If you’re among those Rhode Islanders unaffected by the possibility of tolls on the state’s bridges, take a moment to consider this:

With pressure mounting to avert a transportation funding crisis this summer, the Obama administration Tuesday opened the door for states to collect tolls on interstate highways to raise revenue for roadway repairs.

The proposal, contained in a four-year, $302 billion White House transportation bill, would reverse a long-standing federal prohibition on most interstate tolling.

How about an EZ-Pass station across route 95 just before every exit, like the Garden State Parkway in New Jersey used to be?  That would generate some revenue!

As with the Sakonnet River Bridge, I’ll reiterate that I support, as a general rule, a transition to user fees, rather than broad taxes, in most circumstances.  Of course, it would be legitimate for Rhode Islanders to conclude that the ease of moving around the state is a key advantage the Ocean State has and should not be disrupted with tolls.

If, however, we move toward tolls rather than taxes, it ought to be just that: rather than.  As the Washington Post article linked above indicates — surprise! — that isn’t what’s being contemplated.  Tolls would represent a search for new money, not a replacement as other taxes, like the gas tax, are phased out.  In Rhode Island, specifically, the approach is always to collect fees in addition to taxes.

As it tends to do, government puts things backwards, paying for things first that people might not willingly fund and last that they consider critical.  Priorities should work the other way, and every dollar in projected toll revenue should be offset with decreases everywhere.

Rhode Island is rapidly becoming an economy in support of a government.  Again, that’s reversed from what it ought to be.