Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

White House slams carpooling, new road fees better (children, minorities hardest hit...)
Reuters ^ | February 12, 2007 | Tom Doggett

Posted on 02/12/2007 1:03:09 PM PST by 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.


TOPICS: Extended News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: beammeupscotty; foryourowngood; fromthegovernment; heretohelp; nonewtaxes; smartgrowth; taxdollarsatwork; tollroads; transportation; youpayforthis
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200201-220 last
To: lentulusgracchus
The HOV lanes we're talking about are in Northern Virginia on a stretch of the busiest piece of Interstate in the nation (I think only I70 on the Eastside of Indianapolis is busier).

This is highly developed urban space ~ widening the highway would probably cost something in terms of billions of dollars per mile.

There really isn't somewhere else to put the highways!

As far as double-decking is concerned, the subsurface around here is disaggegated schist leftover from a massive meteor strike tens of millions of years ago. It's been infilled with wind blown loess.

The few spots where the Metro-line (the local "subway system") had to be built "overhead" were incredibly expensive ~ "mindboggling" actually.

Regarding the HOV rules, the system started out requiring "buses only", then HOV-4 was allowed, and finally HOV-3.

What you neglected to account for was the fact that drivers learn to use the system and highway management learns to deliver the service, and working together everyone improves the efficiency of the operation thereby allowing lighter loads per vehicle.

201 posted on 02/12/2007 8:25:07 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Cymbaline
I've driven extensively in Southern California and found the expresslane system (where it exists) to be simply marvelous.

I never failed to have the requisite mob of people in my vehicle (2).

Although there's space between the cars using the expresslanes, they move more cars per lane per hour than the regular lanes do, particularly when they are at a complete standstill for hours on end.

CA should quickly expand the expresslanes to at least 2 full lanes in each direction to bring more speed and efficiency to commuter traffic.

202 posted on 02/12/2007 8:28:34 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: savedbygrace

With the proposal to tax health insurance benefits, this, and a few other things, it's clear that Bush no longer feels the need to even pretend to be a conservative.


203 posted on 02/12/2007 8:30:30 PM PST by steve-b (It's hard to be religious when certain people don't get struck by lightning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: GeorgefromGeorgia

Carpooling only works for Gov employees as they are just about the only ones that can work their day into a 8 tp 5 schedule.


204 posted on 02/12/2007 8:35:39 PM PST by Boiler Plate (Mom always said why be difficult, when with just a little more effort you can be impossible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: The Pack Knight
My Cherokee doesn't "use" the road any more than a Prius does

Heavy objects produce more wear and tear on the underlying surface than light objects. That's Physics 101.

205 posted on 02/12/2007 8:36:33 PM PST by steve-b (It's hard to be religious when certain people don't get struck by lightning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: ROLF of the HILL COUNTRY

It's been the other way around for about 75 years. Living near the railroad is not exactly desirable.


206 posted on 02/12/2007 8:38:26 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Why not just sign an executive order requiring carpooling. After all, stroke of the pen, law of the land. Pretty cool /s


207 posted on 02/12/2007 8:38:35 PM PST by ichabod1 ("Liberals read Karl Marx. Conservatives UNDERSTAND Karl Marx." Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
If you can find a single reference in the Bill of Rights -- or even the U.S. Constitution as a whole -- to a "freedom to travel," then you might have a point.

It is impossible for people to "assemble" without traveling to the point of assembly. The freedom of the people to assemble is explicitly guaranteed in the First Amendment. Q.E.D.

208 posted on 02/12/2007 8:39:06 PM PST by steve-b (It's hard to be religious when certain people don't get struck by lightning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

You lost that argument when they build what is now US 40.


209 posted on 02/12/2007 8:39:53 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Diddle E. Squat
It is a way to get more roads without increasing taxes.

But if the roads are getting congested, that must mean there are more car-miles being driven, right?

And if there are more car-miles being driven, there is more fuel being purchased, and more road tax being paid. So there ought to be more money available for maintenance and construction of roads.

The real problem is that the road taxes are being misappropriated.

We don't really need more taxes or fees...we need less corruption and waste.

If we are to have toll roads, then let's get rid of fuel taxes.

210 posted on 02/12/2007 8:46:32 PM PST by B Knotts (Newt '08!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus

There are confused people everywhere. You just happened to inherit some of them.


211 posted on 02/12/2007 8:49:11 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: steve-b
Putting aside the fact that a Prius is only a few hundred pounds lighter than a Cherokee (due to battery weight), the fact is that heavier vehicles also use more fuel, and pay more fuel taxes.

So, it ought to work out fairly equitably, except for the fact that fuel taxes are being stolen and wasted on urban boondoggles like light rail.

212 posted on 02/12/2007 8:51:29 PM PST by B Knotts (Newt '08!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: Boiler Plate

Slugging worked for me, and I sometimes had to work long hours. Even when the slug line disappeared, I could take the bus. My normal work schedule was 7-5 (government employee).


213 posted on 02/13/2007 4:59:08 AM PST by GeorgefromGeorgia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: rockrr
I don't know how the HOV lanes work outside of the DC area, but they really work well there. There is a significant amount of traffic on the HOV lanes (which are reversible), but not the bumper to bumper traffic on the regular lanes. In N.VA. the regular lanes are bumper to bumper starting before 6am in the morning.
214 posted on 02/13/2007 5:02:04 AM PST by GeorgefromGeorgia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: steve-b
Heavy objects produce more wear and tear on the underlying surface than light objects. That's Physics 101.

True, but the Grand Cherokee only weighs 25% more than the Prius (3614 lbs. vs. 2890 lbs.). Add to that 30% wider tires, which distributes the weight better, and, assuming both cars have fully inflated tires, my Cherokee may actually exert less contact pressure on the road. Even without figuring in tire width, while the Cherokee only weighs 25% more, it consumes 233% more gasoline on average. Now, you can say what you will about my inefficient fuel consumption, but that has nothing to do with my use of the road itself. The gas taxes I pay are wildly disproportionate with the road damage caused by my vehicle, when compared with the Prius. Call that Physics 202.
215 posted on 02/13/2007 6:13:38 AM PST by The Pack Knight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus

So what's your point? Yes, cities exist along the Toll Road in Indiana. You have read the map. Well done!

The fact remains, though, that the Toll Road exists nearly exclusively for out-of-state traffic. In Ohio, (which, of course, is home to the same I-80 toll road as Indiana), up to 85% of the traffic is out-of-state. In Indiana, only 18% of the cars on the Toll Road are Indiana cars. Again, since the Toll Road exists for almost exclusively out-of-state traffic, why shouldn't out-of-state traffic pay for the upkeep of the road?

As far as your relatives go, there are a number of people that oppose the Toll Road deal in Indiana. My only comment to that is that there are, unfortunately, a huge number of woefully ignorant people in the Hoosier state, especially in considering this Toll Road deal.

Again, I note:

1. Indiana will regain posession of the Toll Road when the lease expires. The state never transferred ownership, and still owns the road.

2. The state was losing money on the operation of the Toll Road. Had been for years.

3. The state received $4 billion in cash for the lease of the road, which will fund dozens of road construction projects throughout the state, including the construction of a new interstate highway from Indianapolis to Evansville.

4. The state receives approximately $7 a second from interest on the $4 billion, which far exceeds the loss that the state realized on its operation of the Toll Road before.

I ask again: why do people think this is a bad deal?


216 posted on 02/13/2007 6:21:45 AM PST by Publius Valerius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: steve-b
If you can find a single reference in the Bill of Rights -- or even the U.S. Constitution as a whole -- to a "freedom to travel," then you might have a point.-Alberta's Child


Now to agree with you, steve. Just because something isn't in the Bill of Rights or the Constitution, doesn't mean it isn't a right. Did Americans have no freedom of speech or religion in the years between the ratification of the Constitution and the ratification of the Bill of Rights?

Frankly, I'm getting tired of "conservatives" assuming that just because a right isn't specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights, it isn't a right. After all, are we not "endowed by [our] Creator with certain unalienable Rights"? Note, endowed by our Creator, not by the government. We had these rights before the Bill of Rights was ever written, and as they are "unalienable", would be endowed with those rights even if the Bill was repealed.

The Bill of Rights itself was controversial at the time it was written, as many of the founders saw that it was unnecessary. The Constitution as it was originally written did not call upon the people to cede their rights to the authority of the federal or state governments. Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist #84, "Here, in strictness, the people surrender nothing; and as they retain every thing they have no need of particular reservations." We didn't need a Bill of Rights because those rights weren't the Constitution's to grant!

So, frankly, I'm sick and tired of people using the Bill of Rights to deny liberty, by pointing out that this specific right or that one isn't technically present in the document. We receive our rights from God, not from a piece of paper. Sorry to go way off topic, but this is something that has been bothering me for some time.
217 posted on 02/13/2007 6:33:49 AM PST by The Pack Knight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
Plus the gas tax is twice what it is in this country.

The gas tax is over 200%. I know this because one gas station put stickers on the pumps stating what the gas actually cost before tax, and it wasn't any more than it cost here.

218 posted on 02/13/2007 8:11:26 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat

Gas in England and Germany is between $5 and $6. The difference between that and what AAFES gas coupons cost can be attributed to taxes.


219 posted on 02/13/2007 9:53:25 AM PST by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
The difference between that and what AAFES gas coupons cost can be attributed to taxes.

Nope. AAFES puts a pretty heavy profit premium on top of the regular gas price to arrive at the price they charge for gas coupons. The real gas prices are a LOT less than what the coupons cost, but people rarely complain because the alternative is even more expensive.

220 posted on 02/13/2007 10:27:33 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200201-220 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson