Transcript Cato Event - The Thoreau Institute

CATO
INSTITUTE
The Right Road for America
Alan E. Pisarski
NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION
POLICY 101
 PLEASE BUY CARS – we need to stimulate jobs in a weak
economy
 BUT WAIT!
 PLEASE DON’T USE THEM. They create Green House
Gases and bad stuff. We have to coerce people out of their
cars (maybe we could use them for lawn ornaments?)
 BUT WAIT!
 If they don’t use them there will be no gas tax revenue
and no way to fund the transit that people will need after
we force them from their cars.
 Would you mind mailing a check for the gas tax you
would have paid if you had used your car?
 Please make payable to US Treasury!
--THE NEXT REAUTHORIZATION -THE PRESENT IMPASSE IS NOT NEW
 Whenever there is no money the talk is
about federal roles and policy
 Whenever there is no money the talk
turns to “being innovative!”
 When the money shows up the talk
stops; we all go home and go to work
 IF THE CONGRESS PASSED A 10¢ (or 5¢) a
gallon gas tax we would call it a plan”
Next Reauthorization
 Finance, Finance, Finance
 Stimulus package a factor
 Tolling, congestion pricing disliked
by leadership but few options
 More afraid of gas tax increases
 Is private sector still ready with $$$
 Devolution by Default ??
Next Reauthorization
 Maybe reorg DOT away from modes
to “functional structure” =
intercity; metro
 Metro mobility = transit, bike, walk
 Intercity; HSR, tourism weak
 “Performance Based”
 New focus on land use policies
 Embrace Coercion!
SOME HISTORY
 Most histories mark 1956 as the start of the Interstate –
actually the Interstate idea predates WW II.
 1956 is the date that the funding plan was set in place
by Congress.
The Interstate story begins
with a sketch by FDR in 1937
Refined throughout the war years
THE FUNDING CONCEPT
 The system was to be funded by
“user charges” paid into a Trust Fund
 The fundamental principle:
Users should pay for their use of the system AND government
should dedicate the funds to the care and improvement of
the roads users ride on.
 The entire concept, which has very
effective controls built in, is being lost
RAPIDLY!
We also got:
A system capable of attracting support
-- And repelling diversions
The “flag-ship” of the national program
Now no such flag ship program exists
And it shows in the 3 “interim”
reauthorizations since 1991
 A funding system without a clear
national purpose





ARE WE ON THE CUSP OF
A NEW ERA?
End of the Post-Interstate Interim?
Start of the what?
The Post-Post-Interstate Era!
A Crisis of Goals – A Crisis of Finance
or just the usual problems?
 Congress believes there is no problem
so big it can’t be run away from!




THE PERFECT POLICY STORM?
 Time of Intense Need for $$$$$
 Time Of Intense Anti-auto, Anti-mobility Plans
and Policies
 Time Of Strong Policy Cover by Pricing Theory
 Result:
 Punitive Pricing in a “Good Cause.”
 Decline of User Fee cornerstone to funding
 Cash-Cow-ification of Tolls and User Fees
Few things are as frightening as when government can
be seen to be doing good by taxing something.
Issues with public’s choices





“Too much” transportation spending
Low income are transportation poor
Transportation trade-off with housing loses
Job “sprawl” a problem
We all must come home to the center city
Is the public coerced by circumstances or just
making dumb choices?
Is this serious and real or just reauthorization
hype?
TWO REACTIONS TO $4 GAS




HURRAY!
Schadenfreude!
Those
suburbanites
had it coming!
At last we are at
“the Tipping
Point”
Now there will be
a rush to the city
center of people
and jobs
BOO !
 Less VMT = social
and economic
interactions lost
 Now is the worst
time to be cutting
economic activity
What am I defending ?
 I am defending the personal
vehicle/road system - where the
owner determines when and where it
goes and who goes along!
 I am not defending the internal
combustion engine or any particular
motive power!
 The term “Personal Vehicle” is right;
Personal vs Mass!
Does the personal vehicle need
defending? It doesn’t seem
like it!
 The public doesn’t
think so.
 All trends support
the personal vehicle.
 In 40 years of
commuting we added
66 million
commuters and 70
million auto users!
 The auto wins the
market debate but
not the policy debate
long term mode share trend
140
120
100
80
PRIVATE VEH
60
PUBLIC TRANS
40
WALK/HOME
20
0
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2007
“WHAT % OF TRAVEL IS FRIVOLOUS?”
A congressional question to me; 1979
People travel for rational reasons
 All trips have an economic or social
transaction at their end of value to the
traveler (and to Society)
 If your transportation goals can be
met by everyone staying home –
RETHINK YOUR GOALS!
Slow Decay of User Principle





Spending
Transit share
Enhancements
Earmarks
Local Needs
High Speed Rail
Revenue
 $8 billion Trust
Fund bailout
 $6 billion Trust
Fund bailout
 $26 billion future
bailout
PROTECT THE FED USER FEE
“…not only are we likely to be in the twilight between gas taxes and in-vehicle
pricing for a long time – it is good that
we will be in that twi-light for a long
time.” AEP
 The “Post-Gas Tax Era” is not yet!
(20yrs?)
 We must prepare for it but continue to
defend what we have.
 $1.7 billion per penny still has the
power to attract sharks.
As long as Congress has the
power to tax gasoline it must be
dedicated to highway needs
That sets the upper limit on fuel fees.
 Without dedication there is no upper
limit on federal gas tax (see any
European country).
 Feds very efficient tax collector; hire
them?
 Continued diversion ends support for
new fees.
 There is no way to assure no federal gas
tax –Firewall and RABA are the best we
have!
 Let the gas tax dwindle? Fit the program
The policy conflict = opposed
thinking about the world










Neighborhood
Shorter trips
Walk/bike
Land use solutions
Design
What’s freight?
Accessibility
Public
Mass
Behavior change
Make it happen
Globally Integrated




Longer trips
Broad “community”
Choices
Market forces
 Major role for freight
 Mobility
 Private
 Personalized
 Technological fix
 Let it happen
The focus on changing behavior
diverts us from the real issues








Enhancing Economic Opportunities
Access To Workers; Access To Jobs
Mainstreaming Minorities
Improving Safety
Serving An Aging Population
Greater Freedom Of Mobility
Infrastructure Reconstruction
More!
Summing up:
threats & opportunities
Threats
 Policies to penalize
 Dispersed jobs
 Dispersed households
 Policies to promote
 Higher density
 “Organized” society
 Subsidies to




Opportunities
Jobs moving closer to
skilled workers
Increased mobility
Promote greater job
access
Live where you want
work where you want
 Recentralize
 Promote density
There is no fear they will succeed but the waste in time and
$$ will be disastrous
THANK YOU
[email protected]
WE HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO
CARE GREATLY ABOUT
TRANSPORTATION!
Transportation is all about reducing
the time and cost penalties of
distance on our economic and
social interactions.
To the extent that nations succeed
in that function they enable
tremendous forces of economic
opportunity, social cohesion and
national unity.