Politicians On Left and Right Want Someone Else to Pay for Transportation
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis' proposed gas tax holiday and Boston Mayor Michelle Wu's fare-free bus plan will both require taxpayers to subsidize infrastructure they don't use.

Politicians from across the political spectrum are increasingly shifting the costs of transportation services and infrastructure from the people who use them to taxpayers. The $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill signed into law last week by President Joe Biden will only make the problem worse.
For a conservative example of this phenomenon, witness Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis' announcement on Monday that he would be asking the state legislature to "zero out" the 26.5 cents in per-gallon taxes the state currently levies gas—a measure he pitched as a necessary relief from the inflationary effects of President Joe Biden's policies.
"We're in great financial shape, we have surpluses. We have the ability to do what we need to do from a standpoint of infrastructure," said the governor at a Daytona Beach press conference, adding in response to a question that this gas tax holiday would not involve cutting funding to road projects.
A few days prior, newly-elected progressive Boston Mayor Michelle Wu announced that she would be asking the city council to approve $8 million in funding to expand the city's fare-free bus line pilot program
"This expansion of fare-free bus service is an important example of how municipal leadership can not only immediately improve the lives of Bostonians, but also set us on a path to a more just transit system for future generations," said Wu last Wednesday.
Both announcements differ in the amount and intended beneficiary, but on the fundamentals, they couldn't be more alike.
Rather than charge drivers and bus riders directly for the transportation infrastructure they're using, both Wu and DeSantis instead want to heap that burden on taxpayers in general.
The $8 million that Wu needs from the city council represents the fares that people who currently ride the bus are willing to pay for it. Her plan is to voluntarily say "no thanks."
DeSantis' gas tax holiday is framed as relief from both taxation and inflation. Many a conservative and/or free marketer might think it's a more small government proposal than offering free bus rides. Hardly.
If the governor sticks to his word about not cutting infrastructure spending, then he'll have to find new funding to plug the lost $1 billion in revenue. That means shifting the burden from gas tax-paying motorists and onto everyone—whether or not they drive.
Federal largesse makes both politicians' plans easier.
Wu has asked the city council to make $8 million in federal funds available for her free bus route plan. Although DeSantis has been less explicit about how he will fund his gas tax holiday, it appears that his plan is benefiting from federal spending too.
The budget the governor signed into law in June directs $1.75 billion of the federal COVID-19 relief to the state's highway fund. That obviously gives him more room to shower a tax subsidy on motorists than if Florida's roads had to rely on state revenues alone.
Moving from a system of user fees to general taxing and spending is a bad idea when it comes to infrastructure for a number of reasons.
Firstly, it's unfair to taxpayers who now have to shell out more money for transportation services, be it buses or roads, they don't necessarily use. The federal funding propping up Wu and DeSantis' plans makes this even worse. Taxpayers across the entire country are being asked to subsidize transit in Florida and Boston.
Fare-free transit has the added problem of diminishing whatever incentive transit agencies have to provide decent, effective service to riders. An agency that gets the exact same amount of revenue regardless of how many people ride the bus sees no upside to making its riders happy. If anything, additional users become just another cost or inconvenience, while the politicians making funding decisions become the real customers.
Gas tax revenue, meanwhile, provides transportation officials with at least some knowledge about how much road motorists are willing to pay for. (Tolls and mileage-based user fees would be a more direct, efficient means of providing that information.)
But DeSantis' proposed gas tax holiday completely, albeit temporarily, severs the link between road funding and road usage. Without the information the link between funding and usage provides, it becomes easier for the state's Department of Transportation to build roads that no one is willing to pay for while neglecting maintenance on lanes where people actually drive.
The recently enacted $1.2 trillion infrastructure law will only incentivize states and localities to move away from a "user pays, user benefits" approach to transportation spending to get worse in the coming years.
The law contains $550 billion in new spending, including $110 billion for roads and bridges and $39 billion in additional transit funding.
The bill does not raise gas taxes, or make tolling easier. It also only contains a small pilot mileage-based user fee program. That means the extra road funding included in the bill is effectively a subsidy for highways that'll have to be paid for by taxpayers in general. The additional $39 billion in transit funding meanwhile will go toward transit systems that, in many cases, are still seeing massively reduced ridership from pre-pandemic levels, and therefore massively reduced farebox revenues.
In both cases, we'll see more transportation infrastructure and fewer user fees to cover them.
Rent Free is a weekly newsletter from Christian Britschgi on urbanism and the fight for less regulation, more housing, more property rights, and more freedom in America's cities.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Found someone woth worse takes than jeff or sarc. Regarding the parade deaths:
I'm sorry but the policy key to keeping parades safe from cars is not jacking up bail it is pedestrian safety and lower societal reliance on climate destroying death machines
— Shane (@shaneferro) November 24, 2021
This story yesterday just absolutely set me off because instead of talking about how easy it is to take another person's life with a gas pedal the lead of the NYT was a story sifting through this guy's RAP sheet like a navel-gazing true crime podcaster pic.twitter.com/R2Cuk52zqo
— Shane (@shaneferro) November 24, 2021
It is true that a lot of people who commit mass murders in the U.S. have DV histories, but what, actually, does that mean? It's a correlation, sure, but what kind of rational policy response can you create from that? How do you pick out the mass murderers from the assholes?
— Shane (@shaneferro) November 24, 2021
How do you pick out the mass murderers from the assholes?
To be safe, we should assume that Shane is a mass murderer.
This year do not worry about money you can start a new Business and do an online job I have started a new Business and I am making over $84, 8254 per month I was started with 25 persons company VHo now I have make a company of 200 peoples you can start a Business with a company of 10 to 50 peoples or join an online job.
For more info Open on this web Site............E-CASH
Shane! Shane! Fuck off Shane!
If you were Searching for a supplemental source of income? This is the easiest way I have found to earn $5000+ per week over the internet. Work for a few hours per week in your free time and get paid on a regular basis.NVs Only reliable internet connection and computer needed to get started…
Start today...........Earn-Opportunities
He should be ashaned of himself for such a poor take.
Reason just can't stop criticizing Republicans. They've never been critical of a Democrat ever.
Weird how in every article critical of a democrat you rush to attack conservatives.
He's #1 Bidet.
"Any choice between the NSDAP and the SPD in 1933 was merely giant douche and turd sandwich" - t. sarcasmic
BOWF SIDES
BOFF SIDEZ!!!
How does cutting the gas tax "require taxpayers to subsidize infrastructure?"
It doesn't, unless Christian believes that infrastructure is mandatory spending by government. Koch doesn't pay his writers to journalism.
adding in response to a question that this gas tax holiday would not involve cutting funding to road projects.
So the roads are still going to get built, just paid for by all taxpayers.
Tax the cyclists.
People without children still have their tax dollars used to pay for schools and teacher salaries. Last I checked, there is no box on your tax return where you can decide which projects you want your taxes to fund. This article is asinine. The author is pointing at both libs and conservatives in order to drum up support for a stupid idea. The entire issue is being caused by the federal government caving in to the climate scammers. I hate to break it to all of you, but 15,000 years ago, the entire North American continent was covered by a miles thick sheet of ice. We are actually in the middle of a warm period enabling human life on the planet. If one looks at legitimate climate science instead of scare merchants like Michael Mann and the idiot school girl Greta Thunberg, one would understand that what we experience every day is called WEATHER. It has been happening daily since the beginning of time, and for humans as a species to believe that the little bit of CO2 we emit (which plants consume to exist, BTW) can change the entire environment of the planet is a bit arrogant of us. We have something of an idea about ancient times due to ice core studies and such, but we have no idea about the daily temperatures in any region on the planet before about 1880. Mann's hockey stick graph has been proven fraudulent by anyone with an IQ above room temperature. The fudging of real time temperatures today by NOAA so the figures support their desired outcome should be evidence enough that the "the world ends if we don't stop driving cars tomorrow" crowd is full of shit. Until some energy source is discovered that is more efficient than fossil fuels, that's the best we have. Putting a thumb on the scale to try to make solar, wind, or battery power seem like a logical replacement is just dishonesty. When a fuel source comes along that is more efficient than fossil fuels comes along, trust me, no one will have to create an ad campaign to promote it. It will be abundantly clear for all to see, and the infrastructure to support it will spring up just as gas stations, pipelines, and oil wells did in the 1910's, 20s, and 30s.
When the pandemic first started, gasoline was $2.90/gallon. It promptly shot up to over $4.00. Today it is still $4.37 a gallon.Our local transit system charged $3 each way. Our mayor immediately declare a fare holiday for six months to compensate for the people . The ridership immediately doubled and is still there today under the onl price. There are many fewer cars on the road and the transit system is flourishing. This article is dead wrong about it shifting to the taxpayers. The market WILL adjust and rebound.
gallon down the street from me.
Given that they pay nothing for the roads, cyclists should be barred from roads or charged an annual tax on their bikes to use them.
Just sayin'.
The horror, taxing everyone equally.
How do you think they get paid for now, idiot? You use and pay for the road whether you drive on it personally or not.
Chemleft's still pretending that gas taxes go towards roads I see.
So the roads are still going to get built, just paid for by all taxpayers.
Yes, finally all the bike lanes will for once be paid by bicyclists.
Oh, and people in electric cars.
Chemjeff, you are correct and Spiritus doesn't understand that part of Economics...
Yep, the "infrastructure" costs will continue to be paid, but the loss of gas tax dollars can't mean anything but higher taxes on other stuff to cover the difference.
Econ 101, sadly, for Spiritus.
🙁
Just so you know, our taxes weren't paying for infrastructure previously. That's why the Federal government is passing "infrastructure bills" to help pay for decaying infrastructure in Plymptonville Pennsylvania.
It's why it's going to pay for infrastructure in Los Angeles, California. The politicians have failed to maintain infrastructure because they've diverted those dollars which used to pay for potholes and bridges to pet political projects, leaving the infrastructure out to dry.
As the frustrated CEO of Volvo said to the befuddled, semi-retarded Mayor of Los Angeles when his company's self-driving car demonstration failed to even start, "Paint some fucking lines on the roads!"
If the drivers who use those roads aren’t paying for their upkeep and/or new construction via direct taxes, and those roads are still be repaired and built, the money still has to come from somewhere, and that somewhere is either the general fund or federal funding, which means people who don’t use those roads are paying for them.
Everyone uses roads, whether they drive on them personally or not. Even if you don't personally drive your car on them, someone drives on them to deliver goods and services that you consume.
1. Find me 1 person in the US who does not use a road.
2. Tax monies are fungible. There is no "lock box" for direct taxes.
1.} Maybe some Amish people. Maaaaaybe. And that's only a maybe. But probably not.
2.) Sadly true. Would probably be better if it were the case though, but I'm definitely a "user fees instead of taxes" sort.
https://rroberts.photoshelter.com/image/I0000dkCoHCquEeY
They typically do, and no gas tax either.
Last I checked, the gas taxes do not currently cover road/bridge upkeep. Some general fund money is used each year to make up the difference. The majority is still coming from fuel taxes. So a fuel tax holiday just shifts more burden on general find taxes or fewer improvements will happen as a result. Or a combination.
About half the states do not have a mechanism for EV drivers to pay their “fair (fare?) share.” Not suggesting this is the deficit but it is part of the issue.
A discussion about DOT efficiency and project choices would be appropriate here as well.
Check again. Governments like to pretend that that is the case by pooling their income and doling it out, but fuel taxes are one of their main sources of income and they always exceed the amount spent on transport infrastructure.
I did. Reason had a recent article on state fuel taxes. Some were clearly using money for non-related activities (Texas and schools). The ones that did skim off some, it was commonly used for police. Who do patrol said roads. In Mexico, there were dangerous free roads. And toll roads that were well maintained and patrolled by law enforcement. I took the latter.
The article failed to address the federal deficit between fuel tax revenue and road/bridge spending, which was estimated to be $8B last year. That discrepancy was made up with other monies.
I think we both would like every penny from the fuel taxes used for roads and bridges. Not for bike lanes, mass transit, cowboy poetry festivals or other such nonsense. I believe the total tax revenue is currently less than the road/bridge spending. That is regardless of whether some of the original tax is being skimmed.
Damn Republicans and their un-libertarian...
*shuffles deck*
"tax cuts!"
All buses and trains I have viewed in the last few months have been empty. But we have money for this?
We average about 5 riders per bus route but we're talking adding more buses and routes with the monies coming in. Good use
It's been a lot longer than that. Around here it's common to see 40+ passenger busses plying their routes empty. They could substitute mini-vans for non rush hour duty. In this day and age they could even uberize the bus service.
Monorail!
nope... same difference, but more impact on environment and same problems in taking land for right-of-way, etc.
I've suggested monorails locally (Raleigh, NC,) but only for a direct route from our airport, RDU, to the Raleigh city center.
Just like subways in NYC, they can only come close to success if there are LOTS of customers who, on a regular basis, travel from point A to point B... AND BACK, EVERY DAY! To and from an airport to a city center could make sense, though the city's outgoing traffic to the airport won't pick up myriad air travelers who don't want to drive into the city to take that train...
Hard-to-win battles, there!
For decades, DC and the states have diverted highway funding and other fees/charges motorists pay to pay for public transportation and other boondoggles and pork. A gas tax holiday won’t even come close to making up for that.
This.
For a long time gas taxes haven’t been paying for roads, but for public transportation projects in places like NY or SF. Our gas taxes have paid for subways and buses, not for maintaining roads.
Don't forget bike lanes! For vehicles that definitionally don't pay gas taxes.
But still emit CO2!
And BO too.
Used to be on a hypermiler group where one member converted the calories from hay into equivalent calorie energy content for a gallon of gasoline. And determined a one horsepower horse was about 25 mpg efficient.
Somewhere I read that the power output of an average horse is actually about 3/4 of one 'horsepower.' 😀
How do non-motorists not benefit from surface transportation infrastructure?
In Christians world, nobody walks.
Non-motorists benefit from transportation infrastructure to the extent that the infrastructure gets them goods and services that they want. They thus pay for the infrastructure through the costs of those goods and services, the providers of which add transporation costs to their prices.
However, much infrastructure is built not because of effective demand for it, in the form of people who're willing to pay to use it, but because an influential politician wants to create highway-construction jobs in his district and/or direct state and federal funds toward contractors who've provided him with campaign contributions. And that's the problem with funding infrastructure from Washington or from state capitals: it gets built according to the power and influence of the pols who want to see it built, rather than where it's actually needed. By shifting financing to user fees and local gas taxes, we allow the market to show us where the money really needs to be spent.
The "fare free" bus lines at least serve as a cultural enrichment opportunity for the homeless, who can ride around all day seeing the sights of the city.
Not sure if that's what Bostonians have in mind when the mayor says it will immediately improve everyone's life.
Wu $8 million in federal funds
DeSantis his plan is benefiting from federal spending too.
That day the state's sold-out to Biden's/Democrats Nationalism or I mean National Socialism (syn; Nazism).
Heck; use every drop of that UN-Constitutional Nazi-Gov-Gun stolen money and sue/press charges/impeach the Nazi's in D.C. for violating the US Constitution.... That would be the BEST use of that bribe money.
Oh look. Reason's arguing against cutting taxes again in order to shit on a Republican.
I'm sure that chemleft, White Mike and sarcasmic can tell me how this is somehow still libertarian.
Without the information the link between funding and usage provides, it becomes easier for the state's Department of Transportation to build roads that no one is willing to pay for while neglecting maintenance on lanes where people actually drive.
Makes sense, since the gas pumps record which roads people travel on.
Wait, no, actually that's fucking incredibly stupid. Like, I've seen some dumb takes on stuff here, but this is possibly a new milestone in idiocy.
As if there are no other ways go find out what roads people use the most.
And as if that road no one wants isn't going to get built anyway.
Gas tax holiday vs. The Green New Deal.
Bowf sidez?
During peak hours there are always a lot of people on busses, and just about every person on a bus at that time is one less car on the road at that time, so making the buses more attractive to riders is a benefit to other road users. Most drivers would be willing to pay a small amount to reduce the number of other vehicles on the road at busy times. I know I would.
(I cheated - buses/busses)
OTOH, that bus is a huge traffic obstruction - whether carrying a full rush-hour load, or running empty.
Even if you don't drive, your food gets delivered by trucks using roads. You use roads directly and indirectly.
Reason writers have gotten dumber.
"Everyone benefits from STOLEN labor", arrogantly touts the Nazi-Regime fans. Because those getting Nazi Gov-Guns stuffed up their *sses for the 'common good' don't exist.
Roads and Bridges must be made by Green Unicorns at the North Pole in Santa's workshop.
Keep your Nazism LOCAL!!!
I have to agree with Ben_. There is *no one* living in the US who does not benefit from roads and bridges, regardless of vehicle ownership status. Besides food, clothing, electronics, building materials and almost anything else one can imagine has been transported over roads and bridges at some point.
The *Union* of States Government (feds) were never granted permission from it's people for "roads and bridges" short of access for Postal Delivery...
KEEP IT LOCAL! NOT Nazi-fied (National Socialism).