[sustran] express toll roads + Robert Moses and the NMA

[Eric Britton]

1.         TOLL ROADS 

 

Somebody help me here on the first one of these, because my take on it is so
terribly simple that I must be missing something important. 

 

Which of the following statements is sufficiently wrong that what we have to
do is give up and let them build their new roads anywhere and as they wish?

 

1.	In a modern democratic society with many charges to assure
well-being and social justice, it is only "fair" to put "full cost" prices
on all scarce goods, including those which are funded through taxpayer
contributions such as roads - covering all of the well known externalities.
No argument this side of the religious right and maddog left, okay?


2.	(As a nuance, the price should also cover the cost of collection,
which can lead to more subtle distinctions but that we can handle case by
case.)


3.	Given the information and analytic tools we now have at our disposal
it is pretty easy to distinguish situations in which new roads are really
needed and justified -- but in places like the Northeast of the States, or
many parts of Europe, this justification on a level playing field is going
to be pretty hard to find.


4.	So, the only remaining question is where and how to collect.


5.	This is a classic 'politics of transportation' challenge (but that's
what we are supposed to be doing here anyway).


6.	And what about this as a possible wrinkle to be considered?


7.	In addition to NOT using "toll justifications for unnecessary
additional investments", including by private entities charged with the
whole lot, we rather introduce something along the order of orderly
"escalator charges" when we bring the tolls in on existing roads.  These
would start at a low level, maybe just enough to cover the costs of
collection in a first instance. But then proceed over our set period, let's
take a ten year period as an example to argue, to bring the rates up to the
level (very high it usually turns out) so that the users will in good time
be paying full costs.


8.	This gives all the players plenty of time to adjust their habits -
and at the same time for the responsible public sector to bring in new more
environmental and "space efficient" (that phrase keeps coming up)
transportation alternatives. 


9.	Note: In an ideal world, that escalator will be set by law (and
popular support) so that some later group of politicos cannot come in and
sweep it away because they now have their hands in the cookie jar.

 

 

B.        The new mobility surrogate for Bob Moses:

 

I have been thinking about Robert Moses, who one pretty good reference
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Moses) characterizes as "master builder
.. and shaper of a modern city".  Moses was, as many of you know, not only a
great road guy, but also a master of political manipulation to make sure
that his agenda got done ("if the ends don't justify the means, what
does?").  Other times, other heroes, but that's not the point here.

 

My late night thinking just concluded was suggesting that "what we need"
today is a Robert Moses - someone who can make the New Mobility Agenda (call
it what you will) happen.  

 

Hmm. And hmm again.

 

The trick of course is that Moses performance was made possible by the fact
that he was distributing great gobs of contracts and money, which fed in
this case not so much into his personal bank account (he was on to other
forms of satisfaction) but into those of his political backers. This made
for a very powerful industrial/political machine indeed.

 

Now back to new mobility, which unlike old mobility is characterized by its
general parsimoniousness.  Indeed, to a good extent that's what it's all
about.

 

So where and how do we get the new mobility surrogate for Bob Moses?

 

Item for discussion?

 

Eric Britton

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20051213/3a6cc9bf/attachment.html