Traffic problems first reared their ugly head in the year 1300. The first Papal Jubilee attracted such unexpectedly large crowds to Rome that Pope Boniface, horrified to see the city brought to a standstill, ordered up what are thought to be the first traffic rules in history.

No doubt the rules made some folks unhappy. History does not record which groups lobbied Pope Boniface, but it’s lucky for the early Romans that the automobile and petroleum industry weren’t around. Unluckily for the people of the Bay Area, the automobile and petroleum industry were very much around in the 1930’s and eager to see the comprehensive regional Bay Area ferry and rail network that existed then dismantled as an impediment to car sales. Complaisant policymakers were only too happy to throw up bridges, tear apart rail lines and even outlaw ferries.

The traffic crisis that now threatens the region with ruination is the direct result of such kowtowing to car and oil interests, which continues to this day. Gas-guzzling sports utility vehicles are exempted from air quality standards by the trick of classifying them as "trucks" (one wonders if SUVs would have the same show-off appeal if as a condition of sale owners were required to stencil something like "Bill’s Masonry" on the door). Moreover, gas taxes are way too low given the obvious need to discourage automobile use, egregiously so given that regressive sales taxes are used instead to pay for public transportation. And bridge tolls, at just $2 ($3 for the Golden Gate Bridge) are also inexcusably low and should be raised immediately. The case for doing so – and the many happy results we can expect – is eloquently laid out in this issue’s cover story.

The sensibility of raising bridge tolls is self-evident; far more people want to use the bridges than can be accommodated. Access must be rationed and, in painful fact, already is to those emotionally capable of enduring maddening waits. It would be far wiser to increase bridge tolls to at least $5, thereby vastly improving access for those who really need it while generating ample funds for desperately need public transportation improvements.

An even better idea would be what is called congestion pricing, whereby the bridge toll would vary according to demand or time of day. For example, it might be free to cross the bridge at midnight and cost $20 to cross at rush hour. Electronic collection systems such as FasTrak make such a scheme eminently doable. Why not allow market forces to allocate access to the bridges? Is there a better way – indeed, any other way — to fairly do so? Yet when the federal government offered funds to study such a plan monomaniacal anti-tax simpletons forced a measure through the legislature requiring that the idea not even be considered. Such is the dysfunctional state of our public policy discourse.

Environmentalists and public transportation advocates should band together in a call for immediately raising bridge tolls. Environmentalists want to curb emissions from automobile use and are also determined that new ferries be environmentally friendly. Public transportation advocates want funding for improved bus, bike and rail systems. Everyone wants a restored comprehensive regional ferry system that is knitted seamlessly into the regional transportation network. All these important and worthwhile goals can be realized by the prudent step of increasing bridge tolls.

Raising bridge tolls will certainly be controversial. For some people, including many low-income commuters, driving across the bridge is an only option because of the shortsighted public transportation policies of the past. Those with no existing alternative to bridge commuting deserve special consideration until their public transportation needs are met. Our elected officials are aware of the need for action; Senator Don Perata, in this issue of Bay Crossings, courageously acknowledges the need to study the idea. He needs and deserves our strong support and encouragement.