BUILD America 250 Act

[ElishaGOtis]

lol

https://transportation.house.gov/uploadedfiles/fong_043_rev1.pdf

"Hey could you guys pretty please comply with this law from 10 years ago?    "

At least someone is saying something regarding toll interoperability 

[Quillz]

Direct link to the bill:

https://transportation.house.gov/uploadedfiles/build_america_250_act_bill_text.pdf?utm_campaign=198664-345

We'll see what the Senate does to it.

Not to get political and I'm not advocating for this one way or another but I had read Trump was pushing to include the Save America Act in the transportation bill IIRC. Not sure if that'll impact it or not.

You don't need to say "not to get political" when the thread is literally about something political. The previous Build Act was also political. Supporting candidate A or B is also irrelevant in this case.

[Plutonic Panda]

Direct link to the bill:

https://transportation.house.gov/uploadedfiles/build_america_250_act_bill_text.pdf?utm_campaign=198664-345

We'll see what the Senate does to it.

Not to get political and I'm not advocating for this one way or another but I had read Trump was pushing to include the Save America Act in the transportation bill IIRC. Not sure if that'll impact it or not.

You don't need to say "not to get political" when the thread is literally about something political. The previous Build Act was also political. Supporting candidate A or B is also irrelevant in this case.

What I meant really is that I'm not gonna say whether I support that or not. Just repeating what I've seen.

[SP Cook]

You don't need to say "not to get political" when the thread is literally about something political. The previous Build Act was also political. Supporting candidate A or B is also irrelevant in this case.

I agree with this.  While they don't always do exactly what I would have done, the mods here do a good job of keeping the tone appropriate here.  There is a difference between a discussion that is by definition political, such as this, and allowing people to just turn every conversation into a polemic with the mandatory accompanying simplistic statements and personal namecalling.

As to some of the bill's content commented upon above.

- It is time to add the phrase "except in North Carolina, which just makes stuff up without logic or need" to any discussion of how interstates are numbered.

- More money down the Amtrak rathole is sad.  It just doesn't work and no amount of spending is going to change that. 

- Toll transponder interoperability, we are too far down the path to ever get things done now.  This is one of the great misses of transportation in the last couple of decades.  There should have been one (inter)national (Canada getting offered the chance to join in) clearing house for toll accounts and one universal transponder, which in the natural course of things would have eventually become just something built into the car, at least on high end cars, with no need to attach stuff to your windshield or whatever. 

[architect77]

New report shows surface transportation marginally improving:

https://www.roadsbridges.com/funding/news/55378975/america-spent-15-trillion-on-roads-heres-why-many-still-arent-getting-better

Make sure everyone is aware that says $1.5 trillion not $15 trillion spent over the last 30 years.

That works out to be $1 Billion per state per year, much less impressive.

[ElishaGOtis]

You don't need to say "not to get political" when the thread is literally about something political. The previous Build Act was also political. Supporting candidate A or B is also irrelevant in this case.

I agree with this.  While they don't always do exactly what I would have done, the mods here do a good job of keeping the tone appropriate here.  There is a difference between a discussion that is by definition political, such as this, and allowing people to just turn every conversation into a polemic with the mandatory accompanying simplistic statements and personal namecalling.

As to some of the bill's content commented upon above.

- It is time to add the phrase "except in North Carolina, which just makes stuff up without logic or need" to any discussion of how interstates are numbered.

- More money down the Amtrak rathole is sad.  It just doesn't work and no amount of spending is going to change that. 

- Toll transponder interoperability, we are too far down the path to ever get things done now.  This is one of the great misses of transportation in the last couple of decades.  There should have been one (inter)national (Canada getting offered the chance to join in) clearing house for toll accounts and one universal transponder, which in the natural course of things would have eventually become just something built into the car, at least on high end cars, with no need to attach stuff to your windshield or whatever. 

Let's see...

1) Amtrak's Northeast rail service between D.C. and NYC and Boston has turned a small profit for the last couple of years. It's wildly successful and absolutely vital for a region with congested airspace and maxed out I-95 conditions.

2) Regional intercity rail within 500 miles is absolutely efficient and will be expanding up and down the East coast. Virginia has committed to rail to meet the commonwealth's transportation needs through the 21st century. They are adding service to all parts of the state and are working with NC to connect Virginia's rail service to NC's successful intrastate service.

3) NC's Piedmont service serving central NC is solvent and successful without ever taking on debt. It can be done and currently there are 5 daily RTs serving all of central NC towns and cities.

4) Georgia and SC are studying whether high speed service could link Atlanta and upstate SC to Charlotte & NC's Piedmont service.

5) Anticipated growth in travel along the East Coast can only be accommodated with regional rail. The skies are full and even with GPS guidance there won't be much room for growth, and of course I-95 is heavily used now.

6) Amtrak's long distance service is what's a failure in terms of efficiency and travel times. But don't let the name itself tarnish the successful regional systems of today. It is the best and most relaxing mode of travel in the NE by far.

7) Our country can't afford to build new high speed track of any large scale. But Acela is doing a good job and making money on our old existing tracks now. There are hundreds of trains everyday using that railway to NYC. It's very important in supporting that region's GDP too.

That's where I think we keep getting ourselves stuck in a trap. The standards for "new build" HSR are becoming increasingly infeasible, yet the existing HSR lines are serving their purpose in very good ways. I'd say the focus should be on modernizing and implementing intercity rail regardless of speed, using HSR as a tool and not the focus. Similar to Brightline tbh (despite their financial woes)... it focuses on intercity services and only runs at 200km/h on a small segment. But even at that speed, they're still not technically HSR since that requires 250km/h for new build, something that the NEC only RECENTLY achieved...

Also regarding Brightline, I'm admittedly disappointed that the original P3 plan didn't go through with FDOT (per Gov. Rick Scott's proposal), because I think half of their financial issues they're running into could have been minimized this way...

[ElishaGOtis]

Looking at one of the amendments (on page 13), it adds two routes in the FL panhandle as high-priority corridors:
- US-98 between E Chase St (I-110) & US-331
- SR-85 between US-98 and US-90

https://transportation.house.gov/uploadedfiles/mgr.pdf

[74/171FAN]

Moved the Amtrak Discussion.  (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=37184.0)

[Plutonic Panda]

PR: https://aashtojournal.transportation.org/industry-urges-advancement-of-build-america-250-bill/

[Beltway]

https://transportation.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=409495

A national per‑mile fee sounds good in a press release, but the technology, enforcement, and administrative systems don't exist. The bill is almost certainly referring to a simpler EV‑user fee or limited RUC, not a universal mileage charge.

[Scott5114]

A national per‑mile fee sounds good in a press release, but the technology, enforcement, and administrative systems don't exist.

Whenever I get my car smogged, they collect the odometer reading and submit it to the Nevada DMV with the rest of the smog paperwork. The DMV could easily subtract last year's odometer reading from this year's and know how many miles I drove in a year and use that as part of the license plate renewal fee.

So yes, the technology, enforcement, and administrative systems do exist in Clark County, Nevada. I assume Washoe County uses a similar system. The other fifteen counties do not require a smog check with registration, so you'd have to stand up some other way of collecting that data, but this is not exactly rocket science.

[Beltway]

A national per‑mile fee sounds good in a press release, but the technology, enforcement, and administrative systems don't exist.

Whenever I get my car smogged, they collect the odometer reading and submit it to the Nevada DMV with the rest of the smog paperwork. The DMV could easily subtract last year's odometer reading from this year's and know how many miles I drove in a year and use that as part of the license plate renewal fee.
So yes, the technology, enforcement, and administrative systems do exist in Clark County, Nevada. I assume Washoe County uses a similar system. The other fifteen counties do not require a smog check with registration, so you'd have to stand up some other way of collecting that data, but this is not exactly rocket science.

No odometer readings in central Virginia, not officially. I think NOVA is the only place that ties emissions testing to annual state inspection.

A yearly reading is a very crude measure -- it tells you total miles driven in the past 12 months, but not where the miles were driven, whether they were in‑state or out‑of‑state, whether they were on tolled vs. non‑tolled facilities, whether they were on local streets vs. state highways, or whether the vehicle was even in the state for part of the year.

For a true per‑mile road‑usage charge, that level of granularity matters. A once‑a‑year odometer snapshot doesn't provide it.

This is why the motor fuels road user tax is so hard to replace.

[Scott5114]

A national per‑mile fee sounds good in a press release, but the technology, enforcement, and administrative systems don't exist.

Whenever I get my car smogged, they collect the odometer reading and submit it to the Nevada DMV with the rest of the smog paperwork. The DMV could easily subtract last year's odometer reading from this year's and know how many miles I drove in a year and use that as part of the license plate renewal fee.
So yes, the technology, enforcement, and administrative systems do exist in Clark County, Nevada. I assume Washoe County uses a similar system. The other fifteen counties do not require a smog check with registration, so you'd have to stand up some other way of collecting that data, but this is not exactly rocket science.

No odometer readings in central Virginia, not officially. I think NOVA is the only place that ties emissions testing to annual state inspection.

A yearly reading is a very crude measure -- it tells you total miles driven in the past 12 months, but not where the miles were driven, whether they were in‑state or out‑of‑state, whether they were on tolled vs. non‑tolled facilities, whether they were on local streets vs. state highways, or whether the vehicle was even in the state for part of the year.

For a true per‑mile road‑usage charge, that level of granularity matters. A once‑a‑year odometer snapshot doesn't provide it.

This is why the motor fuels road user tax is so hard to replace.

Huh? Motor fuels tax doesn't take into account any of that either—if I fill up my tank in Blackwell, Oklahoma and then drive to Kansas City on I-35, I still have to pay Oklahoma fuel taxes for fuel being burned on a toll road in Kansas.

Also, since this came up in the context of a "national per‑mile fee", it really doesn't matter worth a hill of beans what state the mileage was accrued in.

[Beltway]

No odometer readings in central Virginia, not officially. I think NOVA is the only place that ties emissions testing to annual state inspection.
A yearly reading is a very crude measure -- it tells you total miles driven in the past 12 months, but not where the miles were driven, whether they were in‑state or out‑of‑state, whether they were on tolled vs. non‑tolled facilities, whether they were on local streets vs. state highways, or whether the vehicle was even in the state for part of the year.
For a true per‑mile road‑usage charge, that level of granularity matters. A once‑a‑year odometer snapshot doesn't provide it.
This is why the motor fuels road user tax is so hard to replace.

Huh? Motor fuels tax doesn't take into account any of that either—if I fill up my tank in Blackwell, Oklahoma and then drive to Kansas City on I-35, I still have to pay Oklahoma fuel taxes for fuel being burned on a toll road in Kansas.
Also, since this came up in the context of a "national per‑mile fee", it really doesn't matter worth a hill of beans what state the mileage was accrued in.

Motor fuels tax is far from being a precise instrument, but at least it taxes every time at the pump, and varies based on actual fuel mileage which is influenced by vehicle weight and types of roads used.

[kphoger]

Also, since this came up in the context of a "national per‑mile fee", it really doesn't matter worth a hill of beans what state the mileage was accrued in.

As someone who has driven more miles in Mexico than in Oklahoma, I can confidently say that one's odometer does not necessarily tell you an accurate "national per-mile" anything.  And I'm sure that's much, much more true for the folks who live in border towns and have jobs on the other side of the border.  Or for our best friends, who literally live in Mexico full-time but whose vehicle is registered in Kansas.

[vdeane]

A yearly reading is a very crude measure -- it tells you total miles driven in the past 12 months, but not where the miles were driven, whether they were in‑state or out‑of‑state, whether they were on tolled vs. non‑tolled facilities, whether they were on local streets vs. state highways, or whether the vehicle was even in the state for part of the year.

For a true per‑mile road‑usage charge, that level of granularity matters. A once‑a‑year odometer snapshot doesn't provide it.

This is why the motor fuels road user tax is so hard to replace.

I may hate the idea of a per-mile usage charge, but I'd hardly say that level of granularity is essential.  Or rather, whether it's considered essential or not is up to the whims of politicians, and I don't think they care much on whether we agree with their assessment or what the consequences of that determination (such as requiring GPS tracking or just giving all your tax to your state of registration even if much of your driving was elsewhere, or requiring an annual filing similar to income tax, etc.).  As mentioned, the gas tax doesn't address much of that at all, and of the stuff that it does, it's only due to the fact that if you drives enough out of state, eventually they'll likely refuel out of state, but it's not a perfect measure.  For example, I've driven the entire lengths of I-85 and I-95 in North Carolina, but I've never spent a single penny in the state - my sales and gas tax dollars went to Virginia and South Carolina in those trips.  And this does drive tolling decisions - such as why Delaware never removed the border toll on I-95.

[Scott5114]

Also, since this came up in the context of a "national per‑mile fee", it really doesn't matter worth a hill of beans what state the mileage was accrued in.

As someone who has driven more miles in Mexico than in Oklahoma, I can confidently say that one's odometer does not necessarily tell you an accurate "national per-mile" anything.  And I'm sure that's much, much more true for the folks who live in border towns and have jobs on the other side of the border.  Or for our best friends, who literally live in Mexico full-time but whose vehicle is registered in Kansas.

I mean, I think it'd probably be better to just assume every US-plated car will be driven 100% in the US, and then have some sort of IRS paperwork you could file to deduct mileage outside accrued outside of the US, than it would be to have to have some sort of GPS tracking.

Or you could do something like allow an optional stop at a CBP office on the way out of the country to get a mileage-out slip and then you get a mileage-in slip coming back into the US. If someone is doing something like, say, only dipping into Tijuana or Niagara Falls for a few hours and coming back and don't think it's worth the time to get the deduction for 5 miles or whatever, they could just skip it.

Then again, the US is one of the only countries in the world that taxes its own citizens on income made abroad. So just saying "if you drive outside the US, tough shit, pay up anyway" would be consistent with existing tax law.

[kphoger]

I think it'd probably be better to ... have some sort of IRS paperwork

[Beltway]

I may hate the idea of a per-mile usage charge, but I'd hardly say that level of granularity is essential.  Or rather, whether it's considered essential or not is up to the whims of politicians, and I don't think they care much on whether we agree with their assessment or what the consequences of that determination (such as requiring GPS tracking or just giving all your tax to your state of registration even if much of your driving was elsewhere, or requiring an annual filing similar to income tax, etc.).  As mentioned, the gas tax doesn't address much of that at all, and of the stuff that it does, it's only due to the fact that if you drives enough out of state, eventually they'll likely refuel out of state, but it's not a perfect measure.  For example, I've driven the entire lengths of I-85 and I-95 in North Carolina, but I've never spent a single penny in the state - my sales and gas tax dollars went to Virginia and South Carolina in those trips.  And this does drive tolling decisions - such as why Delaware never removed the border toll on I-95.

Delaware has widened their turnpike twice, and they include the DE-1 Superhighway in their tolling system. So they would have outstanding toll revenue bonds that need to be serviced.

Once a year measurement is very poor granularity.

The HTF brings in about $43-45 billion per year from federal highway‑user taxes. The problem isn't the revenue -- it's that the fuel tax is a continuous‑measurement proxy for road use, while a once‑a‑year odometer reading is not. That's why replacing the fuel tax with a national RUC is so difficult.

Many states already collect registration fees, title taxes, and personal property taxes, but those are ownership charges, not usage charges. They don't replace the HTF's federal highway‑user taxes. A once‑a‑year odometer reading is still a very poor proxy for actual road use compared to the continuous‑measurement nature of the fuel tax. I suppose that with EV they could simply jack up those charges (registration fees, title taxes, and personal property taxes.)

[Rothman]

A once‑a‑year odometer reading is still a very poor proxy for actual road use compared to the continuous‑measurement nature of the fuel tax.

Mileage not being a good enough proxy for...road miles traveled upon...

[Beltway]

A once‑a‑year odometer reading is still a very poor proxy for actual road use compared to the continuous‑measurement nature of the fuel tax.

Mileage not being a good enough proxy for...road miles traveled upon...

For 30+ years, the anti–fuel‑tax faction has used a rhetorical trick: Point out the imperfections of the fuel tax -- pretend that means the fuel tax is useless -- conclude it must be replaced entirely.

But the imperfections they cite do not logically justify throwing away the entire mechanism. They justify improving it -- or supplementing it -- not detonating it.

The fuel tax has limitations, but it's still a continuous‑measurement proxy for road use. A once‑a‑year odometer reading has zero granularity -- no location, no jurisdiction, no facility type, no time‑of‑use. Pointing out imperfections in the fuel tax doesn't justify replacing it with something that measures even less.

[kphoger]

For 30+ years, the anti–fuel‑tax faction has used a rhetorical trick: Point out the imperfections of the fuel tax -- pretend that means the fuel tax is useless -- conclude it must be replaced entirely.

But the imperfections they cite do not logically justify throwing away the entire mechanism. They justify improving it -- or supplementing it -- not detonating it.

Yeah, I'd rather pay fuel tax on the < 10 gallons of gas I buy for the lawn mower in a typical year than pay an odometer-based tax that includes the > 30 gallons of gas I use driving my vehicle outside of the U.S. in a typical year.

[Rothman]

A once‑a‑year odometer reading has zero granularity -- no location, no jurisdiction, no facility type, no time‑of‑use.

Yet another strange sentence from you, when comparing an odometer/VMT tax to a fuel tax.

[Max Rockatansky]

Is this mileage tax talk something Beltway came up with or is there an actual section that mentioned it?  I scanned through the documents really quickly on lunch and the only thing I'm seeing kind of in the domain is the EV/PHEV fee in section 1129.   

[Beltway]

For 30+ years, the anti–fuel‑tax faction has used a rhetorical trick: Point out the imperfections of the fuel tax -- pretend that means the fuel tax is useless -- conclude it must be replaced entirely.
But the imperfections they cite do not logically justify throwing away the entire mechanism. They justify improving it -- or supplementing it -- not detonating it.

Yeah, I'd rather pay fuel tax on the < 10 gallons of gas I buy for the lawn mower in a typical year than pay an odometer-based tax that includes the > 30 gallons of gas I use driving my vehicle outside of the U.S. in a typical year.

Exactly -- an odometer tax would bill you for Canadian miles and ignore where the fuel was actually consumed. The fuel tax self‑allocates by jurisdiction because refueling behavior reflects where you drive.

A single odometer reading can't tell lawn‑mower fuel from highway fuel (which is not ideal for 2-stroke engines anyhow), or U.S. miles from Canadian miles. The fuel tax already self‑sorts both because refueling behavior reflects actual use.

A once‑a‑year odometer reading has zero granularity -- no location, no jurisdiction, no facility type, no time‑of‑use.

Yet another strange sentence from you, when comparing an odometer/VMT tax to a fuel tax.

There's nothing strange about it -- an annual odometer reading is a single lump‑sum number. It has no information about where the miles were driven, which jurisdiction should receive revenue, what type of facility was used, or when the travel occurred. The fuel tax captures all of that implicitly because refueling behavior reflects actual use. That's the difference in granularity.

Is this mileage tax talk something Beltway came up with or is there an actual section that mentioned it?  I scanned through the documents really quickly on lunch and the only thing I'm seeing kind of in the domain is the EV/PHEV fee in section 1129. 

No, I didn't invent it -- the VMT discussion comes from the fact that the bill increases the EV/PHEV fee (Section 1129) because EVs don't pay fuel tax. Any time Congress raises EV fees for that reason, the policy conversation inevitably turns to what replaces the fuel tax long‑term. That's why the odometer/VMT issue keeps coming up, even if the bill itself doesn't mandate one.