Less driving and better fuel economy means less wear and tear on the roads

But the wear from weather and time will be the same.

A toll is much more directly related to the number of miles driven (though in some cases the presence of a toll would push people to avoid paying the toll possibly by driving local roads that are typically more roundabout when possible).

Even if the number of miles driven had stayed constant between this year and last year, gas tax revenue would more than likely be down as the average gas mileage has more than likely gone up. Maintenance and construction costs should vary with miles driven, not a combination of miles driven and average vehicular gas mileage. Tolls do a much better job of collecting based solely on number of miles driven.

That being said I'm not a huge fan of tolls for the reasons stated above (collection fees, decreased gas mileage caused in the case of backups, etc.)

Someday we may be lucky to live in a society in which satelites monitor our vehicular usage (miles on city roads, state roads, federal roads) and then deduct automatically from our bank accounts the toll we owe to each unit of government.

Bwaa, ha, ha, haaaaaa, ... And what about occupancy? Do we get a discount for carrying more than one person? Do we pay a penalty for being obese (after all heavier cars cause more wear)? Do we tax illegals in Pesos? Is there a surcharge on people making over $100K a year? Is there a senior citizen's discount, and do children under 12 ride for free? And last but not least, do you write the skits on SNL?

In many cases, especially ours, this basically means that urban drivers (usually poorer) are subsidizing the exurban and suburban drivers, since urban areas are far more likely to maintain their own major arterial roads.

... is more equitable. Those who directly benefit from the public good pay the price.

Then I presume you would consider it more equitable to tax welfare recipients in order to pay them their benefits.

The problem is the fact that people are driving less. The proportional revenue loss would be virtually identical whether it be gas taxes or tolls.

Plus I don't see any logical connection between payment and usage. If that were the case, would we have to fund the Army by taxing hunting ammunition or the Navy by taxing fishing rods?

The solution is to elect intelligent, responsible representatives who wouldn't have to trick the public into thinking pay-as-you-go is fair. Besides money is fungible, so who knows for sure where the gas tax dollars actually are spent?

P.S. I dig your little avatar picture. Where can I find a bigger copy?

Thus a tax system that charges you a per-gallon tax. If Americans are driving fewer miles, highways should be eroding more slowly and construction should be able to slow to match this.

Ah yes, but with the apparently long-term (if not permanent) spike in gas prices, people are moving more to cars that get better mileage, thereby increasing the amount of wear & tear per gallon used, further skewing that formula. Clearly, we all need to go back to driving SUVs and big-ass caddys. For the good of the country.

In addition to the obvious crisis we are facing in banking, energy, employment, education, housing, manufacturing, and immigration, many other things will not quite work right.

What I find silly is to propose tolls as a solution to gas taxes. It is not a solution. It's just an alternate way of doing the same thing.

There is another difference. Tolls have a much greater expense to collect than taxing at the pump when you consider costs for tollbooths, equipment, & labor plus the loss of fuel economy & time due to slowdowns & congestion at those booths. Many toll-roads & -bridges have had the tolls removed before they were paid for due to unacceptable congestion.

I am not against tolls in general since, without them, many of our much needed highways & bridges could not have been built w/o them. I'm just pointing out that tolls are not a good overall option, as some toll boosters have suggested.

What I find silly is to propose tolls as a solution to gas taxes. It is not a solution. It's just an alternate way of doing the same thing.

Ok, there is a difference though. Gas taxes don't directly charge people for their road usage whereas tolls do--thus the latter is more equitable. Those who directly benefit from the public good pay the price.

To propose replacing gasoline taxes with tolls as a solution is just plain idiotic. It's the same as saying there's a difference between giving the government money with your left hand as opposed to giving it with your right hand. There is no difference (unless of course you have a vested financial interest in tollbooth operation).

How do you propose paying for road expansion and upkeep then, Mr. Wisenheimer?

To propose replacing gasoline taxes with tolls as a solution is just plain idiotic. It's the same as saying there's a difference between giving the government money with your left hand as opposed to giving it with your right hand. There is no difference (unless of course you have a vested financial interest in tollbooth operation).