To keep it short, YES.

If transportation is in a crisis, then take some of the 78 billion dollars the state spends every year and give more of it to transportation.

So, since you don’t like sales taxes to fund transportation, how about that half-percent of the current sales tax that goes to transportation now. Would you like to cut that and shift it to a higher gas tax in the name of fairness?

No to all the alternatives you propose.

Those that benefit from transportation improvements should pay for it. Even Ronald Reagan agreed to an increase in the fuel tax to pay for transportation maintenance as pointed out in your own blog. However you personally seem to think we should cut taxes while borrowing the the money necessary to fund transportation maintenance. I disagree with you.

The needed additional revenue should come from fuel tax increases and not tollroads, abuser fees or taxcuts.

Only the left sees raising taxes as a way to be “fair” – the truly fair thing is to decide if transportation is a “crisis” when they write the budget, and not in a “special session” after they’ve spent all the money on everything else.

I know about Reagan -trust me – far more than you. I’ve frequently written about how he wasn’t the anti-tax libertarian that the Ron Pauls and Libertarians like to think he was.

Exactly, if you do not drive you do not pay the gas tax. But if you purchase a gallon of milk, you pay the tax indirectly.

Seems fair to me, or do you object? Ronald Reagan seemed to understand this was fair.

If I don’t drive, I don’t pay a gas tax.

Please educate me where Saslaw’s bill is contrary to everyone pays.

You know, you are starting to sound like a stuttering fool.

But but but, I’m a Repub-Repub-Repulican.

You do not even agree with Ronald Reagan.

Why do you bother to make the point that “those who benefit from transportation maintenance and construction pay for it” if that’s everybody?

In that regard, Saslaw’s gas tax in contrary to “everyone pays.”

Actually you make my point (and Ronald Reagan’s point as well) everyone benefits from our transportatiion infrastructure. Ronald Reagan (and Dwight Eisenhower) seemed to think a fuel tax was the most fair way of getting those that benefit from it to pay for it.

Everyone benefits from roads. Do you eat? Guess what! Unless you’re a farmer, someone used the roads to get that to you.

Clothing? Unless you make your own, someone used the roads to stock that store where you bought your last shirt.

The travelers of tollroads, by paying the toll, would subsidize the travelers of freeways. Are the tollroad payers going to receive a tax credit for the price they paid at the pump for the fuel tax while they still pay the toll? Are not the tollroad payers being double taxed? They pay at both the pump and at the tollbooth.

Yes, those that benefit from schools should be those that pay for it. In my opinion every citizen should pay school taxes because every citizen benefits from schools whether they have school age children or not.

It is my opinion that strong arguments can be made that those who put their kids into private school should not have to pay the tax or should receive tax credits for the cost of private school.

But, Brian, I am keenly interested in how, although your worship at the altar of Ronald Reagan, you will disagree with him that the consumers of transportation should be the ones to pay for the consumption.

Fuel Taxes would amount to inflationary pressure on any food or good costs that are transported by local fuel. The poorest among us would be hurt the most. Many wouldn’t even use those new roads.

Tolls placed on new roads would be true user fees. If it was advantageous economically enough then they would use the new roads. Shipping companies could choose whether or not there was benefit to enduring toll costs. Increase costs through tolls may be offset by volume, shorter travel, and less idle time. If expanding the ports brings such an economic boon and provides for countless high paying jobs, then that should be leveraged in covering the costs.

Under a fuel tax, there are no alternatives for struggling families that buy gas to go to work or buy food and goods transported under increased taxation costs.