Viva La Cola!

Founded in January 2009, PubliCola is a blog about Seattle written by journalists who are dedicated to non-partisan, original daily reporting that prioritizes a balanced approach to news. Started by longtime local editor and award-winning reporter Josh Feit, PubliCola is the first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol.

PubliCola was off and running. In June 2009, PubliCola hired another award-winning journalist, super-sourced Seattle city hall reporter Erica C. Barnett.

People were afraid that blogging would change journalism. Instead, we believe journalism can change blogging. Twenty-first century journalism may look and feel different, and yes Erica isn't afraid to get cranky, but we're committed to making sure online news still delivers independent, reliable, even-keeled coverage. And most of all, we're committed to making sure the coverage sparks honest civic debate.

Bringing you cola for the people, PubliCola is named after Publius Valerius PubliCola, the alias for the authors of the Federalist Papers—the original bloggers.

The first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol and Seattle city hall, PubliCola has been called a “must-read” by the Seattle Post Intelligencer and a hot “New Media Mover and Shaker” by Seattle Magazine—which also cited our own Erica C. Barnett as the city's No. 1 news nerd.

Hybrids Aren’t the Reason Gas Taxes Are Declining

KOMO News reports this week that the state’s ability to replace and fix roads and bridges is slipping because gas tax revenues are declining. That, as we’ve reported in the past, is true: Revenues from gas taxes are declining, and city and state transportation budgets are suffering as a result.

But KOMO’s dead wrong about the reason for the decline. And the way that they’re wrong says a lot about why it’s hard to change policies around transportation—in particular, state and city leaders’ inability to adapt to a world where more and more people are choosing alternatives to single-occupancy vehicles.

Let’s start with the headline: “With rise of eco-friendly cars, Wash. sees slump in gas tax revenue.” That’s accurate, in the same sense that with the legalization of abortion, the national crime rate declined. Both things occurred at the same time, but there’s little evidence that one caused the other—much less that, as KOMO’s story concludes, “The state’s gas tax take is dropping” because Washington is “really ahead when it comes to hybrids” and electric cars.

In reality, according to Clark Williams-Derry of the Sightline Institute, the number of electric cars sold in Washington State so far has been negligible; the number of hybrids, though higher, has not been enough to explain even a fraction of the decline in gas tax revenues. Although you “might see a tiny signal [from more hybrid purchases] that rises above the noise,” Williams-Derry says, any decline in gas consumption is probably because people are driving/buying fewer trucks and more cars, not that a few car drivers are choosing hybrids.”

There’s also a question of whether gas tax revenues are actually falling, or merely failing to meet earlier projections that assumed gas consumption—and driving—would continue to increase indefinitely.

The more likely culprit? As gas prices increase and more options to driving alone become available, people drive less and use less gasoline overall. In fact, in the Northwest as a whole, gas consumption plateaued way back in 1999, indicating that people’s appetite for driving has flatlined.

The solution, then, has to be revenue—either from a new, mileage-based tax system or from higher gas taxes. Interestingly, although the state transportation commission has said higher gas taxes are off the table, a new study concludes that the average state gas tax has actually declined 20 percent in real dollars since the last time it was raised, even as the cost of roads and bridges the gas tax pays for has increased. That suggests we could afford to raise the gas tax—or, conversely, that we can’t afford not to.


  • Fgruben

    Gas consumption is affected by the amount of people out of work. And with more unemployed, it must be time to raise taxes again.

  • Anonymous

    Gas tax revenues are not declining, yet we keep hearing this lie from those that want more and more money to spend.

    What’s happening is that they projected revenues to be higher than they are coming in at.  Sound familiar?  It should be as it’s the same with the general fund budget.  In both cases, revenues are increasing, just not at the rate they want to spend them.

    Take a look on page 8 of this WSDOT presentation.  http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/D4126734-0748-4AF7-853A-2ADDF700223C/0/MovingWAtoACEC6111_FINAL.pdf

  • Monster

    so gas taxes are failing becuase of alternative methods? sounds like it time to tax the alternative methods. Roads for everyone!

  • Kevin

    Why not?  Those increased taxes won’t negatively affect the unemployed anyway according to your snarky logic.  Those with jobs already saw a 20% decline in gas tax and that didn’t do anything to help the unemployment situation.

  • Anonymous

    Eco-friendly does not just mean hybrids or electrics. Fuel economy has been going up so even if the amount of driving remained exactly the same or went up a bit it would still translate in to less gas tax revenue. 

    http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/html/table_04_23.html

    But I doubt there is one ‘culprit’. More like a combination of increased alternatives, more efficient vehicles, people living closer to where they work, less people working or going out to spend, etc.   

  • Anonymous

    “The solution, then, has to be revenue.”

    No.  The solution is to stop lying and live within your means.

  • Guest

    I own a car but drive less than 5k miles a year. When I can my motorcycle/bicycle gets me places when I don’t need to dress well or haul things. Can’t imagine driving everywhere any more. 

  • For Real

    On a local level it has declined in real dollars; not just projected planning dollars:

    King County (Actual) Gas Tax Receipts:
    2007  – $15.59 M
    2008  – $14.73 M
    2009  – $14.14 M
    2010  – $13.80 M

  • Kidforlife73

    Erica, are we to conclude that you would like the gas tax to raise so that we could fix roads and bridges as you seem to indicate when you say:

    “…a new study concludes that the average state gas tax has actually declined
    20 percent in real dollars since the last time it was raised, even as
    the cost of roads and bridges the gas tax pays for has increased. That
    suggests we could afford to raise the gas tax—or, conversely, that we
    can’t afford not to.”

    I’m sure you wouldn’t be suggesting this to derive more funds for your toy trains that continue to not meet the even annually watered down ridership projections. 

  • http://yrihf.com John Bailo

    Of course if people drive less, they’re using infrastructure like roads and bridges less.

  • Fgruben

    Well…..  I had no logic, snarky or otherwise. Sadly, gas taxes in Washington (55.9 cents per gallon combining state and federal taxes), have not went down. Ever. Only up, making Washington the 8th from the top of most taxed gasoline.  I agree that there is probably no correlation between gas taxes and unemployment, except the more unemployed, the less gas tax gets paid, if less gas is bought.

  • BillGates

    I like the wrong projection angle idea…  Our state really suffers from some less than competent finical oversight in the planning and protection areas it seems…  And although I understand it would be political suicide I think we could all agree we would better serve us if the projections revenue and others were far more conservative.

  • Anonymous

    You got me there.  Seattle has been at war with the automobile and few can still afford to drive them to work.  The rest of the state still likes to drive and can afford it.

  • Grover

    how about a link to the document you got those figures from

  • Grover

    People are using less gasoline because new cars sold in 2010 averaged 33.7 mpg compared to 24.3 mpg in 1980.  Do you feel like the bridges and roads around here are significanly less congested than they were 10 or 20 years ago?

  • Grover

    Cars and light trucks are getting significantly more fuel-efficient, and that trend will continue and accelerate.  The average mpg of new cars sold in the U.S. was 24.3 in 1980, and 33.7 in 2010.  The government has mandated that it will rise to around 55 mpg in the next 15 or 20 years.  That has reduced, and  will continue to significantly reduce the amount of gasoline per passenger mile used by motorists in the U.S.

    New cars are far more energy efficient than transit in our area.  However, Metro and Sound Transit pay NO GAS TAX and NO DIESEL TAX.  Since we have had huge tax increases in the past several years going to Metro and ST to operate more buses, I would imagine that Metro and ST are buying a lot more diesel now than 10 years ago.  So, that is a lot more diesel being burned WITH NO TAX COLLECTED  ON THAT DIESEL.

    Also, a lot more people are driving motorcycles and motor bikes, which get very high mpg.

    So, one way to increase gas tax reveneues is to make transit agencies pay the same tax on the fuel they burn as motorists and truckers pay.  Buses use — and wear out — the same roads and bridges that cars and trucks use.  Why aren’t transit riders helping pay for the roads and bridges they use?  They don’t even pay tolls when they use a toll bridge or highway.

  • Lew

    Gas is 20 cents cheaper in Lynnwood area then Seattle proper, and that is where I fill up.

  • Not An Economist

    Like others have said in the comments:  If there’s less gas taxes being collected because of lower volume at the pump, then it’s likely for a few reasons.  1.)  High unemployment means less commuting to work, errands, and leisure trips. (If people do take as many trips, they seem to be going to places closer to them); 2.)  Higher emphasis and marketing on using the transit system as well as the light rail being operational (e.g. “Walk, Bike, Ride”-type campaigns); 3.)  Permanently high gas prices due to increased global demand in developing nations:  more than 3 bucks per gallon means a lot of people that can’t afford trade up quickly; 4.)  People choosing more energy-efficient vehicles due to technology options (i.e. hybrid, electric, Mazda’s SkyActiv Engine in the Mazda3, etc.) and overall lower vehicle weight in entry-level cars like the Honda Fit, Mazda2, Ford Fiesta, Nissan Versa, etc. 

    Sure, the hybrid cars must take some sort of fractional amount from gas tax revenue due to less fill-ups, but it’s just a part of the overall picture.  Hybrids and electrics probably tend to get more attention because they’re popular in public perception.  Increased gas demand in India and China are not very popular to talk about unless you’re an economist or commodity trader, I guess…

  • Richard Stans

    Transit doesn’t pay gas taxes because that would be bad policy.  Metro and ST combined will carry over 200 million riders this year.  If those people were in cars they would do far more damage and cause far more congestion than the buses people ride on every day.

  • fount

    sounds like the private sector has been at war with the Seattle automobile then.

  • Kidforlife73

    look man, if you are new to this site , you can be excused for not knowing that the author of the article routinely lies…  at least as much as a National Enquirer Editor. For example the headline says gas tax revenues are declining. Not true, just not rising as fast as projected. Gas tax collections continue to rise.

    The purpose of the article is to persuade folks that gas taxes need to go up…later they will say we need to spend auto derived revenues for transit and fuck roads and bridges

  • Grover

    Wrong.  buses do far more damage per passenger mile than cars. 

    If those people were driving, at least they would be paying for the roads they are using, instead of getting a free ride..

  • Grover

    The internet is also playing a part in keeping the miles driven from rising faster.

    Most people no longer drive to the bank, video store, music store, book store, etc.  They get that stuff from home over the internet.  Fewer miles driven.

  • jimu

    I don’t think one person commented on the link Erica posted.

    Appendix A (page 15 on the pdf) shows that construction costs have actually GONE DOWN compared to the year 2000, giving us $153.8 million more to spend annually.

  • HeresSomeTrollFoodNomNomNom

    Hahaha, and you still read Publicola.  What’s that say for how smart you are? 

  • Perfect Voter

    40+ years ago, when we were building our way out of congestion with hundreds of miles of new urban and suburban freeways, gas tax was 7.5 cents per gallon, which generated about 0.5 cents per vehicle mile traveled, given the fuel inefficiencies of the time.

    Advancing those figures to today, by applying inflation and better mpg, the gas tax now generates about half as much revenue per vehicle mile traveled.

    And back in the day, the gas tax was a pay-as-you-go funding source. Now the state has to sell bonds backed by the gas tax in order to build much of anything, so we end up paying twice due to all the interest paid to bondholders.

    And some people still wonder why our gas tax won’t buy more than it does?

  • Jay

    Because no one actually uses the roads that the government builds and maintains, right? They’re simply doing it because they’re greedy pigs. 

  • Elmo

    Yes. VMT has declined since 2000.

  • Kidforlife73

    Smart enough to know you obviously do too.

  • Gohuskies08

    There’s a difference between “real” and “nominal” taxes.  In real terms, gas taxes have declined.

  • Not An Economist

    Meh, everyone’s biased to varying degrees.  I just thought this was worthy of debate because blaming one factor with something this complex is clearly wrong. 

    Hell, I forgot about the “green factor” w/ people being more conscious of their energy consumption and combining multiple trips into one, carpooling, etc….and I imagine there’s still a few people out there that practice “hypermiling” techniques to reduce fuel consumption in the vehicles they do own…and then there’s whole internet thing Grover mentioned below.

  • Jakers

    Eco-friendly isn’t exclusive to EV and PHEV and hybrids…smaller, high MPG cars (especially if they are used as opposed to buying new) could be included in this category, which have increased in sales as SUV have fallen due to the bad economy (people can’t afford larger cars) and higher gas prices (which is exasperated by the tough economy).

  • http://profiles.google.com/jlog74 Jace Loggins

    Naw, just switch to Light Rail. No road damage there.

    Oh wait – I see where you’re going Grover. If all those people on transit (buses) were driving instead, they most likely would be sitting in traffic. And then people like you would be all pissed about all the cars on the road, slowing you down.

    Then you’d demand more roads, which would then just make even more traffic. Plus we’d need to maintain even more roads, requiring even more tax funds.

    My god. We’re just all doomed – there’s no way to win these arguments.