Get the Ricochet app
Ricochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.
One of my guilty pleasures is trudging through pro-train, pro-transit, and anti-car messaging on social media. They frequently deflect cost-overrun complaints (as if it were on a plane with the California high-speed rail boondoggle) by claiming highways are highly subsidized too. They frequently cite the deficit of the Highway Trust Fund—the U.S. federal accounting mechanism established in 1956 to finance the Interstate Highway System, roads, bridges, and mass transit—as a prime example.
I downloaded the HTF data through 2024 in CSV form. The excise taxes from motor fuel and other sources (tires, inner tubes, tread rubber, lubricating oil, parts and accessories) from 1957 through 1982 are devoted entirely to the interstate expenses. Since 1983, the 2.8 cents/gallon transport fuel tax and a portion of all HTF revenue have been diverted to transit.
I added all HTF excise taxes, including the 2.8-cent transit part, since 1957 and subtracted highway expenses: The difference was a $50.9 billion surplus.
The Highway Trust Fund should fund our interstates, and Congress should find another way to subsidize transit.
Discussion (20)
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
No, Congress should not "find another way to fund transit." Congress should butt out entirely.
I do support federal backing of our interstate highway system and of the rails that carry our freight. Other than that, I see no reason for federal involvement at all.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
I should've said Congress should find another way or not subsidize at all, which would be my preference.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Isn’t this a bit unfair/skewed? You included the transit portion of the tax on the revenue side, but only included highway expenses. Congress has bailed out the fund to the tune of 270+ billion over the years. Is this all due to the mass transit deficit?
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Segregating Highway and Transit I get:
This squares with your comment that Highways have a 50 Billion surplus, as your calculation includes as Highway Receipts the Transit tax receipts of 172.7Billion. Take that away from the 50 Billion surplus and you have a deficit of 120 Billion for Highway.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
One argument in favor of subsidizing transit is that it decreases congestion on the highways (and parking lots). A bus can carry the equivalent of many passenger cars. The same goes for light rail, etc.
This might not seem so convincing if you get stuck behind a bus that stops at every other corner, but there are some potential benefits.
I have heard it said that early street car lines made more money from selling real estate near the tracks than from fares. When the real estate revenue dried up, the lines became insolvent and were taken over by public authorities (pseudo-government).
If transit were left to private enterprise, what would such a system look like? In these days of Waymo, Lyft, and Uber it poses interesting questions. Could a driverless bus be profitable? Drivers are a big expense with bus systems, which are much more flexible than rail.
You're seeing five of 20 comments. Sign in, or join for just $5 per month, to read them all and add your own.