Guest Column: South Carolina Roads & Bridges Need Attention

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

by DAN REIDER

***

There has been a lot of discussion lately about the condition of the roads and bridges throughout South Carolina. These topics range from bridge safety concerns, potholes and wearing of our roads, and even deterioration of road lane lines predominantly in urban areas. On a recent radio talk show, the two hosts got into a lengthy discussion of how the South Carolina gasoline tax was supposed to address some or even most of these issues but had seemingly done very little to improve many of the hazardous road and bridge conditions in our state. They talked about how some drivers contribute a lot less via the gasoline tax than others or maybe even contribute nothing at all as is the case of drivers of electric vehicles.

The drivers of high fuel-efficient vehicles pay far less in gasoline taxes as compared to the gas guzzler while driving the same number of miles on the roads as the drivers of the high fuel-efficient vehicles buy far less gas. In addition, the hosts emphasized that the SC gasoline tax was already high enough and should not be increased to fix roads and bridge even as the situation continues to worsen. 

***

As an alternative to raising the gasoline tax above its current $0.28/gal, the hosts questioned whether or not SC could benefit from adding tolls to existing roads or even constructing new toll roads as we’ve have seen in other States. These toll roads would collect money from local drivers as well as drivers just passing through the State or visiting our State. As they were discussing the issue of toll roads, one host mentioned a toll road that was added not too long ago in the upstate that turned out to be a big failure. It seemed like for a minute that they were even discussing whether there was any possibility of adding tolls on major existing thoroughfares such as I-20, I-26 and I-95 but quickly realized that would not be an option.

While the hosts were bringing up a very important and serious issue in South Carolina- one which some have said has led to many deaths over the years in SC- they did not appear to be well versed in many of the related issues. While most of us would not want the gasoline tax raised to the level of California at $0.71/gal, having one of the Country’s lowest gasoline taxes has led to this funding dilemma that we now face. While some of the southern States such as Georgia, Arkansas, Alabama, and Kentucky have similar or slightly lower gasoline taxes than South Carolina, other nearby States including North Carolina, Virginia and Florida have a gasoline sales tax 30% higher than South Carolina. The SC tax is a good bit lower than most States so maybe raising the tax to be similar to our neighbor to the north should be considered. 

***

RELATED | S.C. TOWN UNSPOOLING AS ‘EMERGENCY’ MEETING TARGETS MAYOR

***

The hosts spent a good deal of time talking about the gasoline tax and how electric vehicles and high performance (MPG) vehicles were not paying their fair share to maintain safe roads and bridges in SC. However, they did not seem to consider that we are not the only State which has to deal with this issue and how other States have implemented measures to at least somewhat adjust for the varying amount of gasoline and therefore taxes paid by drivers of various fuel efficiency vehicles. What others have done to make the amounts paid by the drivers a little more equitable is to implement a vehicle tax- in addition to the gasoline tax- depending upon the gas consumption (MPG) of one’s vehicle. When I first read about this additional tax being placed on vehicles, I had thought that the more efficient one’s vehicle, the lower their tax would be in an effort to get people to purchase and drive more efficient vehicles. It is, however, exactly the opposite.

An electric vehicle pays no gasoline tax and therefore their added vehicle tax is the highest. As a vehicle is rated for worse and worse fuel efficiency, the tax continues to drop. If you drive a vehicle considered that “gas guzzler” you pay the least additional vehicle tax as the thought is that you are already paying the highest amount via the gasoline tax. Maybe this is an option for South Carolina drivers to consider.

A third approach to help reduce road repairs over a longer period of time for States that find themselves continually adding or widening roads to accommodate a growing population and the growing number of drivers on its roads or passing through its State might be to look at what some of the European Countries such as Norway and Sweden have done to address this issue. Ten or fifteen years ago, Norway looked at the continuing increase of vehicles on their roads. Their initial plan was to spend many billions of dollars on long term road construction- widening and adding roads, rebuilding bridges, etc. At some point the discussion shifted to other transportation options such as light rail systems, improving their bus transportation, and other options such as making roads much safer for electric and pedal bicycles in and around urban areas. The decision was ultimately made to spend the money on these alternation transportation measures in lieu of just spending more and more money on building and widening roads and bridges.

***

***

Though the initial costs of these alternative transportation measures were higher than to just keep on building roads and bridges, the long-term costs of repairs for roads and bridges were substantially reduced as there would be less of them to repair. While I do not pretend that the mindset of most Americans is where more and more people with bike to work, I do think that over time, more people might consider options such as taking a train or bus to work in lieu of driving as long as those options are convenient and safe.

In more and more cities, especially college towns, it is getting harder and harder to even find parking spaces and the cost of those continues to increase. And now with today’s technology, one could sit on a light rail system for 30, 40, or more minutes and respond to emails, send messages, read eBooks, etc. without adding to the congestion on roads which then contribute to quicker wear and tear necessitating repairs.

This may not be an option for every city in South Carolina but if you are looking 20 or 30 years ahead, maybe this makes sense in the areas anticipating higher growth rates in their communities. I can remember having this same discussion about 40 years ago. The response back then was that South Carolina would never have the traffic like you see in other States and would never have to widen roads and bridges as was being done in other more densely populated Sates. It is unfortunate that at that time, many did not foresee where we now are.

***

ABOUT THE AUTHOR…

Dan Reider was a consulting mechanical engineer for more than 30 years designing primarily educational and healthcare facilities. He is currently working as a Project Manager for the Construction and Planning Department at the University of South Carolina.

***

WANNA SOUND OFF?

Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our articles? Or an issue you’d like to address proactively? We have an open microphone policy! Submit your letter to the editor (or guest column) via email HERE. Got a tip for a story? CLICK HERE. Got a technical question or a glitch to report? CLICK HERE.