As gas costs more, Americans continue to cut down on their driving. In May, the Federal Highway Administration says, traffic counts on all public roads in the United States were 3.7 percent -- or 9.6 billion vehicle miles -- lower than in May 2007.
That's the third-biggest monthly drop in the 66 years since the feds began keeping count.
It continues a seven-month decline. From November through May, Americans drove 40.5 billion fewer miles than during the same period a year earlier.
Driving fewer miles means buying fewer gallons of gas and diesel fuel, and that means state and federal governments are collecting less fuel tax money.
The state tax is 30.15 cents per gallon, the highest rate now allowed by state law. The feds collect 18.4 cents per gallon gas and 24.4 cents per gallon diesel.
Congress is trying to figure out ways to raise more money for road and bridge repair and expansion, and other transportation needs. The Bush administration opposes any increase in the federal gas tax.
“By driving less and using more fuel-efficient vehicles, Americans are showing us that the highways of tomorrow cannot be supported solely by the federal gas tax,” Mary E. Peters, the US transportation secretary, said today in a press release. “We must embrace more sustainable funding sources for highways and bridges through more sustainable and effective ways such as congestion pricing and private activity bonds.”
Bruce Siceloff reports on traffic and transportation. A News & Observer reporter, editor and blogger since 1976, he took over the
Comments
Instead of hitting
Mon, 07/28/2008 - 14:16 — Anonymous (not verified)Instead of hitting consumers/citizens with higher taxes, why don't they subsidze the loss with the court cost fees that the courts charge. I still do not know where that money the court collects daily goes. If anyone knows please inform me.
NC Insurance Commisioner
Mon, 07/28/2008 - 14:09 — JohnPershingThere have to be fewer accident claims being paid out if we are driving less. Anybody had any rate reduction offers from their auto insurers?
I think it's funny that as
Mon, 07/28/2008 - 13:23 — Anonymous (not verified)I think it's funny that as soon as there is a tiny dip in road use the federal government starts panicking about how to fund highways. It seems that since fewer people are driving, it isn't the best time to push forward with highway building operations, since it is automobile use that necessitates expansion projects and resurfacing, which is where I'm guessing most of the money goes. We should rather put money into developing transit alternatives to the personal automobile, which would save most taxpayers money over the long-term. If no one drives on the roads, they don't need as much funding poured into them! I agree that bridges need to be kept in good shape, but honestly when gas prices were low the government did a terrible job of maintaining them and is now using the recently developed fear of bridge collapse to justify increased highway spending.
damned
Mon, 07/28/2008 - 13:20 — ericlmddamned if you do.... damned if you don't! gotta love these government agencies w/ their hands in our pockets every which way they can.