Cincinnati Enquirer
The case against tolls: Does it hold up?
By Jason Williams
Dec 12, 2012 

The governors of Ohio and Kentucky are scheduled to sign an agreement today in Covington that will map out how to pay for a $2.5 billion Brent Spence Bridge replacement. 

U.S. transportation secretary Ray LaHood is scheduled to join Ohio Gov. John Kasich and Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear in urging the project forward. Both governors favor charging tolls as a way to raise revenue and fast-track construction. 

Not everyone agrees.

In recent weeks, local lawyer and conservative talk-radio host Eric Deters and the Northern Kentucky Tea Party have voiced their opposition to tolls, through social media, talk radio and letters to the editor of The Enquirer. 

Here are five arguments they make against tolls and a review of each, based on Enquirer research and interviews with transportation and public policy experts. 

Washington is broke, and the fiscal cliff threatens the already small amount of money for major national infrastructure projects. The federal government will be on the hook for some Brent Spence funding, but it’s uncertain how much. Some toll opponents are calling for federal infrastructure aid to Middle East countries to be cut and designated to the Brent Spence. But Washington doesn’t work that way. 

Congress has banned earmarks, which provided money for specific projects favored by members of Congress. And federal and state motor fuels tax revenues have lagged in recent years because of more fuel-efficient cars and rising construction costs. Despite that, the federal gas tax of 18.4 cents per gallon hasn’t been increased since 1993. 

In fact, local residents are more opposed to a gas-tax increase than they are tolls, according to an Enquirer poll last spring. The poll showed 84 percent of respondents oppose a gas-tax increase; 51 percent are against tolls. 

Read the rest of the article at the Cincinnati Enquirer