Why we should consider a per mile road tax...NOT

Based on recent history and what's likely to happen to the nation's infrastructure, it's an inescapable conclusion: 

We will need new and different sources of funding if we are to have the type of transportation system that is needed to support economic prosperity.

For the past 75 years, the U.S. road network has provided the foundation for much of the nation's economic development. This network has not come without a cost; estimates are that the replacement value of the nation's roads is $1.3 trillion.

The bulk of the revenue to build the world's most extensive road network has come from motor vehicle fuel taxes, first used by Oregon in 1918 and culminating in a 1956 federal motor fuel tax to construct the national highway network, including the Interstate highway system.

But big challenges loom. The U.S. population is expected to grow through 2100 and the economy likely will be strongly tied to the movement of people and goods. The need for added capacity to the nation's transportation system is great.

When one adds the hundreds of billions of dollars that will be needed to reconstruct and rehabilitate existing infrastructure, the demand for transportation funding will be perhaps even greater than ever.

Why am I so adamant against increasing taxes. Because there is not one governmental unit in the history of the world who has properly prioritized its spending.

We currently pay for our roads through a fuel tax. The more you drive the more you pay. It seems totally fair to me. It would have been more than enough to cover the expenses for all our roads and bridges but our DOT decided that there were bigger priorities. And every time you drive on a freeway you get to see this............

The worst part of these walls is that they are less effective (and less green) than the plants and trees that used to be there.

So when you quit blowing taxpayer money on these road boondoggles, come back to me with your hand out.


More.........