Replies

"Point to some resources so that we can look into that claim. I have not heard of Perry wanting to turn all roads into toll roads. I would like to know where you learned that."

The word "all" is the operative word above. No, it hasn't been explicitly stated that way - but it is the only logical conclusion that can be reached, based on the governor's behavior in this area. Consider:

1. The governor clearly wants to leave some kind of legacy. For some reason he's decided on this (a new park would have been fine for me, even in his name).

2. The governor needs, by my estimate, $100 to $200 Billion for his corridor plan.

3. He clearly will not get anything close to that via the gas tax. Even if he raised it $1.00 per gallon, he would only take in about $10 Billion per year (of which at least $2B would be required just to maintain the existing road system). Thus, it would be a very long time before his scheme was completed. Furthermore, he's ruled out any increase in the gas tax - so this option is moot. Remember, our governor doesn't like raising taxes (yep).

4. So, that leaves borrowing. He would have to sell bonds on an order of magnitude never seen before. So, ask yourself if there's any potential bond purchasers that are dumb enough to finance a $20B toll road running roughly parallel to I-10, when I-10 is a freeway. The answer is clearly NO. They wouldn't do it in California (SH-91) and they will not do it here. I-10 simply could not be allowed to steal traffic. So, there are 3 options: (1) Tear down I-10; (2) Let I-10 degrad to the point that no one will want to use it; (3) Charge tolls for travel on I-10. Considering that his plan calls for permission to start tolling federally funded roads (see quote earlier), and that I-10 is still needed, it should be clear which option he's chosen.

So, I would be much more interested in hearing how the state intend to finance this Corridor program, and exactly who are the investors they've lined up - and what have terms have those investors demanded.

In California, the SH91 toll lanes were built privately, down the center of the 91 freeway. In order to find investors for the project, the State of California had to sign a non-compete clause with the investors. The bottom line was that the state could not make any improvements, to any road, within something like a 20 mile wide strip, running parallel with the road, without permission from the private investors. Well, a year or two ago, it was time to do some widening to relieve a severe bottleneck - and guess what, the investors wouldn't let them do it. Imagine that - a state agency not being able to widen a section of state highway, on state land, that they own. That's the kind of surreal world Mr. Perry is taking this state into. In California, they wound up having to buy the toll road from the investors and now Orange County owns it - and still charges through the teeth.

The reason I bring this up is, unlike what a lot libertarians out there think, it is not possible to mix highways and the free market. In this case, everyone got a small look at what market forces demand, and it is congested and non-functional freeways. Not a pretty world.