Missouri’s roads are often a mixed bag. Urban areas, such as Kansas City and St. Louis, face heavy traffic loads that strain infrastructure, while rural areas contend with neglect stemming from budget limitations. Harsh weather conditions further exacerbate the wear and tear, leaving many roads riddled with potholes and cracks. Rural highways critical for agriculture and trade can quickly deteriorate without sustained investment.

A recent post by the blog Construction Physics contained a chart depicting the road quality of the top 19 cities. It depicts the percentage of non-interstate roads at different quality levels, measured by the International Roughness Index (IRI) and tabulated by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). I’ve added St. Louis and Kansas City for comparison using the same scoring system.

Missouri’s interstates, whose standards and funding largely come from the federal government,  rank 15th out of 50th according to the IRI score. But our non-interstate roads rank 32nd, behind our neighboring state of Kansas (1st) but well ahead of Illinois (37th). Kansas has earned a reputation for relatively well-maintained highways, thanks to strategic funding and regular maintenance schedules. Illinois has committed significant resources to upgrading its aging infrastructure through recent legislative initiatives.

Importantly, both Kansas and Illinois employ toll roads to fund road maintenance. Missouri should, too. Show-Me authors have written extensively on tolling and road maintenance more generally. While Missouri recently increased its gas tax, it’s too soon to know how impactful it will be.

Improving Missouri’s roads requires more than patchwork solutions. Lawmakers and transportation officials must focus on sustainable funding mechanisms, better prioritization of projects, and more efficient use of resources. Policies that balance the needs of urban centers and rural areas will be critical in ensuring that all Missourians benefit from reliable roadways.

The post Kansas City and St. Louis Road Quality appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

For example, large trucks cause between 15 to 49 times more damage to Missouri’s roads than cars do. Yet, the largest source of state road maintenance revenue comes from the motor fuel tax, which is levied at the same rate for both large trucks and other vehicles.

This report looks at various ways in which the financing of road maintenance could be reformed so that the amounts that truck-owners and car-owners pay are better aligned with the amount of damage their vehicles do to the roads. In addition to fuel taxes, tolling and other road usage charges are discussed.

Click here to read the full report.

The post Who Pays for Road Maintenance appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Show-Me Institute Analyst Jakob Puckett responds to some of the comments he received about his recent report, Improving Missouri’s Transportation System through Tolling.

Read the Full Report

The post Reading the Comments: Toll Roads in Missouri appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Listen on Apple Podcasts 

Listen on Sticher 

The post Podcast: COVID Legislation, How to Hire Teachers and MO Toll Roads appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

A proposal approved by the Overland Park City Council and the Kansas Department of Transportation to add two tolled lanes to U.S. Highway 69—one in each direction—will go before the Kansas Turnpike Authority for final approval. Local officials cited increased traffic from an expanding population, which is only expected to continue growing, as the need for such an expansion. Rather than paying for the project directly out of the city’s budget, officials want to use tolling to pay for the construction.

The lanes would be tolled electronically, with drivers either being billed from a K-Tag transponder or by having their license plate scanned. The prices to use these lanes will vary, with prices highest when road usage—the “demand” for roads—is highest. The original four lanes on the highway will continue to be toll-free, so drivers concerned about the cost won’t have to pay for a lane they don’t end up using.

Missouri policymakers also should consider using tolling to finance new highway lanes, particularly in areas where traffic is expected to increase beyond what the current system can handle. Congestion pricing, as this policy is also called, reduces travel times and can also help reduce local air pollution as fewer vehicles are idling on the road.

I hope the benefits of Overland Park’s tolled lanes won’t go unnoticed in Missouri. There are a lot of reasons why tolling is a policy that deserves to be explored in the Show-Me State as well.

The post Overland Park Considers Adding Tolled Lanes to Expand Highway appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The post Improving Missouri’s Transportation System through Tolling appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Every toll road I drove on was tolled 100 percent electronically—there was no option to pay with cash. My rental car was equipped with a transponder that registered with overhead sensors when driving through a checkpoint. Cars that didn’t have a transponder would have their license plate photographed and a bill sent to them in the mail. Drivers without transponders paid higher rates to reflect the higher administrative costs of physically mailing bills rather than deducting money from an online account.

Toll rates vary by vehicle type and number of axles. The more axles on your vehicle, the higher the toll. Rates also vary by the location of the road. The higher the cost of maintaining the road, the more drivers pay for its use. And while I did not use it on my trip, the Florida Turnpike’s website has an online map that lets drivers calculate the cost of tolls on their trip based on the exact route they plan to take.

Florida’s all-electronic toll roads are the future of tolling. Drivers don’t need to stop and start at every checkpoint, nor do they need to constantly remember to carry cash. Missouri has heavily traveled highways that need rebuilding (page 18), and tolling is a responsible way to raise the money needed to get them back in good shape. It wouldn’t be easy to establish toll roads in Missouri. There are a number of legal hurdles that would make implementing tolling in Missouri a challenge, and voters have been reluctant to accept their use.

But if Missourians knew how easy it is to drive on modern toll roads, they might be willing to give tolling a shot.

The post Missouri Can Take a Lesson From Florida’s Toll Roads appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

With fuel tax revenue in a years-long stagnation and transportation revenues uncertain in the COVID-19 work-from-home era, P3s can be useful for funding big transportation projects. P3s are arrangements between a government agency and a private company to partner on a project’s financing, construction, and operation, typically through a long-term agreement. A big advantage of P3s is that investors can finance large projects upfront, rather than waiting for state transportation budgets to get back to normal.

P3s have other benefits. Because a company is responsible for road maintenance for, say, 30 years, it has an incentive to minimize costs over the long run. In contrast, state governments often have an incentive to minimize initial payments or upfront costs in order to make tax hikes or bonds more politically palatable.

Many states have turned to P3s to finance and operate road infrastructure improvements.

Toll road P3s shift the risk of generating enough revenue from the state government to the private sector. Moreover, by relying on tolls rather than existing state revenue sources, toll road P3s open up a new funding stream for road improvements and maintenance. P3s enable the private sector to offer toll-financed solutions where there isn’t a tolling agency or the political will to establish one.

P3s also avoid adding new state debt or liabilities. The toll road company is on the hook for future maintenance obligations, and the state can terminate the contract if the company does not hold up its end of the bargain.

The benefits of using P3s for toll-financed road improvements should prompt Missouri policymakers to reexamine Missouri’s P3 laws. Currently, P3s can be used for a range of infrastructure projects, but not toll roads. Several bills have been introduced in recent years that would change this, but none have passed. Perhaps falling fuel tax revenues and uncertain transportation budgets will encourage policymakers to reconsider.

The post How Transportation Public–Private Partnerships Can Benefit Missourians appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

According to the most recent data from 2011, roughly $711 billion worth of freight crosses Missouri each year, and this is projected to increase to $1.2 trillion by 2030. More than 83,500 Missourians work transportation and warehousing jobs, and more than half of Missouri’s economy is affected through freight movement or systems.

However, according to a new study by the Missouri Chamber of Commerce, this vital part of Missouri’s economy is in danger of falling into disrepair. Missouri’s transportation infrastructure, specifically roads and bridges, is aging rapidly. Traditional methods of funding are inadequate to maintain current systems, let alone provide enhancements.

Missouri’s fuel tax of 17.4 cents per gallon has not been raised since 1996. Due to inflation, 17 cents then are worth 8 cents now. Additionally, vehicle registration fees were last increased in 1980, and a dollar in 1980 is worth about 30 cents today. Together, these two revenue sources make up nearly 40 percent of the Missouri Department of Transportation’s total road budget (and 65 percent of in-state revenue, once federal reimbursement is considered). As a result, $745 million in high-priority road needs go unfunded each year.

According to the Chamber of Commerce report, this funding crisis “is the biggest roadblock preventing the state from reaching our logistics potential.”

To start closing the gap in Missouri’s road funding, the Chamber of Commerce report recommends exploring tolling and also indexing the state fuel tax and registration fees to inflation. These measures would help keep funding sources up to date in terms of purchasing power and start to close the funding gap as well as keep a “user pays” principle.

While these methods are not always the best ways to match road damage to payment for upkeep, they are the type voters were most inclined to consider. Public opinion surveys of Missouri voters conducted for the report revealed that 57 percent support highway express lanes, akin to tolling individual lanes, although tolling proper received lower (40 percent) support. Fifty-one percent of voters support increasing the fuel tax, while 47 percent support raising registration fees. Mileage-based user fees can be effective, but only 24 percent supported the idea. Despite the different levels of support for different funding methods, 85 percent of Missouri voters agreed that Missouri needs more funding for transportation infrastructure.

Missouri’s roads are an economic asset that support jobs across the state. Making sure we have the money to keep them in good shape—while ensuring those who use them pay for them—is something policymakers need to address.

The post New Report Highlights Dangers of Kicking Missouri’s Infrastructure Funding Can Down the Road appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Not according to a new study from the Reason Foundation. The study highlights how residents can benefit from their state leasing a toll road and addresses many common concerns. As tolling is a potential solution to Missouri’s transportation funding woes, it is worth exploring this report.

How could Missourians benefit from a privately operated toll road? States usually sell toll road leases for several billions of dollars, and that money can be reinvested in other transportation projects. For instance, Indiana received $3.85 billion for its toll road lease, which was more than enough to fully fund a 10-year transportation improvement program to improve road quality. For a state like Missouri, with hundreds of millions of dollars in unfunded transportation priorities each year, granting a company a lease to operate a toll road could provide some of the revenue needed to maintain Missouri’s roads.

While this may be good for state revenues, individual drivers may have some concerns. For instance, couldn’t a private toll road company just keep raising rates? And who will guarantee that the road will stay in good condition? Both concerns are addressed during contract negotiations.

Lease agreements typically tie rate increases to an inflation index, and terms of potential increases are agreed to in the contract. Similarly, lease agreements usually include performance indicators that the operating company must achieve, such as meeting pavement quality and bridge condition standards, with a financial penalty for non-compliance. Many contracts also specify minimum levels of maintenance expenditures the leasing company must meet. There is typically a clause for the state to terminate the agreement and resume operations if such provisions are not met.

And what happens if the company operating the toll road goes bankrupt? This has happened before, with non-dramatic results. The road does not close, as the state still owns the road. For instance, the company operating the aforementioned Indiana toll road went bankrupt, and it simply sold the lease to another company that took over operations. A toll road company going bankrupt is hardly a foregone conclusion, though, as many toll roads have been privately operated by the same company for years.

While tolling is not yet a reality in Missouri, several bills have been introduced in the past few years to allow private companies to operate toll roads. The Reason Foundation study should help Missourians see the upsides of such a possibility.

The post Should Drivers Fear Privately Operated Toll Roads? appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Heading south on the West Virginia Turnpike, I hit all three mainline toll plazas. Each occurrence involved coming to a complete stop as I handed a toll booth worker $4.00 to drive through. No credit cards were accepted, but I was fortunate to have enough cash. Drivers who had an E-ZPass transponder were able to avoid a complete stop, although they still had to slow down to 5 miles per hour.

In North Carolina, the I-77 express lane was quite a contrast. The express lane was the smoothest-paved part of the road, set apart by a light barrier to easily identify which lanes are tolled and which are not. There was no stopping, as most drivers paid via a NC Quick Pass transponder. If you didn’t have a transponder, you would get a bill in the mail based on your license plate registration. Rates were per mile and variable depending on traffic conditions, and if you had three or more people in the car you could travel in the express lane for free.

Most new toll roads have a similar structure to North Carolina’s. The hassles of always needing adequate cash and the stop-and-start nature of old turnpike plazas are avoided. Further, research has shown that toll roads with no stopping are significantly safer than traditional toll plazas regarding fatalities, crashes, and property damage. Even collection costs are between two to four times lower (page 59) for electronic tolling than for traditional (page 12) toll plazas.

Electronic tolling is an innovative way to fund road maintenance in a driver-friendly manner. Missouri also has heavily traveled highways that need rebuilding (page 18), and the president wants to lift the federal prohibition on tolling interstates. Missourians have opposed toll roads in the past, but if they knew how easy modern toll roads are, they might be inclined to change their minds.

The post Toll Roads, Past and Future appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Watch our latest video to learn more: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxCKSmuCAdo&feature=youtu.be

The post The Benefits of User Fees appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

But what about the benefits of different types of user fees themselves? Gas taxes and tolls are the two main transportation user fees, and each has different advantages.

The biggest advantage of a gas tax is that it pays for the upkeep of all roads in the state, whereas tolls only fund the road the toll is located on. In Missouri, any purchase of fuel to drive on any road helps fund the maintenance of all of them. Proportionally, 70% of gasoline taxes fund state highways, while the remaining 30% goes to local and county governments for their own road upkeep.

An additional benefit of a gas tax is that it is already in place in Missouri, in contrast to tolling.

The benefit of tolling is that it matches the amount of road damage a vehicle does to the amount the driver contributes to the road’s upkeep. The heavier the car is (heavier cars do more damage to roads), the higher the toll. Additionally, drivers pay comparable amounts regardless of the fuel economies of their vehicles, since the cost is based on the wear of the car on the road.

Tolling can also help relieve traffic congestion. Congestion is estimated to cost Missourians up to $575 million per year. Tolling can save time and fuel wasted from idling while also decreasing air pollution. Most congestion pricing programs use electronic tolling, and as some drivers will choose not to pay the fee to drive on a busy road, average road speeds increase leading to clearer road conditions and better use of fuel.

The benefits of user fees are clear. Matching the costs of services to their use is an effective way to make sure our roads and bridges have the funding they need to stay in shape.

The post Dear User Fees: What’s Your Greatest Strength? appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Show-Me Institute researchers have analyzed numerous roadway funding policies, ranging from general revenue diversions to fuel taxes to tolls. We’ve concluded that the best policies are those that let the free market work and impose the costs of roadways on those who use them. That means tolling and fuel taxes should be the way forward for funding Missouri’s road system.

Not everyone agrees. An anti-tolling group is calling for a constitutional ban on tolling in Missouri, claiming that tolls are unfair and economically pernicious. The group claims to be committed to “solving Missouri’s transportation crisis,” but I can find nothing on their website about how the rebuilding of Missouri’s interstates should be funded. The group offers an abundance of negatives about tolling, but many of their claims are incorrect or misguided. Let’s break some of them down here and set the record straight.

• Tolling is double taxation. We already pay for roads with fuel taxes, so we shouldn’t have to pay tolls, too.

MoDOT cannot cut its way to a new I-70. Over the past six years, it has reduced costs by $605 million, but that’s not money for new projects—that’s money to keep shop open. So, for I-70 to get the attention it needs, new revenues will need to be generated. Whether those revenues come from tolls, fuel taxes, general taxes, or some other source, they will be new; they will be on top of existing taxes. One might worry that tolls constitute double taxation, but do tolls differ that much from a higher fuel tax or higher (or diverted) sales taxes? Is paying two taxes, $1 and $1 each, really any different or worse than paying a single $2 tax?

Important to note too is that discussions about tolling I-70 have mostly focused on tolling only new, additional lanes, not the existing lanes. That means only the drivers who use the new lanes would be tolled, so if you didn’t want to pay a toll, you wouldn’t have to.

• Tolling will hurt businesses near tollbooths and hamper the freight industry’s growth.

This argument is another way of complaining that businesses near interstates will not be subsidized.  When driving is made artificially cheap through general taxation (e.g., through sales taxes as opposed to fuel taxes or tolls), land near interstates becomes more valuable because of the higher consumer traffic. On the other hand, if drivers must pay to use the roads, the consumer traffic on interstates could be lower, reducing the value of nearby land. In short, a toll-free road means all Missourians are paying to create demand for a select few businesses along the interstate.

Some worry that tolling, which would show drivers the true cost of driving, would deter consumers from businesses along the interstate. While it’s true that tolling may hurt some businesses near interstates, it does so only by unburdening taxpayers in general. If roads are paid for with tolls, that means other taxes previously dedicated to roads can either stay in taxpayers’ pockets or be spent on other public services.

And just as taxpayers shouldn’t have to subsidize businesses near interstates, they shouldn’t have to subsidize trucking companies (many of which do not employ Missourians). Heavy trucks do well over 90% of the damage to our roads, so why shouldn’t they should pay for rebuilding them (via tolls)?

• Toll roads are poor investments, and when they fail, taxpayers are on the hook.

Some proposals to toll I-70 call for private firms to invest in the roadway in exchange for tolling concessions. Such an arrangement would let firms try to make a profit from tolls, but only by assuming the risk of major capital investment. Like other enterprises, toll roads run the risk of going under. But contrary to what anti-toll crusaders claim, taxpayers do not bear the risk of toll roads. Firms are required to invest in the roadway before collecting tolls, so the public gets a new road regardless of whether the company makes a profit. If a firm goes under, its assets are repossessed, but that just means a different firm owns the road—the new road the public gets to enjoy.

Tolling is by no means the only way forward, but it is a way forward. Dozens of states across the country have successful toll roads and bridges, and Missouri can, too. Banning toll roads won’t solve Missouri’s transportation woes; in fact, given policymakers’ reluctance to increase fuel taxes, it would cut off yet another free-market policy solution.  

The post WRONG WAY: Anti-Tolling Group Gets It Wrong appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

To explore this question, we first need to look at traffic on the bridge. Before MoDOT placed weight restrictions, about 4,000 vehicles used the Champ Clark Bridge every day. That’s about as much as a lightly used urban street, and it’s low for a Mississippi River crossing. For example, bridges at Hannibal and Quincy each carry between 15,000 and 17,000 vehicles per day. Also, according to the Census Bureau, only four Missourians living in Pike County, Missouri (where the bridge is located) commuted to work in Pike County, Illinois. Actually, that estimate was within the margin of error, meaning it is possible that no one who lives in the county on the Missouri side of the Champ Clark Bridge works in the county on the Illinois side. About 500 residents of Pike County, Illinois, work in Pike County, Missouri. This low traffic makes sense when one notes that on the Missouri side there is only the small city of Louisiana (population 3,300) and the Illinois side of river is primarily farmland. Additionally, commodity flows are generally routed to the north or south of the Champ Clark Bridge.

Given the low traffic level on the Champ Clark Bridge, and the very few commuters who live in Missouri and commute to Illinois, a new Mississippi River bridge is likely to have limited positive impact for Missouri. The bridge’s replacement, therefore, is a perfect opportunity for Missouri to explore the option of tolling. Assuming the $60 million cost estimate is correct, a toll of around $2.50 per vehicle would be able to pay for bridge in 30 years, assuming existing drivers were willing to pay for the convenience of a Mississippi River bridge in that area. And if they are not, it calls into question the need for a bridge, with or without a toll. By placing a toll on the bridge, those who benefit greatly from the new bridge can fund its replacement without much, if any, additional strain on MoDOT’s or IDOT’s finances. It would be a fair way of funding a new bridge, and was in fact the method used to fund the construction of the Champ Clark Bridge in the first place.

The bottom line is that paying a new bridge on US Route 54 may not be worth it for Missouri, but it may be worth it for those who would actually use the bridge. The best way to find out whether that is the case is to explore the tolling option.

The post Is a New Mississippi River Bridge Worth $60 Million? appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Some toll road opponents have latched onto this bankruptcy as an example of how privatized toll roads are a bad idea. But when we look closer, the case of SH 130 (as well as the Indiana Toll Road) teaches the opposite lesson. A private, international investment consortium—and not the Texas Department of Transportation—spent almost a billion dollars improving highway infrastructure in Texas. Traffic estimates did not live up to expectations, but that is a normal risk with highway expansion, a risk that would normally be that of state taxpayers.

SH 130 received no money from the state of Texas. The only public support for the project came in the form of over $400 million in Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loans from the federal government. If the SH 130 Company is unable to restructure its debt and cannot find a buyer for the toll road, the federal government (and hence the taxpayer) is at risk of taking some loss on the loan. But as we have pointed out before, financing part of infrastructure projects with federal loans (with the risk of losses) is a vast improvement over the current modus operandi, where the federal government provides 80 to 90 percent of a highway project’s funding with no mechanism for getting a return.

So what is the future of SH 130? While the bankruptcy is proceeding, SH 130 Concession Company will continue to operate the road. The company will then either restructure its debt or the toll road will be sold to a new operator (as happened with the Indiana Toll Road). It is too early to say whether the company will default on any federal TIFIA loans. Whatever the end result, Texas residents will continue to enjoy the highway that private investment built. 

The post Texas Toll Road Goes Bankrupt, but Taxpayers Don’t appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Hopes are high that this year the legislature will take concrete action on MoDOT funding. Speakers talked about how SB 623, which would increase the state’s fuel tax (1.5 cents regular and 3.5 cents diesel) had already been voted unanimously out of committee. The dire predictions of the last two years, namely that MoDOT would fail to maintain the highway system in its present condition, took a back seat to new discussion on how MoDOT might rebuild I-70 and whether MoDOT might bring back its cost-share program to help local transportation initiatives.

With I-70, most speakers emphasized the fact that Missouri has one of a few slots in a federal pilot program that allows tolling on existing interstate highways. But with passage of the FAST Act, Missouri now has a limited time (22 months) to “use it [the slot] or lose it,” meaning the slot could be taken away and given to another state. A representative of Macquarie Infrastructure Corporation, an international infrastructure investment group, discussed how public-private partnerships could be an option for major infrastructure financing and operation. Macquarie’s most famous (or infamous) acquisition is the Indiana Toll Road, which, following its privatization promptly went bankrupt. The Macquarie representative pointed out how the transfer of toll road traffic risk to private investors greatly benefited Indiana residents, which we’ve written about before.

The general focus on the fuel tax and tolling, both user fees, as solutions for MoDOT’s funding problems, is a welcome change from a just two years ago. At that time both options were barely mentioned as officials drove for a transportation sales tax. But there were exceptions to this salutary trend. A representative of the state’s gas station lobbying group discussed a plan to fund highways with increased cigarette taxes. There seems to be no logical connection between smoking and highway maintenance expenses. When questioned why smokers should be targeted for road funding, the representative responded that the tax was likely to go up anyway and that roads were a good place to spend money. We would point out that there is no reason why cigarette taxes must increase. In addition, one could imagine fairer ways to spend any such money (like, say, health care or addiction treatment).

Funding talk was only part of the conference, and we will discuss some of the other topics, such as ridesharing, port development, and highway safety, in future writing.

The post What I Saw at the 2016 Missouri Transportation Conference appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

However, in an ironic twist, the increased federal support promised under the FAST Act could once again put Missouri in a bind. As we’ve discussed before, the federal government gives highway funding to states in the form of individual project grants, not as a lump sum. This means that for MoDOT to get federal money for highways, it needs to spend state money. Thus, increased federal support through the FAST Act requires increased state spending.

Back in early 2014, MoDOT officials predicted decreased federal support (of 19% in 2016), not a steady increase, as is now expected (see the chart above). While a decrease in federal dollars was feared, it also meant less revenue would be needed to maintain state matching funds. Even so, MoDOT officials at the time predicted they would not have the funds necessary by 2020.

With more federal funding available, MoDOT’s situation today is similar to that in in 2014—left wondering whether it will be able to match all federal dollars in the coming years. The key difference is that in 2014, the loss in federal funds would have meant the MoDOT would not have had the funds to maintain the state highway system. Now, it would mean the state was not taking advantage of all federal funding that will become available (which would then be redistributed to other states). Better problem.

Furthermore, as we’ve stated before, nearly all major highway projects receive a $4 to $1 federal to local match, meaning that it does not take much increased state revenue to match significant federal dollars. For example, the dollar gap between pre– and post–FAST Act projections should reach $305 million by 2020. MoDOT would need to spend $76 million in additional state-based revenue to cover that gap.

How will MoDOT cope? The department is already using creative accounting to get federal dollars for projects that were previously ineligible. The state legislature is also looking to shore-up the department’s user-funding base through increased fuel taxes and the possible introduction in tolling. If policymakers can focus on fair and economically sound solutions, Missouri should be able to capitalize on the better funding environment for transportation. 

The post MO Money, MO Problems for MoDOT Funding appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

And while they might not seem like much, Missouri’s highways are something to be proud of, too. Even though we have one of the largest highway systems in the country, the vast majority of those roads, from I-44 to US 36 to Route ZZ, are in great condition. They get us to work, get goods to us, and allow us to enjoy virtually every corner of the state.

While there is no threat to Missouri’s natural beauty, the same cannot be said of the condition of the state highways.  The Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT), which funds our state highways, is in serious financial trouble. Whether or not the state can continue to maintain the highway system is an open question. Even worse, there is no money for major improvements like rebuilding I-70 or replacing our many aging bridges.

The prime reason for this is that the largest source of funding for highways, a 17 cent fuel tax, has brought in less and less money over the years. Part of that can be blamed on inflation; part of it is the result of more fuel-efficient vehicles. And no doubt, MoDOT—like any government organization—could have made more prudent spending decisions in decades past.

The most important question now is not how Missouri has gotten into this mess, but how we’re going to out of it. Not long ago, state policymakers backed a statewide sales tax to pay for highways. Bad idea. Why should Missouri’s shoppers pay as much as—or more than—trucks just passing through the state for improved roads? It’s not fair to those who choose to drive less, and it’s not good economic policy to subsidize driving. Missouri voters did the right thing when they overwhelmingly rejected the new tax.

Fortunately, Missouri has a better option: have drivers pay for the highways. Since the inception of the state highway system, it has relied on user fees for funds. There is no reason to abandon that principle now. A small increase in the fuel tax—a few cents per gallon—could prevent MoDOT from running out of money. Many policymakers agree. The governor has come out in favor of a fuel tax increase, and multiple legislators have pre-filed bills that would enact such an increase. For example, one proposal would increase the state’s per-gallon tax on diesel fuel by 3.5 cents and on regular fuel by 1.5 cents.

Higher fuel taxes are not the only solution. MoDOT is looking at tolling I-70, which could provide the funds to construct a modern highway, paid for by those who benefit from it most. Another proposal would allow the state to hand over control of smaller highways to counties and cities in return for additional local transportation funding from MoDOT. Giving local governments the responsibility for maintaining what are for practical purposes local roads, as is done in other states, could allow MoDOT to better focus its resources.

Missouri can’t let its highway system fall into a state of disrepair, but it can fix the system’s user funding base. If Missouri can do that, both residents and visitors alike will be able to enjoy the view with full confidence that the road is good shape and that they are helping to pay for it. 

The post The End of the Road for Scenic Missouri? appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Mr. Mckenna, currently deputy commissioner of the New Hampshire Department of Transportation, will take over MoDOT at a difficult time. While the department will not fall off a fiscal cliff next year (as was once feared), there is little doubt that MoDOT’s financial position is precarious. Worse yet, there are no funds available for large but necessary highway improvements like the rebuilding of I-70.

While the problems are challenging, there are solutions available to Missouri that will not require large general tax hikes. For instance, if Mr. McKenna were to drive from the New Hampshire Department of transportation in Concord to MoDOT’s headquarters in Jefferson City, the fastest route would take him through six states with open-road tolling:

Tolls are just one of MoDOT's options for financing I-70 reconstruction and other expensive infrastructure projects, and the success Missouri’s neighbors (and New Hampshire) have had with this method of funding should encourage Mr. Mckenna to consider it.

The post MoDOT Gets a New Director appeared first on Show-Me Institute.