Congestion Pricing and Infrastructure Financing: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Water Resources, Transportation, and Infrastructure of the Committee on Environment and Public Works, United States Senate, One Hundred Second Congress, First Session, March 21, 1991
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Environment and Public Works. Subcommittee on Water Resources, Transportation, and Infrastructure
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1991 - Congestion pricing - 112 pages
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Other editions - View all
additional airports annual approach areas Association automobile benefits billion bonds Bridge build capacity capital cars cause Chairman charges cities Committee commuters congestion pricing construction continue Corporation cost developed dollars Economic effect efficient employers ERISA estimate example exempt facilities federal fees financing flow free parking funds going greater hear highway implementation important improve income increase industry infrastructure initial interest investment issues legislation less license lower Morrison nation's needs offer operating optimal pavement peak pension funds percent places planning pricing and investment problem productivity projects proposal raise reduce requirements result road pricing Ruth safety savings securities Senator Moynihan Small space tax-exempt Thank tion toll traffic transit transportation trip trucks urban vehicle Washington Winston York
Page 97 - primary dealers in government securities as recognized by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and all major dealers in mortgage-backed securities, federal agency securities and money market instruments. I am pleased to be here this morning to testify on the
Page 69 - 52-60. Transportation Research Board, National Cooperative Highway Research Program. "Relationships Between Vehicle Configurations and Highway Design," National Research Council, Washington, DC, November 1986. United States Department of Transportation, Moving America: New Directions. New Opportunities. Washington, DC, February 1990. Viton, Philip A., "Pareto-Optimal Urban Transportation Equilibria," Research in Transportation Economics, 1983,
Page 30 - the primary dealers in Government securities as recognized by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and all major dealers
Page 69 - Microeconomics, 1989b. 61-112. Morrison, Steven A., and Clifford Winston, Clifford Winston 127 "The Dynamics of Airline Pricing and Competition," American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings, May 1990, 80, 389-393.
Page 59 - Railroads gain because truck charges tend to rise on intercity traffic shipped long distances in large quantities: hence their business grows despite a small overall decrease in truck charges.
Page 57 - (1962) were the first to determine optimal pricing and investment policies in a rigorous long-run framework.'Although recent work has extended their model to account for demand uncertainty, lumpy investment and so on, their basic insights remain intact. The efficient marginal cost pricing rule recognizes that when infrastructure users make travel decisions,
Page 68 - 126 Journal of Economic Perspectives pricing. Indeed, efficient pricing is a prerequisite to making efficient infrastructure investments. 14 Leadership at the federal level would help shape an efficient infrastructure policy. One useful step would be for the federal government to require that requests for federal grants for highway and airport
Page 62 - then annual net benefits would be even higher and the initial redistribution from road users to the road authorities would probably be less. Highway Finance and Additional Benefits Although efficient road pricing and investment would generate substantial benefits, one must estimate the degree of scale economies in highway production to
Page 53 - Johnson MB (1964) On the economics of road congestion. Econometrica 32, 137-150. Jordan WJ (1983a) Heterogeneous users and the peak-load pricing model. QJ Econ, 93, 127-138. Jordan
Page 65 - and also would pay lower fares because the expansion in runway capacity called for under optimal investment combined with congestion pricing would reduce congestion to such an extent that, on average, landing fees would fall." The annualized cost of the additional runway investment is only about