I-695 FALLOUT: Toll Roads Coming Back? November 11, 1999 OLYMPIA - At least one state official is bringing up a taboo topic to try to recover tax money lost because of Initiative 695.

State Transportation Secretary Sid Morrison says lawmakers may have to turn to user fees such as highway tolls to make up for the lost money.

Tolls are common in 30 states across the country and Morrison says tolls might be necessary in our state if drivers want better highways and less congestion.

It should be considered since so many other states use it. And people get used to it, Morrison said, Its just like paying your phone bill. You use something, you pay for it.

Historically, drivers in Washington State have opposed tolls, but the state may use tolls to help pay for a second bridge across the Tacoma Narrows.

Tolls were also used to help pay for the 520 floating bridge and the Hood Canal bridge.

http://www.komotv.com/news/Mnews-index.html

-- Mark Stilson (mark842@hotmail.com), November 12, 1999

Answers

Toll roads in WA?: Does the phrase "when pigs fly" mean anything to Mr. Morrison? So the reason it should be considered is (1) because other states do it, and (2) because we would just get use to it. I think I tried those excuses when I was little and was trying to get my parents to let me do something or go somewhere. Their response was always: "If Johnny jumps off the Brooklyn Bridge, would you follow him?" Maybe that's what Mr. Morrison should do....

Obviously he didn't hear the message the voters sent with I-695! Having been newly empowered, the taxpayers will not "just get use to it". We spent too many years doing that and it did nothing but create more fees and taxes.

-- just a guy (torijosh@yahoo.com), November 12, 1999.

A toll was to be used as a REGRESSIVE tax, in other words it went away once the item of toll was paid off, ie narrows bridge. The use of tolls to perpetually fund projects is WRONG, progressive taxation is right out of the communist/socialist manifestos. Our roads of this nation belong to the people NOT TO THE STINKING STATE. We fought a revolutionary war to stop those evils remember!

-- Chuck in Kent (antifed@foxinternet.net), November 12, 1999.

Isn't this interesting? Some of the supporters of 695 don't seem to like the possible consequences, including the addition of user fees and the elimination of subsidies that Craig was so supportive of.

-- dbvz (dbvz@wa.freei.net), November 12, 1999.

"toll roads are a good idea. that is a true user fee. Even Craig would agree to this one.

-- theman (theman@wuzzup.net), November 12, 1999. " Within limits. Of course, I'd want non-transit dependent transit users to pay their full cost too. (What do you mean, EVEN Craig? Am I a separate class of troglodyte? ;) )

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), November 12, 1999.

I get the impression that some people believe that there is a "freedom of taxation". The American Revolution was fought for many reasons. The reasons relating to taxation, was not because the taxes were too high, but because the taxes were imposed without true REPRESENTATION and were applied only to the American colonies.

The U.S. Constitution identifies the requirement for taxes to support the various needs of the people. No one likes to pay taxes. Most of the people would agree that some taxation is necessary. The question that most of us seem to have difficulty with is deciding what should tax dollars go towards.

For those of you who think that you should not pay any taxes, if you find a country without taxes that you can move to, please give me a call. Until then, why not work with the system to get I-695 to work with the minimum of impact.

-- Gene (gene@gene.com), November 12, 1999.

theman (theman@wuzzup.net), November 12, 1999. " Within limits. Of course, I'd want non-transit dependent transit users to pay their full cost too. (What do you mean, EVEN Craig? Am I a separate class of troglodyte? ;) )

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), November 12, 1999.

craig, what I meant was that you seem to be a leader for discussion on behalf of 695ers, and if the author of the orriginal thread was trying to gain support of his or her thought among 695ers, it would probably not be there.

-- theman (theman@wuzzup.net), November 12, 1999.