Officials See Difficult Transition to VMT as Possible Replacement for Fuel Tax

This story appears in the Nov. 30 print edition of Transport Topics.

WASHINGTON — Several lawmakers, Department of Transportation officials and experts have  expressed concern with elements of a vehicle miles traveled tax, which some advocates tout as a replacement for the fuel tax. They also cautioned that a transition to VMT could be a slow process.

Roy Kienitz, DOT undersecretary for policy, said during a Nov. 18 briefing by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, any solution for overcoming declining revenue from the fuel tax would be “technically difficult and politically difficult.”

Kienitz was pressed by Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) about what DOT was doing “to prepare for a transition to a new sustainable funding stream.”

“It is a matter on which we’ve giving a fair amount of thought,” Kienitz said. He added that while DOT was “working really hard to prepare internally, none of that is something that’s become a proposal.”

Earlier this year, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood floated the idea of a VMT charge as a replacement for the fuel tax, only to be rebuked by the White House.

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), chairwoman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, said she could not support a VMT fee, even through Congress will be looking at “a new sustainable source of funding” as it develops a new highway bill.

“It seems to me, within the VMT realm, without getting into those things that I would not vote for — which is meters in your car, and Big Brother checking in on you — I wouldn’t have any of that,” she said.

“There’s ways of having some kind of fees when you buy a car or you register a car, where you can say, ‘I’ve gone this many miles in the past’ and you pay your fair share. That’s all we’re asking for — your fair share,” Boxer said.

At the same time, Boxer acknowledged she had three hybrid cars — which she said is an example of why the fuel tax alone cannot meet the nation’s transportation fund-ing needs.

“I drive a hybrid . . . and I am not paying my fair share at the gas pump and I’m using the roads,” she said.

Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio) agreed that Congress has “to look at other methods . . . because we are moving toward reducing the number of vehicle miles traveled.”

He said even though less fuel is being consumed, in the near term, nothing other than an increase in the fuel tax would generate “the dollars you need.”

“Most people in the House and Senate are all worried about a vote on an increase in the gas tax,” he said. “You can’t do it without increasing the gas tax. There’s just no other alternative.”

During the hearing, Boxer praised “the truckers” for stepping forward to “look at a higher tax for gas . . . because they are so desperate to get the roads fixed up.”

Groups including American Trucking Associations have said they favor an increase in the fuel tax over other methods, such as tolling or a VMT, to pay for infrastructure.

At a National Journal-hosted policy lunch, Deron Lovaas, federal transportation policy director at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said road pricing and mileage fees are slowly gaining traction because there is “a growing consensus about the need to price transportation goods which will help to reduce emissions and improve traffic flow.”

Also at the Nov. 17 event was lawyer Jack Schenendorf, who was vice chairman of one of two congressional commissions that studied transportation finance. Though both commissions backed use of a VMT tax, he said the transition would take time.

“There’s no way to institute a large-scale pricing system in a two-year time frame,” he said “It is going to take a lot longer than that.”