Abstract
Transportation infrastructure such as highways and bridges requires upgrades and maintenance. In many U.S. regions, these requirements have surpassed current funding, so new solutions are needed. One obvious though imperfect source is gasoline taxes, but raising these is politically risky, regardless of need. To illuminate this conflict, we analyze data from four random-sample telephone surveys (2016–2018, n = 2,035) that asked residents in the U.S. state of New Hampshire about their perceptions of highway and bridge conditions, and support for gas tax increases. About one third of the respondents counterfactually reported that highway and bridge conditions had improved compared with 10 or 20 years ago. At the county level, subjective perceptions correlate well with actual pavement and bridge conditions. Majorities of respondents also said they would support tax increases of 5 of 10 cents, although support falls off at higher amounts. Support for a tax increase varies not only with the proposed amount, but also with individual characteristics—especially political identity. In a structural equation model, infrastructure perceptions serve as an intervening variable between ideology and tax support: if infrastructure is falsely seen as improving, that supports an ideologically favored rejection of taxes. Partisan differences in perceptions of physical conditions, noted previously in other domains such as climate change, pose an unexpected challenge in building public support for transportation infrastructure.
Highlights
In April 2017, the California legislature and governor approved a bill that increased the state gasoline tax by 12 cents per gallon, and raised the diesel fuel tax by an additional 20 cents per gallon, while introducing new vehicle fees as well
We focus on the counterfactual perception that state transportation infrastructure has improved. (Focusing alternatively on the more accurate perception that conditions have stayed the same or worsened yields mirrorimage but substantively similar results.) We start by asking who thinks that infrastructure has improved
Our findings suggest that infrastructure perceptions stand in relation to opinions about taxes much as weather perceptions stand in relation to opinions about climate change
Summary
In April 2017, the California legislature and governor approved a bill that increased the state gasoline tax by 12 cents per gallon, and raised the diesel fuel tax by an additional 20 cents per gallon, while introducing new vehicle fees as well. Governor Jerry Brown and others across the state argued in support of the tax, which would provide badly needed funds to make travel and commuting easier and safer throughout the state. Brown and his allies sought to frame the issue in terms of infrastructure and deteriorating roads, but as a way to help the economy (Dawid, 2018; McGreevy, 2018). Twenty-one percent are considered to be in poor condition, and funding has been in decline since 2003 To address these deficiencies, an estimated US$120 billion investment over the 15 years is required (American Society of Civil Engineers [ASCE], 2013)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
