Mike Critelli

Mike Critelli,
Executive
Chairman,
Pitney Bowes

About Mike Critelli

Why I Blog

Recent Posts

Topics

Search

Archives


TRANSPORTATION FINANCE

As a person who has been involved in providing advocacy and advisory services as a volunteer for over two decades, I find that public and political decision making relative to transportation shows our elected officials and the public in their least flattering light.

Clearly, we have a crisis in terms of traffic congestion, overburdened existing transportation infrastructure, too many bridges that are structurally deficient and functionally obsolete, and too many preventable safety-related problems.  In the July 28, 2008, USA Today, a federal transportation official was quoted as saying that we need an additional $225 billion in transportation spending to address this crisis.  Moreover, in the July 29 New York Times, an articled reported that the Federal Highway Trust Fund, the main source of federal dollars for road and bridge projects is in such dire financial straits that money may need to be borrowed from a federal mass transit fund.

Decades ago, our country made the decision to finance transportation construction, maintenance, and repair, and public transportation asset acquisition primarily through taxes and fees levied on purchases of gasoline and other fossil fuels.  Today, that decision is painful and being stress-tested to the limit because of the $4 a gallon price for gasoline.

Elected officials are reacting to this crisis by proposing temporary gasoline tax holidays, rollbacks of gasoline tax increases, and even reductions of current gasoline tax levels.  At the same time, they and the public are resistant to implementing or increasing tolls or congestion pricing that could potentially provide a supplemental source of financing.  There is also a lot of resistance to privatizing transportation assets in many states and regions, although some states, such as Indiana and Illinois, have jointly outsourced the tollway that operates at the border of both states.

This collective denial and refusal to face up to this crisis has serious consequences, particularly in an environment in which delay is causing significant increases in the price tags of any transportation project governments may wish to undertake.  The same forces that are causing a rapid increase in gasoline prices are operating to increase the prices of the basis commodities used in construction: steel, plastics, nickel, zinc, copper, aluminum, and cement.  As the clock ticks, inflation ravages the purchasing power of tax dollars at a level unseen since the 1970’s.  Unlike the 1970’s, when we basically had a self-inflicted set of problems that drove inflation, this inflationary spiral is driven by global forces that are largely outside our control, such as demand in China, India, and the Middle East for the same construction materials.

The only thing that appears to motivate elected officials who do not want to collect gasoline taxes, do not want to institute or raise tolls, and do not want to privatize assets is that they are hoping against all odds that this crisis will go away on its own.  Unfortunately, it won’t.  This crisis is not like fine wine.  It will not get better with age.  

We need elected officials who have the moral courage to describe in specific detail what it will take for our transportation crisis to be addressed, and to propose unpopular, but necessary, steps to deal with it.

I understand that there is a lack of trust in many departments of transportation in terms of their cost estimates and their competence in carrying out big projects.  But even if they had exaggerated the problem by doubling cost estimates, and even if they were exceptionally competent, we would still have a major crisis.

I believe there are some creative ideas for reducing the scope of the problem.  Private sector money could be used for assets such as bicycle paths, rail station parking areas, or even airport improvements.  Traffic information systems could be provided far more cost-effectively by the private sector than by the cumbersome processes used in government procurement, and they would be far more responsive to the needs of both individual and business travelers, as well as logistics and delivery firms that depend on correct, real-time information.  I also believe that demand reduction is a viable strategy today, a far less expensive and faster one than adding capacity.

But none of these ideas will see the light of day until elected and appointed government officials face honestly up to the problem, and have an intelligent dialogue with the public.  While there will also be those members of the public who do not want to face reality, the majority of Americans will support prudent investments in our critical infrastructure.

Guidelines for Comments

Welcome to this Pitney Bowes-hosted blog (the "Blog"). By using this Blog, you agree that you are solely responsible for any comment you post to the Blog and you agree to abide and be bound by the pb.com Terms of Use

Please stay on topic. We may redirect certain submissions if they are better handled through another channel such as customer service. With regard to the content of any submissions you make through this Blog, you agree to remain solely responsible and agree to not submit materials that are unlawful, defamatory, abusive or obscene. You also agree that you will not submit anything to this Blog that violates any right of a third party, including copyright, trademark, privacy or other personal or proprietary rights.

Pitney Bowes reserves the right to terminate your ability to use and/or submit posts to this Blog. Pitney Bowes may not review all postings and is not responsible for anything posted on this Blog. Pitney Bowes nevertheless retains the right to not post, edit a posting and to remove any postings in its sole and absolute discretion.

Leave a Comment




Permanent Link

Subscribe to my feed

Google Reader or Homepage
Google Reader or Homepage
Add to My Yahoo!
Subscribe with Bloglines
Subscribe in NewsGator Online

To receive new posts via email enter your email address.

 

Disclaimer

This is Mike Critelli's blog. The views and statements expressed herein are those of Mike Critelli and, in the case of a comment, those of the person who submits such comment, and not necessarily those of Pitney Bowes Inc.

The press releases, financial reports, filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, presentations, interviews, blog posts and other information provided on the Pitney Bowes website may contain "forward-looking statements" as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. These statements are based on the currently available information as of the date of such statements and are subject to risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially. Pitney Bowes specifically disclaims any obligation to update the information in such press releases, financial reports and or filings, which speak only as of their respective dates, except as required under the federal securities laws. Please see the Forward-Looking Statements Disclaimer in the pb.com TERMS OF USE section of this website.