Date: 2005-03-10
Speaker: TOM DAVIS (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Virginia

Mr. Chairman. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman. let me address my friends on the other side. because they are aware. of our traffic problems in Northern Virginia where we have tried to get infusions of money to take care of the secondlargest .traffic jams in the country. and we have arrived at something called the HOT lanes. these highoccupancy toll lanes that we are looking at for a publicprivate cooperation that we would use along the Beltway and possibly 166. This is a partnership. The Federal Government will fund part of it. but there is just not enough money in the highway bill. or at least we have not been able to get enough money out of the highway bill. if the gentleman would help on that there would be no need for this amendment. to build these extra lanes. We have the private sector coming in and building the lanes. and then the users do the tolls on the lanes. and that is how we lay asphalt. Because there is not enough March 10. 2005. CO money at the .%tate. local. and. Federal levels to lay enough. asphalt on these lanes. and so we are using tolls in some of these areas. The current bill contains several provisions that make it difficult for us to collect tolls on the interstate highway without trying to decide how much money people make. and there is almost a means testing into who uses them. It is Very. very difficult to determine how much you are going to collect to get your bonds. what percent are .low income and what percent are high income. and so we basically knock that out of the current language in this legislation. I support the- provisions that allow the highoccupancy tolls. but I am concerned about the requirement for States to establish procedures to permit lowincome individuals to pay reduced tolls. These are user fees. These are not taxes. This requirement would impose unmanageable requirementson those States who would otherwise like to make use of these tolling provisions. and in our case it is the only way .we can lay down new pavement. The Commonwealth of Virginia now seeks to use toll provisions to finance several important projects. including widening of the Capital Beltway. adding HOT lanes to 195. and adding dedicated truck lanes on 181 in the Shenandoah. Valley. The Capital Beltway HOT lane proposal. which would greatly benefit my constituents. as an example. is a publicprivate partnership. In addition. the 181 partnership is another example. These partnerships are increasingly important as Virginia and. I think. other States in the Union grapple with massive . infrastructure needs that are not met. even though this bill will help toward our final results. In this instance. the ability of tolls on a HOT laneto pay for construction has been determined by costbenefit analysis. which would be skewed by some users not paying the full toll. As we look for these publicprivate partnerships to take over construction of some road projects. it is important not to set a precedent for eliminating or reducing tolls which could affect bond financing. In addition. the cost of a bureaucracy to administer a reducedtoll program would add tremendously to the cost of operating a toll facility and I believe would provide a strong disincentive for private investment. The existence of .automated tolling technologies does not address the issue. The most fundamental question is how the Department of Transportation would determine the.income. It seems to me this would be extraordinarily problematic and would make tolling an impractical option. Tolls are user fees. not taxes. There are currently no tolling facilities in the country that provide an incomebased discount. Furthermore. no other highwayuser expenses are regulated by the Federal Government to require discounts based on income: not the gas tax. not the price of automobiles. .and not the price of auto insurance. Why do we single out tolls? Finally. I Want to make clear that while I do not think that incomebased tolling is a viable solution. my amendment would not stop anybody from doing it. The Governor of Virginia does not think it is practical. but the Governor of another State might have another view. and that flexibility would remain in this legislation if my.amendment passes. Frankly. I would be interested in seeing how a State -might implemeht -incomebased tolling. But this provision would amount tb a considerable mandate upon"the States. a mandate I do not believe we should add to their already full plate with growing transportation infrastructure needs. This just takes some of the flexibilities we are trying to employ outside the box now off the table. So. Mr. Chairman. I would hope the House would adopt this amendment. Mr. Chairmian. I reserve the balance. of my time.