- Email: [email protected]
Congressional intent and road user payments
436
BibliographicSection
Congressional Intent and Road User Payments, by K. Bhatt, R. McGillivray, M. Beesley and K. Neels, Report 5044-8, The Urban Institute, 2100 M St. NW, Washington, DC 20037, Mar. 1977, pp. 97, $3.00. This paper presents an examination of expenditures for and payments from United States roads. Part I summarizes the companion paper (see above) which analyzes road expenditures and payments by different classes of road users over the period 1956-75. Part II of the paper considers ways to apportion expenditures among road users most efficiently within the constraint that user payments must cover road expenditures. Charges levied on each of the above three vehitle classes are compared with expenditures incurred by each vehicle class because of road use. In addition, four possible policies are considered for allocating the residual costs so as to balance the budget: the vehicle mile (VM), ton-mile (TM), value of service (VS), and inverse elasticity (IE) proposals. For illustrative data on 1%9, the VM proposal suggests the least change from present policy, followed by the TM, VS, and IE proposals respectively. The IE proposal suggests substantially higher payments for heavy vehicles than were collected. With regard to the extent to which they promote efficient patterns of road use, the proposals are ranked IE, VS, TM, and VM in descending order. However, in regard to availability and quality of information and diiculty of implementation the proposals are ranked in the opposite order. Consequently, the radical revision in payment structure suggested by the IE proposal should be regarded only as a desirable direction of change. Much more precise analysis of better information would be necessary to suggest a detailed structure for revision of user charges.
The Eeonomk Impact of Antomobik Travel Cost Iaereracs on BouseboIds, by J. P. Stucker and T. F. Kirkwood, Report R-1842-NSF/FEA, Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, CA 90406, July 1977, pp. 67, $5.00. This report examines the economic impact on U.SI motorists of proposed federal legislation aimed at reducing gasoline consumptionspecifically, increases in the gasoline tax. (Other measures such as taxes on the weight and efficiency of new cars are also discussed, but the focus of analysis is on the consumer response to pump price increase in gasoline.) Fist, says the report, such a tax would be regressive, falling hardest on the poor. They cannot afford to buy new, more fuel-efficient cars to offset hikes in the pump price of gas, and yet a greater share of their income is spent on automobile travel than among middle
and upper-income families. Second, if the intent of such a measure is to encourage immediate cuts in gasoline consumption, the authors say it probably will not work: to take the case of the poor again, the authors say it is unlikely that many will reduce driving mileage, but opt for some other solution, such as deferring maintenancewhich in the long run may lead to increased fuel consumption. Third, it is not the poor, only about half of whom drive, but the middle and upper-income groups in the society that consume the most gas-almost threefourths of gasoline consumption by households. So any policy aimed at reducing gas consumption should be targeted on them. The study says there are a number of options that U.S. motorists of all income levels can take advantage of to offset the increased costs of operating their cars-whether or not any of the proposed policies are adopted-and thbse are spelled out, showing in dollars and cents estimates how large a pump price increase (above 66 cents a gallon) a motorist could neutralize. Among these: austere maintenance, already discussed; buying a used car: eliminating a second car; buying a new, more fuel-efficient vehicle-and, of course, reducing driving mileage. The most efficient measure, for both reducing costs and saving fuel, is said to be the purchase of new fuel-efficient cars.
qpproaebcs to ControBIng Air PoUution, Ann F. Friedlaender (editor) MIT Press, Cambridge, MA 02142, 1978, pp. 480, $24.95. The contributors to this book are not concerned with questions of economic doctrine or issues of social justice raised by air pollution control, but rather with entirely pragmatic questions of implementation and whether it is possible to devise some scheme that permits simplicity of standards but contains a safety valve of fines or fees that does away with the need for recontracting. In this collection of papers and comments, researchers and practitioners examine the Clean Air Act of 1970 and its implementation through the EPA, the courts, and the various state agencies. They assess a wide range of methods for controlling air pollution where the costs and benefits of cleanup are uncertain, where implementation is imperfect, and where administrative costs may be substadtial. The book presents original research in the area of policy evaluation that is not only accessible but critical information for government policy-makers, individuals in industry, and interested citizens who do not have technical knowledge in law, economics, or political science.
SpeeiaI Feature In line with our policy of drawing the readers’ attention to particular sources of research reports, we continue our occasional series on transportation research centers and their publications.
Directors or leaders of such facilities are invited to provide us with descriptive material on their act&ties, and to give us a list of their currently &&able publications.
BibliographicSection
Congressional Intent and Road User Payments, by K. Bhatt, R. McGillivray, M. Beesley and K. Neels, Report 5044-8, The Urban Institute, 2100 M St. NW, Washington, DC 20037, Mar. 1977, pp. 97, $3.00. This paper presents an examination of expenditures for and payments from United States roads. Part I summarizes the companion paper (see above) which analyzes road expenditures and payments by different classes of road users over the period 1956-75. Part II of the paper considers ways to apportion expenditures among road users most efficiently within the constraint that user payments must cover road expenditures. Charges levied on each of the above three vehitle classes are compared with expenditures incurred by each vehicle class because of road use. In addition, four possible policies are considered for allocating the residual costs so as to balance the budget: the vehicle mile (VM), ton-mile (TM), value of service (VS), and inverse elasticity (IE) proposals. For illustrative data on 1%9, the VM proposal suggests the least change from present policy, followed by the TM, VS, and IE proposals respectively. The IE proposal suggests substantially higher payments for heavy vehicles than were collected. With regard to the extent to which they promote efficient patterns of road use, the proposals are ranked IE, VS, TM, and VM in descending order. However, in regard to availability and quality of information and diiculty of implementation the proposals are ranked in the opposite order. Consequently, the radical revision in payment structure suggested by the IE proposal should be regarded only as a desirable direction of change. Much more precise analysis of better information would be necessary to suggest a detailed structure for revision of user charges.
The Eeonomk Impact of Antomobik Travel Cost Iaereracs on BouseboIds, by J. P. Stucker and T. F. Kirkwood, Report R-1842-NSF/FEA, Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, CA 90406, July 1977, pp. 67, $5.00. This report examines the economic impact on U.SI motorists of proposed federal legislation aimed at reducing gasoline consumptionspecifically, increases in the gasoline tax. (Other measures such as taxes on the weight and efficiency of new cars are also discussed, but the focus of analysis is on the consumer response to pump price increase in gasoline.) Fist, says the report, such a tax would be regressive, falling hardest on the poor. They cannot afford to buy new, more fuel-efficient cars to offset hikes in the pump price of gas, and yet a greater share of their income is spent on automobile travel than among middle
and upper-income families. Second, if the intent of such a measure is to encourage immediate cuts in gasoline consumption, the authors say it probably will not work: to take the case of the poor again, the authors say it is unlikely that many will reduce driving mileage, but opt for some other solution, such as deferring maintenancewhich in the long run may lead to increased fuel consumption. Third, it is not the poor, only about half of whom drive, but the middle and upper-income groups in the society that consume the most gas-almost threefourths of gasoline consumption by households. So any policy aimed at reducing gas consumption should be targeted on them. The study says there are a number of options that U.S. motorists of all income levels can take advantage of to offset the increased costs of operating their cars-whether or not any of the proposed policies are adopted-and thbse are spelled out, showing in dollars and cents estimates how large a pump price increase (above 66 cents a gallon) a motorist could neutralize. Among these: austere maintenance, already discussed; buying a used car: eliminating a second car; buying a new, more fuel-efficient vehicle-and, of course, reducing driving mileage. The most efficient measure, for both reducing costs and saving fuel, is said to be the purchase of new fuel-efficient cars.
qpproaebcs to ControBIng Air PoUution, Ann F. Friedlaender (editor) MIT Press, Cambridge, MA 02142, 1978, pp. 480, $24.95. The contributors to this book are not concerned with questions of economic doctrine or issues of social justice raised by air pollution control, but rather with entirely pragmatic questions of implementation and whether it is possible to devise some scheme that permits simplicity of standards but contains a safety valve of fines or fees that does away with the need for recontracting. In this collection of papers and comments, researchers and practitioners examine the Clean Air Act of 1970 and its implementation through the EPA, the courts, and the various state agencies. They assess a wide range of methods for controlling air pollution where the costs and benefits of cleanup are uncertain, where implementation is imperfect, and where administrative costs may be substadtial. The book presents original research in the area of policy evaluation that is not only accessible but critical information for government policy-makers, individuals in industry, and interested citizens who do not have technical knowledge in law, economics, or political science.
SpeeiaI Feature In line with our policy of drawing the readers’ attention to particular sources of research reports, we continue our occasional series on transportation research centers and their publications.
Directors or leaders of such facilities are invited to provide us with descriptive material on their act&ties, and to give us a list of their currently &&able publications.