[Gay State Conservative]

Bottom line: Massachusetts, like New jersey, chose to pay for the costs of maintenance and improvements by issung new bonds, thus containing the costs within an authority bound by bond covenants. Connecticut had all of America pay for its improvements. Which was better? Judge for yourself.

Given that,among other things,Massachusetts is one of the biggest "contributors" (per capita) to the US Treasury I'd say that America can,at the very least,help pay for the maintenance of I-90.

[Alberta's Child]

Given that,among other things,Massachusetts is one of the biggest "contributors" (per capita) to the US Treasury I'd say that America can,at the very least,help pay for the maintenance of I-90.

The level of tax revenues isn't relevant in that regard. The only real consideration should be whether the roadway in question functions as an economic asset across a wide, multi-state region. I'd say I-80 in Pennsylvania more closely fits that description than almost any road in Massachusetts. Ironically, I-80 in PA is almost as important to the people of Massachusetts as I-90 in MA is.