Virginia GOP on Transportation: One Good Idea, One Bad

As the special transportation session of the General Assembly draws nigh, the House Republican leadership has thrown out some new ideas regarding transportation funding. One of them deserves serious consideration. The other one is dangerous: a potential blank check for the political class.

Del. G. Glenn Oder, R-Newport News, announced Friday that he had introduced legislation to create a “constitutional lock-box” for the Transportation Trust Fund. This idea, backed by Gov. Timothy M. Kaine early in his administration, would protect dedicated transportation from revenue razzias to fund other programs. Politically, a constitutional lockbox is mandatory to induce voters to support tax increases for transportation construction. Without such a guarantee, only the most naive would trust the politicians to honor a commitment to leave the funds alone.

Said Oder in a press release: “It is time to put ‘trust’ back into the Transportation Trust Fund. This constitutional amendment provides a guarantee to the citizens of Virginia that money dedicated to transportation will be spent on transportation. To prevent similar diversions and raids, we approved a constitutional amendment to protect funds for education raised through the State Lottery. We should protect transportation dollars as well.”

Oder’s legislation is backed by the House Republican leadership, including Speaker William J. Howell, R-Stafford. Said Howell: “The people of Virginia have every right to expect that moneys dedicated for transportation will, in fact, go to transportation.”

Right on!

While Howell’s logic is impeccable in that instance, he floated a stinker last week when discussing how to address the transportation needs of Hampton Roads. In an interview with the Daily Press, Howell suggested leasing the long-term tolling rights for Hampton Roads bridges and tunnels in return for up-front payments in cash.

“You can’t raise taxes enough to build all of those things,” Howell said of the region’s list of seven major transportation projects, which includes expanding the Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel, reports the Daily Press’ Kimball Payne. “Looking at tolls and concessions is the only way you’re going to solve Hampton Roads’ problems.”

The problem with the transportation projects favored by the political class of Hampton Roads is they are largely for the benefit of the port and maritime interests, and to some extent development interests. By leasing off bridge and tunnel concessions and hiking tolls to pay for those projects, Howell’s proposal would represent a multibillion-dollar transfer of wealth from the general citizenry to the port/maritime/development sectors of the business community.

I’m all in favor of finding creative ways to build the new transportation capacity needed to expand the ports — as long as the projects can pay their own way, and as long as private interests shoulder the risk that revenue projections might not materialize. Toll the trucks. Tax the containers. Create Community Development Authorities to develop industrial real estate along the expanded highways and use the proceeds to issue bonds. Privatize the Virginia Port Authority. But don’t tax or toll already overtaxed citizens for something that benefits them only indirectly if at all.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

  1. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    ell me whether you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree with each way to fund transportation improvements in Hampton Roads.

    Through tolls only on new highways and bridges built in Hampton Roads
    23

    Through tolls on highways and bridges 20

    An increase in the statewide sales tax – 16

    An increase in the statewide gas tax 14

    A new regional sales tax just in the Hampton Roads area 6

    A new regional gas tax just in the Hampton Roads areas 4

    Rate how important you feel each project is on a 1 to 5 scale
    (% who rated project 4 or 5):

    Expand the Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel – 69

    Improve/expand mass transit, including light rail 60

    Build a third Bridge-Tunnel crossing 57

    http://universityrelations.cnu.edu/news/2008/04_30_08tunnel.html

    full disclosure: the above is selected excerpts that I have tried to faithfully summarize but it is still subject to some level of interpretation.

    But I ask the same question that I have asked Bob and others:

    If YOU are a politician.. and a Republican one at that – then what would you make of this POLL in terms of what you might offer to the public – to convince them that you are listening to them?

    I’ll admit – a 23% favorable rating on tolls as the prefered charging method is not exactly a ringing endorsement .. but compared to how folks felt about a regional gasoline tax – 4% = what path would most politicians pursue?

    but is this statement going to win the voters:

    “Toll the trucks. Tax the containers. Create Community Development Authorities to develop industrial real estate along the expanded highways and use the proceeds to issue bonds. Privatize the Virginia Port Authority. But don’t tax or toll already overtaxed citizens for something that benefits them only indirectly if at all.”

    ???

    not to mention the problem of whether one thinks you’d actually get a billion or two dollars from CDAs and truck tolls – which, in and of itself, presents a problem.. how would you toll the trucks ONLY?

    But if you are a Republican – I think you’ll have to do much better than just “suggest” what Jim B has.

    You’d have to put together a real budget – like Kaine did – showing where you are going to get the money and how much.

    Kaine’s plan offers about $180 million a year from a 1% sales tax – not near enough for the projects and he is suggesting that this be “seed” money for the billion dollar projects that are needed.

    but a real plan.. on paper.. and you can hammer away at it… or you can show a better way

    So.. let’s see the “better” Republican Alternative – by the numbers not the hand waving…

    Will voters in HR/TW more likely throw out elected who offer no plan or a vague plan without numbers or a plan that can be laid down next to Kaines and compared on the merits?

    Reid and Darrel probably now that answer…

  2. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    and yes….

    “A new regional sales tax just in the Hampton Roads area – 6% in favor”

    (consistent with the overwhelming rejection of the 2002 Referendum)

    does NOT match up well with:

    [Kaine Budget]

    1% Sales Tax – Hampton Roads =
    FY 09 – $167.9 million

    some would say .. “WHAT was HE thinking” – right?

    so.. really pitiful … except what is more pitiful?

    ..well .. that would be the Republican Plan – right?

    🙂

  3. James Atticus Bowden Avatar
    James Atticus Bowden

    The biggest stinker in HR/Tidewater is the Regional Government. Any plan that doesn’t kill the HRTA is UNSAT.

    Our MPO = HRPDC = HRTA is malfunctioning.

    If the GA comes up with nothing in the Transportation Special Session, that is better than something bad – meaning anything that lets the HRTA live.

    Keeping the Regional Government alive as a breeding ground for the genteel way we do corruption in Virginia to feed special interests who feed politicians is the sure way for more politicians to lose their jobs in the next election cycle.

    Ask the Speaker what the latest polls are on Regional Government here in Tdewater/HR.

  4. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Mr. Bacon – unfortunately the constitution requires that amendments be passed by two separate legislative sessions and that there must be an election for the house between those two sessions.

    So, his lock box must be passed by the 2010 session, then a legislative election held and then passed again by the 2011 session.

    Passing the bill in June 2009 will do not good.

  5. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Anonymous 7:56, You are quite right. Constitutional amendments were purposefully made to be difficult to do and undo.

    That fact, plus the fact that the General Assembly has yet to re-think its policy on impact fees/proffers — potentially a major source of transportation funding — suggests to me that June 2008 is the wrong time to hold a special session on transportation.

    Moreover, nobody agrees on anything. Not only is there not a consensus about what to do, public opinion is extraordinarily fractured. The comments on this blog are a good reflection of public and political sentiment. Nobody can agree on anything!

    One of the very few things that the public does agree upon is that there should be a lockbox for transportation revenues.

    Such a lockbox is a political prerequisite for moving ahead politically on the transportation funding debate. Until a lockbox exists, the public will have no trust that the money won’t be diverted to some other purpose.

  6. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    I think the Lockbox idea is a diversionary scam that will achieve nothing of substance – and further the voters will see this for what it is – and is not – also.

    A minority of people think that there is truly enough being “diverted” to make transportation “whole”. The rest sense that funding is a problem even if they don’t want to pay more.

    The vast majority of the 4 billion a year spent on transportation actually is spend on that purpose and the part that is not is largely a drop in the bucket of what is said to be actually needed.

    The folks that say otherwise need to show the numbers if they want to be believed.

    Some folks think conceptually that the Lock Box does not include transit money -that te purpose of the LockBox is to protect road money.

    Is there language to that effect in the proposed legislation? I bet not.

    A lockbox also implies a dedicated revenue stream from something other than the General Fund because by definition – a lockbox preserves a specific revenue stream for a specific purpose.

    The gas tax is that stream and the problem that we have is CURRENT gas tax is no longer sufficient to produce ENOUGH revenue to pay for NEW infrastructure.

    Those who support the Lockbox concept but ignore the fundamental issue of not enough revenue from the dedicated revenue stream will not be taken seriously IMHO.

    Revenue from gas tax: $842,674,700
    Revenue from sales tax:$421,832,000

    the gas tax revenue (lockbox stream) is FLAT while the revenue from the sales tax is growin.

    Will the 1/2% sales tax be considered a lockbox stream?

    What else would we ADD to the lockbox revenue stream? Would we up the sales tax to 1%?

    that’s only 400 million – about what is needed for maintenance and it does have one saving grace – it IS indexed so it probably would put to bed – the maintenance issue.

    What else would be a legitimate – “protectable” lockbox revenue stream?

    I don’t think you can say a certain amount or a certain percentage of the General Revenues but you might.. if it is codified but for some reason, I don’t see the pachyderms following this path.

    Perhaps if they did – they’d get some credit that they don’t get now.

  7. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “But don’t tax or toll already overtaxed citizens for something that benefits them only indirectly if at all.”

    Right on, but, we need to have a comprehensive agreement as to what constitutes benefits, and how they should be measured. Corporations are citizens, too, and just because they benefit (and presumably their employees) is no reason a project shouldn’t go forward.

    The whole question of what constitutes benefits and how they should be paid for is central to many of our most pressing questions and issues, and yet no one is working on a comprehensive set of metrics to help us make public decisions.

    RH

  8. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    what path would most politicians pursue?

    Depends on whether they are leaders or merely representatives.

    The British Prime minister made a statement today that British perticipation in Afghanistan and Iraq would not be dictated by political pressure. What kind of statement is that, from the leader of a Democracy?

    RH

  9. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    As long as the articulated antidote to the current wasteful/diversionary/tax&spend (pick your pejorative) policies is a shoulder shrug – not only from politicians but from folks who say that “someone needs to do something” then we get what we get.

    Blaming inaction on the leaders without putting something on the table as a contribution is not really doing much but whining IMHO.

    If the folks who truly believe that the basic problem is that the gas tax has not kept pace and by not dealing with it – leads us to other wrong/non solutions then where is that advocacy at the political level from those that opposed Kaine’s proposal?

    I don’t think the opposition can have it both ways.

    We can condemn the current approach and then whine that no one else is saying what should be done.

    That’s my biggest complain about the Republicans and the opposition.

    Where the heck is the BEEF?

    There is not shortage of places to go get your fill of “whining” … what I’m looking for is MORE than “we could do this or we could do that ideas” – I’m looking for a legitimate, credible alternate vision on transportation funding.

    I dunno about HR/TW but I suspect many in NoVa will use that kind of a criteria to decide who to vote for (or who to vote against).

    People want answers not dogma.

  10. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Yes, but as I understand your polls, 80% of the population is opposed to increased taxes of any kind by any name.

    If politicians only give people what they want, then the political answer is let the people stew in their own transportation juices.

    But if the answer is that something HAS to be done about transportation, then the answer is to raise more money. That means taxes, whatever you name them. And it should be done in the most convenient and cost effective way. Preferably with some kind of tie to the end use.

    For transportation, that means sales and payroll taxes, preferably with some kind of guarantee that they will be used as promised.

    RH

  11. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    Ray – I thought you were a gas tax guy? what happened?

    re: politicians, “courage” and “leadership”

    A person showing courage and leadership who believe in the “user pays” gas tax would challenge Kaine with a budget that showed a 10 cent gas tax to pay for the maintenance deficit, indexing the gas tax to keep from having to revisit that issue and then put a viable plan on the table for NoVa and HR/TW.

    A 1% state-wide sales tax would raise a billion dollars.

    Do we have a billion dollars worth of road needs OUTSIDE of NoVa and HR/TW?

    Kaine thinks if you plug the maintenance hole that it will free up enough money – restore the cuts to the rest of the State.

    where is the alternate plan?

    Those that do not do that are not truly interested in solutions in my opinion

    .. UNLESS they want to claim that we don’t need to raise new taxes because we already have the money but it is being wasted/mispent and in that case – they need to show the specifics of just exactly how they would alter the current budgets.

    In that case – Mr. pachyderm would have to have the courage and leadership to look at NoVa, Charlottesville, Fredericksburg, Roanoke, et al and say “you already tax cars – use that money for roads”.

    Where is the pachyderm who has that level of courage and leadership?
    Where is the BEEF!

    Courageous and leadership are NOT knocking down what you don’t like and walking away…

  12. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Lock box?

    No thanks.

    Lock boxes (one per region)?

    There you go!

    As many on this board have said:

    1. Driving is not a right.
    2. Drivers should pay their own way.
    3. Some regions pay more in taxes that would be directed to lockboxes.
    4. Some regions need to spend more (out of their lockbox) than other regions.

  13. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    A gas tax is a special kind of sales tax. It should be levied per dollar instead of per gallon. It has the special benefit that it encourages conservation and thrifty fuel usage.

    A gas tax shold be one part of a sales tax package to support transportation needs. Sales taxes of all kinds are a fair way to allocate the costs AND the expenditure of transportation funds, because transportation is so closely tied to commmerce.

    ———————————

    A 1% state-wide sales tax would raise a billion dollars.

    Do we have a billion dollars worth of road needs OUTSIDE of NoVa and HR/TW?

    —————————-

    This is red herring Larry, at it again.

    A 1% state-wide sales tax would raise a billion dollars. Not all of it would be raised in NOVA and not all of it would be spent in NOVA.

    What possible difference does it make if we have a billion dollars in road needs outside of NOVA? Outside of NOVA isn’t going to get all of that billion dollars.

    They would get funding proportional to the amount of money raised. Frankly, that might no be enough because they have by far the greatest extent of roadways, but at least it would be a place to start.

    I would pretty much guess that you can watch how the money in VA flows from HR and NOVA to the rest of the state. My plan would allocate road funds the same way, as sales taxes are collected.

    Where’s the Beef with that?

    RH

  14. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Cool.

    Lock boxes one per region.

    The regions with excess money could then lend it to rgions with not enough money – with interest, which they could use to lower their other taxes.

    This would encourage regions to be thrifty with their transportation spending.

    RH

  15. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    I’m not sure you followed.

    Kaine has already proposed 1% for NoVa-ONLY and HR/TW-only.

    That is the holy-grail lockbox per region that ya’ll seem to like.

    Both Kaine and the Republicans seem to agree on this concept – mostly.

    Nevermind that the folks in both regions soundly rejected this concept and are not offered a referenda –

    which if you think about it is an alternative that the Republicans COULD support.. let the people who will be taxed decide.

    what I was suggesting was for the rest of the state if you oppose what Kaine is proposing – for the rest of the State.

    Kaine is not proposing any money for the rest of the state but he is saying that if you implement his suggested taxes – which are not gas or sales taxes by the way .. anyhow that money will pay for statewide maintenance .. which currently is currently gobbling up money intended for statewide new construction – “diverting” construction money from RoVa.

    why I was suggesting was that if you are someone who is opposed to Kaine’s plan.. there there ARE other options – including a statewide gasoline or sales tax.

    further.. it’s not a red herring when a billion dollars worth of projects have just been cut…

    is one billion dollars the right amount of new tax?

    if you think this is “about right” – say so.

    if you don’t then say what you think IS “about right” or content yourself to be thought of as someone who wants to raise taxes with no idea about how much is needed – you just want to raise taxes – in the process – making Kaine look like a tax&spend piker.

    that’s a concept that voters don’t care for in case you have not noticed.

    are you saying that Kaine’s budget does not spend “enough” new money?

    are you saying he is spending not enough.

    or is he Goldilocks?

  16. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Kaine has already proposed 1% for NoVa-ONLY and HR/TW-only.

    That is the holy-grail lockbox per region that ya’ll seem to like.

    Here’s what I’d like to see:

    1. Virginia is divided into a set of transportation regions – I think about 5. These regions are chosen along two lines – consistency of transportation need and the fewest number of regions possible.

    2. The state gets 15% of all transportation related tax revenues to apply to the state government’s list of priorities.

    3. Each region gets all of the remaining 85% of transportation related taxes raised in that region. This includes tolls, gas tax, car tax, gas tax surcharge, sales tax surcharge (if originally targeted at transportation), etc. All new taxes must be declared “regional lock box taxes” or “other”. The regional lock box taxes cannot be spent on anything but transportation needs in the region where they were collected. All trasnportation tax increases (or new taxes) must be approved by referendum within the region where they are to be collected.

    4. Each of the 5 regions will elect a separate, independent transportation commission. This commission will have the power to levy taxes (or, at least, request referenda for the taxes) for transportation and determine how the money from the region’s transportation taxes are spent.

    5. The transportation commission positions are full time, salaried jobs. A commissioner cannot hold any alternate employment while a commissioner.

    6. Commissioners will stand for 4 year terms. One half of the commission will be elected every two years. There is a 3 term limit on these positions.

    7. Political contributions are capped at $2,500 per contributor per commissioner per election.

    8. All commission meetings are to be held in public. Transcripts are to be taken and distributed vai the internet or by request received by US Mail.

    9. Commissioners accept no more than $25 / week in food, tickets, etc. This is intended to allow commissioners to have a lunch or two a week with people who may be doing business with the commission. No vacations, no tickets to professional sporting events – none of that.

    If Kaine had any guts (which I doubt), that’s what he’d be recommending.

  17. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Larry,

    As you have correctly pointed out there is no Republican plan

    I stated this before but to be clear it is in the best interest in most of the Republican areas to have no statewide plan

    If you are in a Republican area your maintanence needs are going to be taken care of because they are a top priority over new construction.

    There is no transportation problem/crisis for you so it would be incredibly stupid to vote for higher taxes for something that provides no benefit.

    There is a tiny opening for a creative democratic party challenger to bring up say a new interchange in Farmville that won’t be built since funding is being drained from new construction for maintanence needs.

    However, most of these areas are so red and protected it doesn’t matter. Also there is propably a significant chunk of people that don’t want a new interchange in Farmville to begin with.

    In closing, I really wish I could get inside Dave Albos or Tom Rusts or Ken Cuccineeli’s brains. They are the ones that have some really tough decisions to make. They and a handful of other urban Rs are the only people that should be worried about providing an alternative solution.

    And to be perfectly honest as a urban R I think Kaines plan isn’t that bad… we could propably cut some more spending first but the plan is actually pretty fair when you think about it

    NMM

  18. What I don’t understand is why so many want regional lockboxes. If you want to balkanize funding, why not split the state? What benefit does NOVA get from ROVA? Nothing as far as I can tell.

    If Virginia is to remain one state, then NOVA needs to subsidize ROVA for the good of the whole. I haven’t seen any coherent explanation of the need for a split funding solution.

    By the way, the data show NOVA really gets the shaft. See here. NOVA gets the worst maintenance, the most congestion, fewer projects than tiny ROVA districts, etc.

  19. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    FYI –

    “New Funding Regions Should Be
    Established to Replace Existing VDOT Districts for Purposes of Distributing Regional Construction Funds

    The existing VDOT districts, which are based on Congressional district boundaries established in 1922, are antiquated and arbitrary.

    The regions would be based on metropolitan planning organization boundaries in major urban areas and transportation corridors in other areas of the State.

    These regions should further promote and facilitate a regional approach to transportation planning
    and funding with regard to regional
    roads.

    The report recommends that CTB
    members be appointed from the proposed funding regions instead of from VDOT administrative districts.

    http://jlarc.state.va.us/Summary/Sum272.pdf
    page 3

    Regional perspectives are not balkanization any more than Virginia having 21 Planning Districts is balkanization or any more that the Federally-designated MPOs foster balkanization.

    I tend to agree with Groveton. the closer taxing and spending are together – the better voters have some idea of what is going on and some ability to throw folks out if they ignore those who are paying the taxes.

    The current way that we fund roads is ironically the reason why we have some of the problems of “diversion” that Bob rails on and on about.

    When you send money to Richmond, you invite “diversions”.

    Bob rants on about METRO Rail.

    METRO Rail to Dulles would be dead as a doornail if not for his and your gas taxes being “diverted” in Washington towards transit.

    Mary Peters, the top DOT – has pointed this out over and over.

    She’s the top Fed and she’s telling you that your Federal gas tax money is being spent on things that you’d not agree on.

    I’m not sure you can have it both ways anyhow.

    If you want the opposite of what you perceive to be balkanization, doesn’t that, in fact, breed the very abuses that bring on cries of “lockbox”?

    Why would anyone want to play “shell game” with their transportation funding anyhow?

    You send it to Richmond..and then .. like Bob pointed out – who gets their pavement fixed? Certainly not the folks in NoVa who paid their taxes – right?

    so tell me again why it’s “better” to send that NoVa money to Richmond , Bob?

  20. You’re confusing two separate issues. Regional diversion of funding is not the same thing as diverting sources from one type of project to another (eg. taking from motorists to benefit the 2% of the population that take transit). The problem with source diversion is that it misallocates resources in a way that stifles commerce solely to make a handful of Birkenstock-wearing hippies happy.

    The only reason one would support regional diversion is if one area of the state needed more money than its own taxes can provide. Some of the rural areas in VA, I suspect, are like this. Think of it on a national scale — if you balkanizers had your way, Wyoming and Montana would have no interstate highways because those tiny populations could never come up with the cash to build them. It’s good for commerce that those freeways (emphasis on free) exist, and they exist because the big states subsidized the little ones for the good of the whole.

    A good road network throughout the entire state, not just the part in which I live, is good for commerce. Good for commerce is good for me. I might even use those rural roads myself on occasion. I hate parochial politics — the focus should be on what does the most good for the most people as a whole, not just “make things nice in my neighborhood.”

    More money is diverted on the local level than on the state level, so let’s not pretend that Richmond is the evil diverter and, e.g., Fairfax County is innocent. Fairfax is the king of stealing from motorists to build Taj Mahal palaces of government waste.

  21. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Separate state?

    Good by me. Kentucky, West Virginia both left. Arlington and Alexandria were given away and then returned. Virginia is the leader in losing ground. Maybe it’s time for the “descendants of Pocohintas” to lose some more.

    Combine NoVA and DC. Maybe add Maryland.

    It would solve a lot of problems. However, it would also be politically tricky. How would New Virginia’s population vote? All Democrat. Maybe you could argue that would leave Old Virginia to be all Republican – so, not real change and the residents of DC finally get representation. Just the thing that President Obama might consider.

    Meanwhile, there are two kinds of government services – those that ensure support representing rights and those than ensure support of things representing good ideas (but not rights). Education is a right. Funds should be dispersed. Transportation is a good idea but not a rights. Funds should not be dispersed. And funds should not be collected for one thing yet used for somethimg else. So, Fairfax County would be subject to the lock box just like the state. And the state has some inter-regional responsibilities – hence the 15% of taxes allowed to the state to manage those legitimate needs.

    If transportation is a right – there should not be tolls on roads nor should roads be sold to private enterprise. Education is a right so tuition is not charged to students and and public schools are not sold to private operators. However, if transportation is not a right then funds should not be shared across regions and funds should not be collected for this priveledge only to be spent on something else.

    The toll lovers on this board find themselves hoist by their own petards. First, they said that roads should be user pays. The implication was that NoVA was failing to pay for all its transportation costs (no evidence, of course, just talk). Then, the argument was advanced that RoVA would never accept a hike in the decades old gas tax because they shouldn’t “have to pay for NoVA’s roads”. Now we find that NoVA is paying for RoVA’s roads – as well as RoVA’s schools, RoVA’s jails, RoVA’s ports, etc. All this talk of “the real Virginia” and “sense of community” is BS. The Republicans in RoVA rail against “the welfare state” while running one themselves. Meanwhile, Jerry Connolley keeps practicing his sleight of hand at the local level. When it comes to taxes intended from transportation, “Now you see it, now you don’t”.

  22. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    “The implication was that NoVA was failing to pay for all its transportation costs”

    chronically not understood.

    NoVa is a VICTIM or folks who use their roads heavily but do not pay for them.

    Every daily rush-hour NoVa driver who lives outside of NoVa is essentially using NoVa roads for free if they buy the gas outside of NoVa.

    The use of Balkanization to describe allocation of monies to local, regional and State roads is wrongheaded and ignorant.

    The Feds ASSURE that SOME of the money that comes from the Federal Gas Tax .. IS spent on roads of National Significance – not all of it – as some of it is returned to the States without strings.

    But I would point out that when the Feds “preserve” funding for the Interstates, that they can – and do use that same process to “preserve” money for transit.

    It’s the same process.

    JLARC – Virginia’s own CBO has recommended that Virginia do essentially what Groveton has advocated which is – by formula – give VDOT a fixed allocation for roads of state-wide significance so that we do have Interstates and Primary connecting roads but they also recommended that the remaining gas tax money be allocated to MPOs and localities on the same fixed formula basis.

    It is not balkanization to plan regionally.

    If you believe this then you would also be opposed to the Federally-mandated MPOs AND to the Virginia-mandated Planning Districts both of which were created specifically to foster Regional planning when it became apparently that individual jurisdictions lacked the ability to effectively plan as regions.

    Bob is arguing both ways.

    He’s arguing for State-level control of funding decisions to insure that all of Virginia’s needs are met but then he’s arguing that – that process “diverts” transportation funding to uses that he does not agree with.

    The same process that assures that Va allocated money for Interstates also insures that Urban areas like NoVa get to use gas tax money for transit.

    Bob – which is it?

    How would you “get to” the unelected folks who decide to spend your tax money on transit?

    By NOT having those decisions made locally – your opportunity to change this system is nil.

    When you agree to hand over your money to Richmond and Washington – you ARE …AGREEING to diversions for things you do not agree with.

    Give me a solution that you could claim is NOT balkanization.

  23. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “NoVa is a VICTIM or folks who use their roads heavily but do not pay for them.”

    Nonsense. We’ve been throguh this before. The vast majority of NOVA road users are NOVA residents. NOVA is not a victim of folks who use NOVA roads heavily and don’t pay for them. NOVA residents are victims of the GA.

    NOVA residents are vicitims of ROVA residents who use their own roads – and don’t pay for them.

    ———————————-

    “Every daily rush-hour NoVa driver who lives outside of NoVa is essentially using NoVa roads for free if they buy the gas outside of NoVa.”

    Only if the allocation of funds is wrong.

    ——————————–

    “that individual jurisdictions lacked the ability to effectively plan as regions.”

    They have the ability to work together if they choose. They do not have the leadership to get it done.

    ———————————

    “He’s arguing for State-level control of funding decisions to insure that all of Virginia’s needs are met but then he’s arguing that – that process “diverts” transportation funding to uses that he does not agree with.”

    Larry’s red herring again.

    It is a diversion if you take money primarily from motorists and use it for transit. But if you drop the stupid “user pays” notion, then you can develop transportation funding streams that affect everybody, motorists and transit users alike.

    In that case it is no longer a diversion, unless the allocation is grossly pro transit, far beyond what the transit uses pay in transportation taxes.

    ———————————–

    “How would you “get to” the unelected folks who decide to spend your tax money on transit?”

    Don’t let them have the money. No taxation without representation.

    RH

  24. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Bob is right. Wyoming and Montana would have no interstates if they had to pay for them locally.

    Same with ROVA roadways: they would still be dirt tracks, if they had to raise the money up front to pay for them. The fact that they are not shows that their road money comes from someplace else.

    As a result, they have first class service levels, and yet it is NOVA who is expected to pay still more – for “services” that will do nothing to improve congestion.

    The same argument applies to APF: it is a no-growth plan in disguise, because there is no way to raise the money without the participation of current residents. PAYGO just means nothing gets done, which is the whole point of APF, despite any claims anyone makes to the contrary.

    RH

  25. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    re: wrong allocation

    Ray – you have at least 40,000 non-NoVa people using NoVa roads every day and the vast majority of these folks buy gasoline and have that gas tax allocated to where they live -not where they work.

    A more fair “allocation” would be for the portion of the gasoline expended on NoVa roads -that NoVa would get that portion.

    re: “diversions”

    Ray – when you agree to your gas taxes going to Washington or Richmond you are also “outsourcing” the decisions about what are ‘diversions’ and what are not.

    By agreeing to send your money to someone else to make decisions – you are removing yourself from the decision process.

    The fact that you “like” some diversions and dislike others is not the point.

    The point is that you apparently FAVOR a process that allows others to “divert” your taxes for uses you don’t agree with.

    Do you not agree that this is, indeed your position?

  26. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    The gas tax is only part of the transportation fees paid. The amount paid by 40,000 people is a drop in the bucket compared to what NOVA residents pay.

    Yes, the situation you describe is unfair, but it is a teeny tiny part of the overall problem. Even you admit the gas tax is nowhere near adequate, so why worry about that?

    Yes, the allocation is wrong, maybe. Probably.

    We really don’t know.

    We do need to come up with an allocation plan everyone can agree with, but we have to get over the dumb and interfering idea that where we live or where we drive has anything to do with it.

    Unless Bob is right, we also need a lot more money. But whether we have it or raise it, no one will be happy if the allocation and priorities are wong. No point spending money on a broken system as Bacon would say.

    But we don’t fix the system, ever, by niggling over points like what 40k people spend on an nadequate gas tax and how that gets spent, when it isn’t enough anyway.

    ———————————–

    “A more fair “allocation” would be for the portion of the gasoline expended on NoVa roads -that NoVa would get that portion.”

    Fogeddaboutit. Why keep track of what they spend at home, and then send it someplace else? Even you say:

    “By agreeing to send your money to someone else to make decisions – you are removing yourself from the decision process.” so it is a dumb idea to begin with.

    ——————————-

    Why do those 40k people go to NOVA? For some kind of commerce.

    Tax the commerce where it happens and then spend money on roads (and other transport) to take people where the most commerce happens.

    End of tax problem, end of allocation problem, end of balkanization.

    RH

  27. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    And if those 40k don’t like it, they have a “choice” as you say. They can work near home and spend the money there. Eventually, they will get more road funding.

    RH

  28. “By NOT having those decisions made locally – your opportunity to change this system is nil.”

    RH answered everything perfectly. I’ll just contribute one point:

    I don’t have any more influence over Fairfax County than I do over my state legislator. In fact, I find the opposite is true. It factually untrue that Richmond diverts more money than Fairfax County. Fairfax is the worst offender.

    Likewise, I find the most oppressive form of government is also the most local: the homeowners association. That may be a special case, but it does prove local is not necessarily synonymous with good.

    It’s not the “process” that’s broken, it’s the idiots in charge of the process. No matter how brilliant a process you come up with, it’s going to be ruined when you have nitwits behind the control panel.

    Unelect Kaine and Howell, replace them with a visionary. Of course, we need to come up with a vision first…

  29. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    Again – if you support sending gas taxes to Richmond (or Washington), you are sending along with that money – the decision as to who decides what is a proper “diversion” or not.

    You cannot have it both ways.

    You cannot want money collected to be spent in theory what is best for the public as a whole – without also giving the decision about what is best for the public to someone other than yourself.

    Mary Peters, the head DOT – makes this same point repeatedly.

    By sending your money to Washington you are, in effect, approving it’s “diversion” to transit.

  30. When I send the money to Fairfax, the money is still diverted.

    Instead of transit, it might go to the Fairfax County Government Center. What’s the difference?

  31. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Let Fairfax County put a 2% payroll tax on all businesses that employ 100 or more employees and/or contractors. Use the proceeds to fund transportation improvements in Fairfax County.

    TMT

  32. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    re: “When I send the money to Fairfax, the money is still diverted.”

    You have the direct opportunity every two years to have a say…

    when do you have an opportunity to have a say about what happens to your Federal Gas Tax?

  33. “when do you have an opportunity to have a say about what happens to your Federal Gas Tax?”

    Every two years. Here is some more data:

    Heritage report that came out today.

    VA sends $2.851b in federal gas tax to DC, VA gets back $2.554b. The latter figure is VERY important. Where the heck is that $2.554b in Virginia motorist tax/spend calculations? I could only find $1.3b in federal money in my budget-diving endeavors. That means there’s another $1.2 billion in gas tax being diverted somewhere (at the local level, perhaps?)

    By the way, I support Virginia sending $300 million around to places like Montana. As the Heritage guy points out, it’s just wrong in cases like Alaska where we’re being robbed blind (thanks, Ted Stevens).

  34. Oops, cancel the above.

    For some reason Heritage was using “share of the Trust Fund” instead of dollars. That 2.851 is $966 million in; $964 million back.

    From FHWA pdf

  35. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    I’m glad to see that you’ve expanded your reading sources to include organizations that document the myriad ways that your taxes are used when you send your money to Washington.

    You may also want to read, by the same Author – Mr. Utt:

    “Opportunities for Private Sector Participation in Surface Transportation Investment and Operations”

    But the most important thing to keep in mind when you send your gas tax money to Washington is that it really does not matter what uses of it you support or oppose because you are so far removed from the decision-making process at that point that your sentiments fall into the cheer leading realm.

    It’s true you can participate every 2 years in Congressional elections but the Authorization and Re-authorization for the Federal Transportation Budget is done every 5 or 6 years…and I’m betting you don’t even know who your Congressman was when it was last authorized much less his/her specific positions on things on using your gas tax money for transit.

    Mary Peters says there is no way to fix this problem except to stop the Federal gas tax and Ron Utt of the Heritage Foundation says the same thing plus he supports letting the private sector do transportation.

    I see that you are finally starting to come around on your point of view.

    Congrats!

  36. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “You have the direct opportunity every two years to have a say…”

    Whoopee.

    You get two choices, if you are lucky: Republican dogma or Democratic dogma.

    Larry is right, it would be better is none of the above was an option. If none of the above wins, it is a mistrial, and you keep going until you have someone the majority actually wants.

    RH

  37. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    At the local level – you have the best opportunity to affect who will be elected ….

    agree?

    Now.. if ALL of your taxes were collected at the local level – are we not pretty sure that whoever got elected would be paying fairly close attention to what the voters wanted?

    agree.

    If you agree with 1. and 2. above

    would you not agree that even though you still have an opportunity to affect your elected in Richmond.. that your ability has been diluted?

    and then on to the Federal.. etc.

    When you send your gasoline taxes to Richmond and Washington – you are not only removed from the elected officials but you are removed from the unelected and unaccountable officials who will – as Bob has shown with the Heritage Foundation report re-allocate the money inequitably per state .. and per mode..i.e. transit…

    .. and also this.. providing interest free loans for HOT lanes that perhaps would not even be an issue if the Private Companies did not have access to below-market capital…

    .. so put those things in your hat when you insist that everyone paying gas taxes on the premise that the money is then allocated to benefit everyone..

    a nice theory .. but not reality.

    so.. by supporting the gas tax, you really are supporting the very things that you and Bob complain so bitterly about..

    agree?

  38. “At the local level – you have the best opportunity to affect who will be elected ….agree?”

    No. As I’ve said above, I think the responsiveness and purity of local politicians is highly exaggerated. I think this is so primarily because people are more likely to know what their federal legislators are up to than their locals.

    This is my opinion from living in suburban-commute-to-urban areas my whole life. It may be different for rural types who might care what the mayor is doing. I have no idea who represents me on the board of supervisors.

    “by supporting the gas tax, you really are supporting the very things that you and Bob complain so bitterly about..”

    No, because I have absolutely no problem subsidizing ROVA roads or Montana highways with my gas tax dollars. I can drive on those roads. Goods come to me on those roads. It is a benefit of being one state and one country.

    (Or else NOVA should split from ROVA and let ROVA become another West Virginia.)

    Local control has no effect on taking motorist user fees and diverting them to other purposes. Fairfax County takes $200 million in car tax and spends it buying new draperies for the government palace.

  39. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    “by supporting the gas tax, you really are supporting the very things that you and Bob complain so bitterly about..”

    No, because I have absolutely no problem subsidizing ROVA roads or Montana highways with my gas tax dollars. I can drive on those roads. Goods come to me on those roads. It is a benefit of being one state and one country.”

    do you agree with the other uses of your federal gas tax?

    more importantly, you have no say in it at all… only whether or not you agree with what others have decided.

    re: local vs remote tax spending

    whether you choose to know your local representative or not does not change the fact that your local vote is worth more than your Federal Vote.

    and local BOS can and do get thrown out of office quite frequently compared to entrenched Federal incumbents.

    again – what level of influence to you actually have with respect to your gas tax being spent for roads in Montana verses transit in Norfolk?

    You have ZIP influence because your money is being spent by those far away from you ..folks who are not even elected… and yes.. they can much more easily spend your money on office drapes than your local BOS because the chances of you actually knowing that that bureaucrat in a Washington DOT office spending your gas taxes on drapes is ZERO.

    so you are satisfied with this?

    so. you’re helpless in preventing the wanton spending of your gas taxes on office drapes..but it’s okay because that same guy might spend some also on Montana Roads and free financing for HOT lanes?

    tell me you’re fine with your gas taxes being spent on HOT lanes.

  40. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “Now.. if ALL of your taxes were collected at the local level – are we not pretty sure that whoever got elected would be paying fairly close attention to what the voters wanted?”

    If all your taxes were collected at the local level, many local areas would never have enough to get anything done, so what the voters want becomes moot.

    You trade the problems with allocation for the ability and funds to get big things done.

    RH

  41. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “you’re helpless in preventing the wanton spending of your gas taxes on office drapes”

    But, Larry, you are the one who, when beaten in an argument, falls back on the idea that we DO have a political process, with elections, hearings, etc. That anyone is free to participate in. — The “It’s th e Law argument.”

    Why do you think this is OK when it comes to development rights or pollution standards, but “broken” when it comes to funding allocations?

    RH

  42. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “and local BOS can and do get thrown out of office quite frequently “

    Which is why the powers that be want to switch to staggered terms – to limit the power of the electorate.

    RG

  43. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    re: falling back to the “law”

    decisions and taxes at the local level Ray.

    whether the taxes go for transit or roads or the decisions go for or against property rights

    let the folks who live locally in communities participate in the decisions and the responsibilities.

    some money DOES have to go to Richmond and Washington but should be limited to those things that cannot be done at the local level.

    but we know that roads are not one of them because all 17 cities and 2 counties in Va do their own roads without having to “help” RoVa.

  44. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “because all 17 cities and 2 counties in Va do their own roads”

    They maanage the roads, but they get funding from VDOT.

  45. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    they get their gas tax back and they get to decide the priorities.. instead of some VDOT bureaucrat.

    Other counties can do this also if they want more control of their gas tax dollars…

    further.. counties that do their own – can contract with companies that do some of the work cheaper…and faster.

    see: http://www.virginiadot.org/business/local-assistance.asp

  46. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    No, they don’t get “their” gas tax back: they get what VDOT gives them. Someoen else still has an (indirect) handle on the priorities.

    As a result, we still don’t know whether their gas tax “helps ROVA”.
    And we know gas tax isn’t enough. How is all the other driver related money allocated back to those counties?

    And what would the allocation be if every county adopted this practice? You still would not solve the problem: either the small counties never have enough, or someone makes allocation decisions.

    Your contention that
    all 17 cities and 2 counties in Va do their own roads without having to “help” RoVa is false BS.

    RH

    You think property rights should be different according to locality?

    Whew, that really smells.

    RH

  47. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    re: localities doing their own roads

    the less gas tax you send to Richmond, the more opportunity you have to decide your own priorities.

    The answer is clear – don’t send more gas taxes to Richmond unless you want less of it than you sent.

    re: property rights

    yes. In the end, the people who make up a community have the right – and the responsibility to decide what they want their community to look like and how it should grow.

    That’s why the Constitution of Virginia – allows elective representation of the counties and cities and allows counties and cities to determine what kinds of land uses are allowed where.

    Most folks want unbridled land-use restricted.. they support it.

    right?

    If they did not support it.. they’d get rid of the folks who advocate such restrictions – right?

  48. Missy Blankenship Avatar
    Missy Blankenship

    Please visit http://www.BeatTheGridlock.com and view the informative video on the transportation issue. Would love to hear your comments! Thanks for the blog!

  49. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Missy Blankenship, I agree with part of the video: The ports of Hampton Roads and Dulles airport *are* treasured economic assets. An expanding economy *does* need a transportation infrastructure to match.

    But I don’t support the proposition that the general public should be taxed to finance the construction of infrastructure to serve these assets. The users and operators of the ports and airports, who are the direct beneficiaries of that spending, are the ones who should pay for that infrastructure.

    In the case of Hampton Roads, an elegant solution has presented itself. Privatize the ports and use the proceeds to build the infrastructure needed to support the continued expansion of the ports.

  50. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    same old. same old.

    The fundamental general premise is this:

    Any economic development that produces ANY jobs and other benefits is worth ANY amount of costly infrastructure that can be put on the backs of citizens who… “in theory” are the direct beneficiaries.

    I’d like to see a direct per capita “benefit” that accrues from the ports… and then a “per capita” infrastructure cost of the recommended infrastructure to serve the port interests.

    In other words – let’s do a real cost-benefit… and then.. let’s let the folks in HR/TW decide via referenda if they think this is a fair bargain for them….

Leave a Reply