VA Senate Bill to Expand Tolling Authority
Printed From: Slug-Lines.com
Category: Archived Slugging Topics
Forum Name: HOT Lanes Discussion
Forum Description: Post messages regarding High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes here.
URL: http://www.slug-lines.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3094
Printed Date: 25 Nov 2024 at 7:43am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.10 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: VA Senate Bill to Expand Tolling Authority
Posted By: Bob
Subject: VA Senate Bill to Expand Tolling Authority
Date Posted: 09 Jan 2007 at 4:04pm
introduced down in Richmond this week:
http://tollroadsnews.info/artman/publish/article_1677.shtml
|
Replies:
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 10 Jan 2007 at 7:49am
|
BOO! BOO BOO BOO!!!!! So they want to toll all the major roads? Like the cost of living isn't already high enough around here, especially for young people who didn't grow up here and already owned a home. If this keeps up, eventually this region will have no new employees to fill all the jobs.
|
Posted By: Bob
Date Posted: 10 Jan 2007 at 8:49am
Found another interesting one put forth by Delegate Lingamfelter of Dale City (see link) As far as I can tell they are talking about tolling all of the major interstates in VA, -- regular lanes. Of course it hasn't been passed yet.
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?071+ful+HB2314
|
Posted By: sluDgE
Date Posted: 10 Jan 2007 at 9:51am
Looks like this delegate proposes the Commonwealth establish "user fees" (tolls) for Interstate Highway use statewide (instead of raising taxes) to provide funds to improve and maintain Virginia's highway and road system.
Would we rather pay an Interstate toll or increased state taxes?
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 10 Jan 2007 at 12:27pm
|
Tolls require out of state people to pay them as well. If VA does this for a large portion of their roads, I wonder how other states will react.
|
Posted By: SpongeBob
Date Posted: 10 Jan 2007 at 12:50pm
Oddly enough, I think this will generate opposition to tolls in general. Tolls are a regressive tax that disproportionately hurt lower-income people. There is no political way they could put tolls on all the interstates. The opposition party can simply point out that user-fees are undemocratic, and other states can and will retaliate, and the trucking industry will go ballistic at the idea of being tolled everywhere when they already pay extra user fees.
What an asinine and mentally bankrupt idea. It shows a complete lack of real thinking about transportation.
The problem here is that the Governor has the political cohones to state the truth (taxes for infrastructure) while the anti-tax Republicans are in the last-ditch stonewalling away.
It's our own fault for electing majority Republicans from NoVA to the state legislature. I'd piss on them all if they'd just hold still. [V]
|
Posted By: Bob
Date Posted: 10 Jan 2007 at 1:13pm
I agree with part of what you say, but I don't see either Republicans or Democrats coming out against HOT lanes in VA. HOT lanes have also been pushed in blue states such as CA, the Midwest and FL. And tolls are gigantic in the northeast on 95. The problem is that the Dems like HOT because the oppose newbuild roads and realize there is a crisis. The "expansion" HOT lanes supposedly cram more cars on existing right of ways and dont go through pristine forests. And yes, the Repubs like the "user fee" aspect of it and tend to ignore the elitism of it.
The other thing we have going against us is North vs South Virginia. Those guys down south could care less if we have to pay tolls.
I think the federal govt should be in charge of the interstates and there should be no tolls allowed on the intestates. The gas tax should pay for it.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 16 Jan 2007 at 8:34am
I pointed out gas tax vs. tolls on a different post and was pointedly told that there is no relationship between gas taxes and transportation.
Tolls appear to be the only way to force us to use public transportation for commuting. If there's a better way to get commuters on public transportation, recommend proposing it.
Building new roads for cars won't work - eventually you run out of places to put new roads. Sponge or Dick Boyd can probably tell us how much pavement is needed for every 1 million people added, and we all know that it's only a matter of time before we add that many to the region. Maybe years, maybe tens of years, but, like the stock market and inflation, the population is going to increase. We have to force people to use mass transit. And, with no other proposals on how to do that, tolls seem to be the solution.
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 16 Jan 2007 at 9:23am
|
Again, if Mass Transit is to be viable, it needs to exist. The current offerings of train and bus are woefully inadequate for most workers in the DC Region. But since the states do not care to fund these options much if at all, many have little choice to be drive.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 16 Jan 2007 at 10:00am
So, it sounds like we need to push VA to increase the current offerings of train and bus as an alternative to tolls. However, I suspect (don't know) that no study has been performed to justify that the current offerings are "woefully inadequate." Also, I suspect (don't know) that the demand for these services has changed much in the past couple of years.
There is, however, a tie between the demand for mass transit and the slug system. Unless and until slugs have to pay tolls in excess of the cost for commuting via mass transit, the demand for those services will be arificially surpressed. Do you think Richmond has figured that out?
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 16 Jan 2007 at 12:39pm
Again you go on about slugs should be made to pay for their rides. What's the problem if they don't? Oh that's right, you don't like it that a free ride is an incentive to carpool. Under all circumstances, carpooling leads to less congestion than if each carpooler drove a SOV hybrid. Save us your talk again about saying the hybrids use less oil/pollute less. We've heard it too many times. The most pressing concern in this region is traffic congestion, NOT oil consumption/pollution. Because of that, we need to deal with the problem of traffic first. Yes, mass transit does help if it exists. Carpooling helps too! Is mass transit better? From a sheer moving people per vehicle standpoint, yes. However, in this world we live in, people often need to get from pt a to b quickly and at all times of day. Mass transit does not help with that concern. Can I take the train or bus from DC at 9 at night to my home in VA? NO! Can I get from the pentagon to ft belvoir by train? NO! Can I get there by bus? Sure, but you waste too much of your day sitting on the bus or you have totally missed your appointment. Because of this, so many people MUST drive because mass transit just won't work for them.
It's ignorant to think that there aren't slugs who commute this way because it's cheaper. However, for so many slugs, this is the most efficient way to get to and from work. Cars leave continuously at most lots during the HOV hours, and drop off points/pickup points are often much more accessible than other mass transit locations. It's an added bonus that the ride's free. If you want more people to use mass transit, you need to make it cost effective for the riders, make it funded, make it accessible at all times of the day, and make it efficient. And you know what, it's a really hard problem to solve.
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2007 at 7:47am
|
Apparently you still can't read. You always tell people to re-read what you write, well it's time you do the same. I never said the slug system solves everything. Stop putting words in others' mouth. You are the one who keeps going back and forth between global warming, traffic, and taxes over and over again whenever someone shows how retarded your arguments are.
|
Posted By: SpongeBob
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2007 at 12:11pm
Can I answer first, please please please teacher?????
Gee, it's such a difficult and tricky question... and it bears such a direct relation to climate change and gosh, I just don't know what to say!
Please, Mr. NoSUV, can you enlighten us with your clever wisdomliness and give us the answer to your ever-so-tricky riddle?
|
Posted By: n/a
Date Posted: 17 Jan 2007 at 3:48pm
Unless there is a viable (reliable, affordable, convenient, clean and comfortable) mass transit system slugs and carpoolers have no incentive to change. And why should we? What we have (carpooling) is economically/traffic/ecologically friendly and, oh by the way, its voluntary. So anyone who wants to switch can.
Algae? What in blazes are you talking about?
|
Posted By: N_or_S_bound
Date Posted: 18 Jan 2007 at 9:55am
quote:
Originally posted by raymond
[br]
Algae? What in blazes are you talking about?
It's an old debate move. When you don't have a solid argument supported with facts, avert and/or obfuscate.
Hybrids are part of the solution ONLY when they are HOV-compliant. That is the only time they aren't part of the problem. It's simple math. Which would you rather have on the road: 1,000,000 SOV hybrids or 333,333.333 HOV vehicles?
My Avalon just turned over to 130K miles. I think it's got another 200K left in it. Maybe they'll come out with a retrofit kit so I can convert it to hybrid technology, ya think?
NoSb
SOV because you can, HOV because you care!
|
Posted By: litaru
Date Posted: 18 Jan 2007 at 11:25am
I'm curious about the lake riddle, too. Can someone answer soon, I have to leave town and really would not wake up in the middle of the night when I finally get the answer. As for the whole debate...necessity begat invention. NoVA commuter traffic was/is horrendous and enterprising people came up with a solution. There were no tolls or private highways that encouraged an alternate method of commuting to/from DC. I realize it sounds passive /aggressive; but no matter what the Senate elects on the HOV issue, there will be a more pleasant alternative because human nature cannot be legislated. Gonna go google that riddle, now.
Take Care...C Ya
[;)]
M
|
Posted By: n/a
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2007 at 9:53am
The question on the table is, should gas taxes pay for road improvements/maintenence, or should tolls?
Both are user taxes. The assumption that a gas tax disproportionately burdens locals is only true if the tax is levied only in local NOVA jurisdictions. In addition, tolls burden local users even though NOVA has been tax subsidizing SOVA's transportation needs for years, decades maybe. Then why shouldn't future gas taxes supporting NOVA road improvements be levied statewide? That way all Virginians, as well as thru traffic that stops for in-state fill-ups, will pay to support the state roadways. It seems unreasonable for SOVA/Richmond to object as they have been beneficiaries of NOVA's tax base for so long. Fair's fair!
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2007 at 10:58am
|
Gas taxes are probably the best way to go as it best distributes the cost state wide.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2007 at 11:26am
|
With tolls, the vehicle that is on THAT ROAD, pays for THAT ROAD.
|
Posted By: N_or_S_bound
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2007 at 11:47am
quote:
Originally posted by NoSUV
[br]With tolls, the vehicle that is on THAT ROAD, pays for THAT ROAD.
Really? How does one go about putting into place an accounting method to track just what funds are collected, then reallocated back to THAT ROAD?
That comment is such a utopian view and takes in little to none of the realities that exist when it comes to how things really work.
Who paid for the roads they're going to start collecting tolls on (e.g. HOT)?
NoSb
SOV because you can, HOV because you care!
|
Posted By: n/a
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2007 at 11:47am
quote:
Originally posted by NoSUV
[br]With tolls, the vehicle that is on THAT ROAD, pays for THAT ROAD.
And of course that would be a fair way to establish a user tax, but that is not how taxes are distributed in VA. Tax payers in NOVA have been subsidizing SOVA road projects for years. Where's the parity? Where's the payback? By distributing funding for NOVA road costs back across the whole state, the way NOVA taxes are used to subsidize road construction for the whole state, we may finally have some parity.
|
Posted By: Bob
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2007 at 11:49am
|
With taxes, the taxpayers have some say in how much. With tolls on private toll roads, the companies can charge anything they want.
|
Posted By: n/a
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2007 at 11:52am
quote:
Originally posted by Bob
[br]With taxes, the taxpayers have some say in how much. With tolls on private toll roads, the companies can charge anything they want.
Another good argument against toll roads! Thanks Bob!
Besides, once the private companies pay their fat executive salaries, their stockholders, and their hip-pocket-politicians, how much of that toll revenue do you really think will make back to fix the pot-holes?
|
Posted By: Bob
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2007 at 11:56am
|
And I was just going to add that X percent of HOT tolls not only will go out of state, but out of the country. Crock. Whatever toll revenues are generated should stay in VA/US.
|
Posted By: SpongeBob
Date Posted: 19 Jan 2007 at 12:47pm
If you follow NoSUV's "logic", then we ought to charge only parents the taxes that support schools.
National parks should be turned over to private companies to run as they see fit, with only visitors paying for them. Wonder what the admission fee would be then?
NoSUV, will you be sending in a contribution for the "use of the road" should the fire department ever need to come to your place?
Some vehicles "use" the road a lot harder than others. Will we be charged a weight fee? Will fat people pay more?
If you accidentally have an accident, will you need to reimburse the state for lost revenue?
NoSUV, as usual you don't have a leg to stand on. My god, if I was that dumb, Patrick Starfish would be the lead and I'd be the sidekick.
|
Posted By: NoSUV
Date Posted: 22 Jan 2007 at 10:30am
Sponge - my, you've hit the nail on the head! Have you noticed that education bonds have a tough time passing because there is a higher percentage of voters without school age children than those with? That private parks DO exist with only visitors paying for them? On the weight question, have you notices that toll booths charge a different price for each axle? And have you noticed that in many cases, when there is an accident and the police arrive, a citation is issued - which costs the offender money?
Note that in the general comment area that the toll breakdown in at least one bill is 75% for that jurisdiction - proving, once again, that raymond's posts are idiodic.
|
Posted By: darkprime
Date Posted: 22 Jan 2007 at 12:25pm
|
But the bill does not say exactly how that revenue is to be spent/applied. The toll company can argue (and I'm sure they will do this) that paying their executives and shareholders is an operational expensive of some sort that must be paid in the toll's jurisdiction.
|
Posted By: SpongeBob
Date Posted: 23 Jan 2007 at 9:38am
What? You are making even less sense than usual, NoSUV.
You cannot really be so stupid as to be suggesting that only parents should pay for schools... or are you flipping to the other side of the argument? You said only users should pay for roads, and I'm saying you are an idiot because if you apply that standard to other government-overseen things like schools, you see that it does not make logical sense. Now you are talking about bonds when the subject was taxes. No one, not even you, could be so retarded as to say that taxes should not support schools, nor that only those with kids in school should pay school taxes.
So Gettysburg and Antietam should be private parks? And Yellowstone should be sold to the highest bidder? My point isn't that there are no private parks, it is that some things are held to be of such value to all in society that we ask our government to handle them. Things like Gettysburg and Yellowstone.
And yes, there are per-axle tolls, but my point, which you ignored or missed as usual, was about the definition of the word "user". A two-axle trash truck weighing 10 tons "uses" the road a lot more than a Honda Civic carrying one person. How are you going to equitably charge them? And should business users of the road pay more or less than pleasure users of the road? A motorcycle club on a Sunday ride vs a fleet of panel vans? Oh yeah, equitable isn't in your vocabulary.
Finally, there are many accidents that tie up traffic that do not result in a citation. The citation, moreover, is not related in any way to the traffic flow on the road, but is a punitive measure.
Really, we've all got better things to do than argue with you.
|
Posted By: n/a
Date Posted: 06 Feb 2007 at 2:34pm
|
Important issues being discussed here that deserve to be bumped up above the spam. Anyone is welcome to add their opinion to the discussion...
|
Posted By: n/a
Date Posted: 12 Feb 2007 at 11:48am
Posted By: n/a
Date Posted: 23 Feb 2007 at 2:05pm
|
Pay attention people, this isn't going away!
|
Posted By: DC2RV
Date Posted: 23 Feb 2007 at 8:12pm
What's not going away - the SPAM? That's too obvious given the enormous amounts of it on this site the last 6 months...
Seriously though, you're right; the toll issue isn't going away. What else isn't going away is the stupidity shown by lawmakers in acquiescing to the whole notion that tolls are the way to go.
But what do they (and their minions and their base) care? Most of those numbnuts don't live here, nor do they have to commute or drive in this area.
Whatever happened to the Regional view of things? Virginia seems to be oblivious to the impact its' decisions have on DC, MD, and its own NoVA residents.
'cept of course in granting exemptions to the so called "green" class while accepting other states trash.
Anyone know where the Secession movement stands these days?
|
|