The US Department of Transportation is quite concerned that the Highway Trust Fund will be depleted due to a drop in income from the federal highway tax. The fixed highway tax is based on the number of gallons sold, and with the drop in driving due to high energy prices, less revenue is come in. Several schemes have been proposed to make up for lost revenue, but I think the best option is the one used during the last funding crunch in the 1970s—a moratorium on new highway construction.

Specifically I would suggest:

• A moratorium on all new interstate highway construction or expansion.
• Cancellation of all ongoing highway projects where it can safely be done.
• Cancellation of replacements and upgrades of functionally obsolete bridges and highway infrastructure, instead focusing on structurally deficient structures that pose a safety hazard.
• Replacing plans for mixed interstate highways allowing cars and trucks, and replacing them with narrower car-only highways with 8-feet lanes and no break down lanes (ala Taconic Parkway).
• Demolishing urban interstates needing costly repairs, and replacing with a traditional grid structure, boulevards, or limited access with roundabouts. Examples include downtown San Fransico.
• Designing new rural highways with 15 MPH design speed entrance ramps, 60 MPH design speed (50 MPH drive speed), and limited access with low-traffic high visibility grade crossing (ala Taconic Parkway).
• Abandoning dual carriageway highway systems like I-81 or I-87 in rural areas, where the traffic level only really justifies a 2-lane “Super 2” highway with limited access/by-passes of urbanized areas. Examples of this include US Route 7/Bennington Bypass in Vermont and Route 9 in New Hampshire.

Nobody knows high the drop in traffic will be in the future, but “downgrading” our highway system is something we must realistically think about in the future. If traffic levels remain about the current level, the likely result is more fatalities per mile and traffic jams. However, if we adjust properly with the drop of traffic from high fuel prices, we will save a lot of money, and restore land from more dignified uses then massive “walls” just moving cars quickly.

The drop of fuel taxes is a signal from market saying “we want less highways”. We should respond. Likewise, if ridership and revenue continues to increase on mass transit, we should be increasing subsidies at a proportional amount, until transit once against becomes able to function without government subsidy.