Brent P usage
I'm not quite sure where Jim gets the idea that bicyclists aren't already paying a disproportionate share of the costs of roadway building and maintenance. For everything except interstates (upon most of which bicycles are not allowed), fuel taxes and registration fees come nowhere near covering the costs. In WA, if you buy anything or pay rent-mortgage, you are paying for the roads. In fact, those funding sources pay more than fuel taxes provide. Even if fuel taxes went for ONLY paying for roads (construction and maintenance), fuel taxes and registration fees wouldn't cover the costs.
I lived in Portland, OR for a brief time, and used a bicycle to get around (along with public transport.) Oh, I had a car, but taking it into the downtown area was a pain. No parking, expensive parking, crappy traffic all made driving a huge pain. I paid full price for an all-zone TriMet pbutt, took my beater bike everywhere, and was much happier.
Funny thing was this - my car got pretty good mileage, and registration is cheap in Oregon. So, I actually paid more to ride my bike and take public transit than I would have if I just had driven my car and tried to park on the street. (Parking would have tipped the payment balance the other way.) What's more, I always got to my destination on time, and never felt like I lost anything by riding my bike and-or taking transit. And I was always home sooner at night than when I drove. That's all just interesting anecdote.
The point is: sales taxes and property taxes are where the majority of funds for roadbuilding-maintenance come from round these parts. If I didn't own a car, I'd already be paying for the roads. And since I'm paying for them, I'm going to use them legally. If Jim or Scott doesn't like that, tough breastty. Go ahead and just try and stop me.
E.P.
