Replies

And, this perhaps overly-optimistic item from the Heartland Institute:

Three Lessons in Highway Privatization

Written By: Robert W. Poole, Jr.
Published In: Budget & Tax News
Publication Date: March 1, 2005
Publisher: The Heartland Institute

1. At the very time state Departments of Transportation (DOTs) are desperately short of funds for highway investment, global capital markets are awash with capital for economically sound highway projects. Wise governments will take advantage of this.

2. Long terms (50- to 99-year leases) make it feasible for the private sector to pay significantly more for a highway project, because of the potential of large long-term gains. This applies not only to existing assets such as the $1.8 billion Chicago Skyway deal, but also to new projects.

In December 2004, the Texas DOT selected the winning bidder to develop the first Trans-Texas Corridor. CINTRA--an international group of engineering, construction, and financial firms--has committed $7.2 billion for this project, of which $6 billion will be used to construct the 316-mile, four-lane toll road. The other $1.2 billion is a franchise fee, to be paid to the Texas DOT over the decade or more of construction, in exchange for the right to charge tolls for 50 years.

3. Although the idea of investor-owned highways strikes people as odd, because it's unfamiliar, it is no more radical than investor-owned electric utilities or investor-owned telecommunication firms. All are vital elements of infrastructure that we use every day. The long U.S. history of success with investor-owned utilities (contrasted with state-owned utilities in most other countries for most of the twentieth century) should give us confidence that the market can handle highways, too.

Robert Poole (bobp@reason.org) is director of transportation studies and founder of Reason Foundation.

"3. Although the idea of investor-owned highways strikes people as odd, because it's unfamiliar, it is no more radical than investor-owned electric utilities or investor-owned telecommunication firms."

If that were true, the country would be crisscrossed with private highways. This is one BIZZIARE concept, and I just wish the druggies at Reason could find another state to try out their experiments on (like California). Until recently Texas did quite well with its freeway system.

As far as the comparison to investor-owned utilities are concerned. That's fine, I would only wish they'd complete the analogy by explaining that utilities that are given monopoly protection are also highly regulated. The utilities are not free to charge their customers whatever they can squeeze out of them, while this insane toll road scheme could give Cintra full authority over the tolls it charges to drivers - just like they have in Canada.

"1. At the very time state Departments of Transportation (DOTs) are desperately short of funds for highway investment, global capital markets are awash with capital for economically sound highway projects. Wise governments will take advantage of this."

One or the other, ehhh. Well how about some middle ground. Instead of inviting Cintra over here to rape Texas drivers for the purpose of building more condos on the French Riviera (for their investors), why doesn't the state of Texas simply build the roads itself - as toll roads (if the governor really tolls to satisfy some craving he has). After all, capital is capital, and if all this money is looking for an investment, why not have the state do it? Then at least the money stays in the state and could maybe be used to offset other taxes or build new roads.

Better yet, build them as freeways, using the state to guarantee payment. That makes the bonds tax free, so their interest rate can be much lower, and it also eliminate tolling, which cuts the cost of the highway by at least 1/3.

But to Mr. Poole, none of that matters - he, no doubt has an extra $5,000 or more of extra cash lying around (per year), so he's not really affected by these tolls. But if the roads are built quickly, he does get to drive on them. And that is probably the bottom line - he's one of a bunch of people that have more money than they know what to do with, who simply want their own highways - they're sick of having to drive around with us "little people".