> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Why tolls are a bad idea for our community



Relax. Don’t be afraid of tolls. They will be a good thing for our community. Such is the tone of the recent editorial by Michael Dalby of One Southern Indiana published Aug. 22. Tolls are actually innovative, progressive and the way cities will build in the future. Really?

Contrary to all the hype from the Bridge Coalition and Michael Dalby, tolls are not the panacea they claim. Two recent toll roads went bankrupt: The southern connector in South Carolina and the San Diego tollway. Both were planned with unrealistic traffic and rosy financial scenarios. And, the administrative costs of the tolling bureaucracy consumes a good percentage of the amount collected, thereby reducing the value of tolls.

Tolls are not popular with the public. Drivers seek alternate routes to avoid tolls, which is why the Bridges Authority is requesting the Federal Highway Administration for a waiver to toll existing bridges so as to fully control any escape from paying a toll. No other American metro region will be split in two by such a process. This will culturally divide our metro population.

Tolls also discourage economic growth. Businesses in Southern Indiana will likely suffer most since Kentuckians will not pay the additional toll fee combined with Indiana’s already higher sales tax. Louisville will also be affected by companies, especially logistics-based ones, who wish not to locate in a toll-based community.

Tolls are regressive since the fee doesn’t vary according to income and affects more negatively the blue collar and lower income levels. In fact, residents of the inner Louisville neighborhoods such as west Louisville, Portland and Butchertown — who shop and dine in Southern Indiana — will be adversely affected more than the upper-income. With those Southern Indiana businesses suffering from loss of customers due to the tolls, many may go out of business. There is a great social inequity in this toll proposal.

Per a 2006 review in the Denver Post, 75 percent of toll road financing and traffic projections are inaccurate. Of the three main toll consultants studied — including Wilbur Smith, who is the Bridge Authority consultant — the Post said they were wrong on 19 of 22 toll road projections.

The Indiana Northern toll road has almost doubled tolls for cars and tripled for trucks in less than four years. So, wrong projections wind up as bailouts by the local commuters who have to pay higher rates for such bad estimates. One civic official in the Post report suggests that toll projections should be lessened by 25 percent for a more realistic forecast.

If we are opposed to tolls, then how best should more cross river connections be implemented? Scale the design back to a size where it can be paid for within Kentucky and Indiana’s economic budgets.

Let’s not restrict our communities’ growth and divide it by using inefficient, unpopular and outdated tolls.

— Shawn Reilly, Louisville, financial adviser and co-founder of the group “Say No to Tolls” which is opposed to tolls on Louisville’s existing roads and bridges.



Social Security needs to be protected



I take issue with John Krueger’s letter titled “The problems with Social Security” that was published Aug. 31 in The Evening News.

He’s right when he says Social Security needs to be protected. But he’s wrong when he says that Baron Hill “votes for and spends our Social Security funds.” Baron has never voted to raid the Social Security Trust fund or for any bill that would raid Social Security to balance the federal budget or pay for other programs. Anyone can check the official Congressional Record to see Hill’s votes on this and other issues.

Unfortunately, candidates like Todd Young refuse to tell voters where they truly stand on issues, and only seek to instill fear into the minds of voters by calling Social Security a “welfare program” and a “Ponzi scheme.”

I worked and paid into Social Security for 40 years. I earned the benefits I now receive, and it’s neither welfare nor charity nor a “pyramid scheme.” Contrary to what Mr. Krueger writes, we don’t need fear — we need solutions. And, I’m placing my trust in Baron Hill to get the job done.

He has a proven record of fiscal responsibility, and has authored the bill for pay-as-you-go budgeting in Congress; a concrete solution to getting us back on track.

— John D. Eckert, Jeffersonville