In August 2011 Gov. Rick Scott first made it plain he likes toll lanes on major highways and wants more of them. They speed up traffic, he said. In October 2011,PolitiFact Florida checked outhis assessment, rated it"mostly true."
So it was a little surprising to see the Florida Center for Investigative Reporting(FCIR), whose stated purpose is "to expose corruption, waste and miscarriages of justice," expose Scott's commitment to toll lanes.
Don't get me wrong, I think it's great this news is well and truly in front of the public again. And shame on all of us for not keeping up with the story since 2011.
But timed as it is, making the connections to developers all slimy-like as it does, the FCIR report feels like another weapon the liberal media brought to the election battlefield to bang over Scott's head.
I admit, I like express lanes. I've gratefully used them in South Florida. So, I agreed with Scott when I first heard him bring the expansion idea up publicly on a Daytona Beach talk-radio show. He explained to show hostMarc Bernier the state can designate toll lanes on federal highways as long as it adds a new lane, and he talked about changes to Interstate 95 in Broward County as an example of how such lanes can work to transform an insufferably sluggish commute.
"We did that down in Broward County," the governor said. "It took the rush-hour traffic for the nontolled lanes from 25 mph to 45 (mph). So, for people not paying the toll, it was a big benefit. We're going to start doing that across the state."
My point here is, Scott didn't exactly sneak his intentions through. Toll lanes have been on his dance card almost since his inauguration and he's admitted it enthusiastically. Certainly in 2011 -- with the PolitiFact report -- toll lanes got a lot of media attention. Then, in 2013, whenScott and the Legislature gave the go-ahead to new toll lanes on I-4 to help pay for a massive overhaul of the interstate, they made prominent headlines again.
While fully admitting toll lanes make commutes quicker, FCIR reporter Eric Barton seems shocked that "there has been little debate about the need for the projects not one resident will cast a vote on the lanes or the billions spent to create them."
He also claims toll lanes are an option for the wealthy, pointing to "a state-issued report on toll lane drivers, which found that 87 percent of motorists who use the lanes most frequently have an annual household income of more than $76,000." (In South Florida, why am I not surprised?)
I remember when I was a kid, much the same thing was said in the pre-construction days of the Garden State Parkway, which was designed for cars only and runs 173 miles virtually parallel with the New Jersey Turnpike. "It's going to be a rich man's road," commuters complained. "Ordinary people won't be able to afford it."
All the New Jersey Legislature did was create a highway authority and get on with it. There was no voter referendum on the parkway, no public hearings. It took four years to build, was completed in 1956 and cost $330 million. Construction costs were paid for by state-sponsored bonds, while tolls -- fairly sizable for travelers driving end to end -- covered operation and maintenance.
Even back then -- in a time when most families had only one car -- from the day the Garden State opened, users sang its praises, relieved to be out of the competition with bumper-to-bumper 18-wheelers on the noisy, smelly New Jersey 'pike.
Transportation infrastructure is a big-ticket item. Gas taxes no longer do the trick. I'm a fiscal conservative, so, yes, I like the pay-as-you-go plan to keep roads and bridges in good repair. And guess what? So does Barack Obama.
The White House announced in April it is is allowing more state and local governments to begin charging tolls on highways, to address the rapidly disappearing federal money available for highway repair. The reversal of the longtime federal ban on tolling is contained in the new $302 billion transportation bill the executive branch introduced.
Highway repairs in much of the country were federally funded through gas taxes collected in the Highway Trust Fund, says The Washington Post. But with cars becoming more fuel-efficient, tax revenues have dropped and the fund may soon run dry.
Meanwhile, the thinking on toll lanes in some states -- Rick Scott and Florida, by the way, don't stand alone in this regard -- has anticipated the White House:
- Orange County, California has toll roads on its insanely busy State Road 91, and is looking to add them to its 405 Freeway..
- Maryland is completing toll lanes on I-95 just north of Baltimore..
- Texas is floating a bond for toll lanes in Harris County.
- Toll lanes are on track for a spring 2015 start along I-77 to help Charlotte, N.C. commuters..
- In Colorado, the Boulder-Denver Turnpike is getting not one, but two toll lanes, a lane in each direction.
One last point:
The Florida Center for Investigative Reporting does a lot of connecting highway developers involved in the toll lane projects with campaign donations to Rick Scott and even HNTB of Kansas City, a brief former employer of Transportation Secretary Ananth Prasad.This is what good investigative reporting is all about -- shining a light on every perception of favoritism or corruption in the public arena.
But my problem with this report is, virtually everylarge transportation contractor in Florida -- as every major industry and aslarge lobbying firms and whoever else with a lot of money needs to ingratiate him/herself to those in high office -- gives campaign contributions to both parties. They are equal opportunity givers or takers or both. They hedge their bets. Especially in a year like this, with the promise of a close election between Republican Scott and Democrat Charlie Crist.
Frankly, campaign "gifts" from people fishing for something specific are all repulsive to me. But the problem is working out which is intended as business as usual and which is an out-and-out quid pro quo.
Toll lanes are a plan entirely within the realm of Scott's authority. The transportation secretary works for the governor, but he also follows legislative process as required. So, where's the beef in this "expos"? Presenting as a sneak attack a 3-year-old plan seven weeks from the election -- a plan even the White House would approve? I'm sorry, but it just feels like a put-up job.
Reach Nancy Smith at nsmith@sunshinestatenews.com or at 228-282-2423. Twitter: @NancyLBSmith
