils down to money. Don't increase my taxes. My point is not about money. My point is there is no future in the personal automobile.

In 20 years let's get back together and find out who was right.