Some dispute the finding of a study advocating tolling as the way to fund infrastructure investment
"The public detests interstate tolls, and with good reason," said NATSO president and CEO Lisa Mullings. "Tolls divert motorists and truck drivers to non-interstates, leading to more traffic deaths. Additionally, it costs the government more money to collect tolls than to collect fuel taxes."
According to NATSO, the report makes several faulty assumptions, including the five percent collection costs for the entire interstate system based on a study of four existing urban toll roads. NATSO says vast majority of the interstate system is rural and therefore has lower volumes, so collection costs are bound to be much higher on average. Historically, it costs less than one per cent to collect the fuel tax, which is collected at the wholesale level by about 1,500 registered taxpayers. Even with electronic tolling, it costs between 20 per cent and 30 per cent just for toll collection and administration.
The report claims motorists prefer tolls to higher fuel taxes, but this is based on surveys asking about tolls only on newly built lanes, not on existing interstates.
NATSO feels the Reason Foundation's report mischaracterises why three states that have been granted conditional approval to implement interstate tolling under a federal pilot program have not moved forward. The report claims Virginia, North Carolina and Missouri have not "solved the political problem of getting legislative approval to go forward." The fact is the legislature in each of the states killed the tolling initiatives, citing overwhelming public opposition to it.
"It is not a 'political problem' when citizens urge their elected officials to reject a proposal that would, if enacted, effectively tax them twice," Mullings said.
