What Would Voluntary Road Funding Look Like?

Voluntary Road Funding

                It has become a cliché of the Statist vs Libertarian argument to ask “But who would build the roads?”  One side argues that if you didn’t force people to pay for the roads through mandatory taxation, then no roads would exist.  But the other side argues that roads existed prior to mandatory taxation and that businesses and individuals would voluntarily fund the roads because they are useful.  Then the argument devolves into some form of debate over how everything becomes some version of a toll road and that’s just not fair to poor people, how does such a system prevent freeloading non-payers from “stealing” the roads others have funded, and many more similar examples.  As a Libertarian, I concede that the argument for voluntarily funding the roads desperately needs to be fleshed out.  It needs to be presented in a way that makes sense to the general public as they understand the world right now.  Arguing for a theoretical model, even if it’s based on a solid philosophy, is almost impossible when the audience cannot envision that theoretical model or fully understand the philosophy behind it.  Which is why I’m writing this blog.  I would like to present a realistic, conceivable way to voluntarily fund roads that everyone can understand and that also adheres the Libertarian philosophies of Volunteerism and the Non-Aggression Principle. 

                The crux of the disagreement between statists and volunteerists, aside from the fundamental question regarding the proper role of government force, is the question of: How do individuals and businesses pool their resources to perform the task of building and maintaining roads?  I believe the proper mechanism for businesses and individuals to pool their money and purchasing power is through a non-profit.  It’s a structure that already exists, one people are familiar with, it has many excellent benefits and it eliminates some of the statist arguments against voluntarily funding the roads. 

                First off, by having an organization that is solely dedicated to the building and maintaining of the roads, you gain quality and efficiency.  Our current system of allowing government to handle the roads results in bureaucratic red tape and waste.  Decisions can be made faster and better without having to go through the hoops of government approval.  Specialization and definition of purpose also benefits the end product of roads and infrastructure.  So, it would deliver a higher quality product than our current system does. 

                Our roads could also then benefit more from competition.  A non-profit will look for the best quality at the cheapest price to perform a task.  They may be able to act quickly when an opportunity for savings comes along where a governmental bureaucracy could not.  They will not be bound by crony regulations that restrict their options to only a handful of contractors, or in many cases only one.  The customers, the funders and users of these roads, would certainly see a benefit once proper competition were allowed into the task of maintaining our infrastructure, just as consumers enjoy the benefits of competition in any other competitive market. 

                Under our current system, funding our roads would become a tax deductible charitable donation.  Instead of having it taken out of your check every week, whether you like it or not, you can donate to your local “Smallville Roads Fund” if and when you can afford to do so and take the tax break.  This incentivizes both individuals and businesses to donate to their local Roads Fund.  Because it is a charity, this also eliminates the need for any punishment of “non-payors”.  You are knowingly and willing donating to the betterment of your community.  No need for special perks for payors over non-payors.  No enforcement is needed.  Contributions are made with the spirit and expectation that this will benefit everyone, not just a few. 

Now, does that mean a non-profit will not offer some perks as a means for fundraising?  They certainly could, and they would be well within their rights to do so.  For example, if you make a donation over $XX, maybe they come to your street and fix that pothole that spills your coffee every damn morning.  How many times have we done just that and thought to ourselves, “I’d pay my own money to have that thing fixed if I thought they’d do it”?  Well, a non-profit who wants your donation probably would.  You know what else they might do?  They might rename 5^th street bridge to Local Factory Name Bridge if Local Factory pays for a large portion of the bridge repair themselves.  Under our current government controlled system, governments may have a website or hotline for potholes, and sometimes, they might even check it.  The non-profit model is dependent on providing a level of customer service based infrastructure maintenance to their donors that currently does not exist for tax payers. 

Our current system also results in a diversion of funds so terrible that it would be considered criminal if a private or non-profit entity tried to divert funding the same way.  In Indiana, for example, they just voted to raise our gas taxes to the 5^th highest in the country, but only around half of all gas taxes are being spent on the roads at all.  By removing government as the provider of this service we gain accountability.  Government is very bad at auditing itself.  Even when things go horribly wrong, residents & taxpayers rarely have any means of finding justice (just ask anyone who lives in Flint, MI).  By giving this task to a third party, government can fulfil its proper role of protecting citizens from force, fraud and abuse.  We already have laws on the books for non-profits that swindle folks or misappropriate funds.  Unfortunately, they do not apply to government misappropriation of our money.  They can take it, say it’s for roads and spend it however they want; which they currently do often and abundantly.  You gain more accountability, both to the people and to the law, by having our roads funded by a non-profit. 

And then there’s some interesting potential unintended consequences of having a charity build our roads.  Perhaps they offer some paid positions to only the unemployed to help them through a tough time.  Volunteering to actually go out and fix roads in local community would be community service; whether that’s mandated as part of court ordered restitution or just to build up a college application or just because you want to help your fellow neighbors.  It’s the sort of thing that makes people feel good about volunteering.  Like when people pitch in to build a local playground, you can see and hear the results from your friends and neighbors.  Volunteer labor can be just as valuable as volunteering money and many would learn new skills they can take with them into other aspects of their lives.  That’s not an opportunity people have available under our current system. 

Finally, there’s the argument that no one would pay for the roads if you didn’t force them to.  People are just too greedy and would let the roads and bridges rot to shambles before ever donating a single thin dime; even though in many areas our infrastructure is already rotting to shambles under our current system.  On the point of selfish greed, however, we simply disagree.  I see other organizations, like Habitat for Humanity, that relies on donations and volunteers to go out and fill a need in communities.  Individuals, religious organizations and businesses all come together to fill that need, often times traveling a long way to participate.  People, for the most part, genuinely want to help each other.  In some cases, like Adopt a Highway, there is more than just the feeling of helping your fellow man.  The part of the road sponsored by: Smallville Corp is a great bit of advertising, great for public image, a tax write off and still makes you feel good for investing in your local community.  You may argue that all people are horrible and selfish, but I would argue there is evidence to refute that claim all around you. 

Perhaps my favorite part of the non-profit model; aside from being more efficient, cheaper, a tax deduction, voluntary, based on customer service, more accountable, and a community service; is that it could be implemented today.  This does not have to be some huge federal law change, or even a big debate in the state house.  No.  Smallville roads are currently maintained by the Smallville Municipal Government.  An enterprising and liberty minded individual could start this non-profit.  The Smallville town council could then pass them responsibility of maintaining the local roads. 

Maybe it doesn’t happen all at once.  Maybe it starts with that one stretch of road over there that everyone is really sick of & the Smallville road crew never seems to get around to fixing it.  Start there.  Raise the money voluntarily through fundraisers or online campaigns.  Fix that road.  Maybe it becomes the best road in town.  Maybe they raised more money than they needed to fix that road.  So maybe the Smallville Town Council approves giving them another section and another, and it works out great so they eventually cede all the roads in Smallville to the Smallville Roads Fund for maintenance.  Great.  Now the Smallville Town Council has one less thing to worry about.  They can spend their time and energy focusing on more important tasks.  Hopefully, they pass the savings on to taxpayers by reducing their tax burden.  Maybe other communities see it working out for Smallville and they try it too.  Next thing you know a whole county tries it.  And in this way the idea of Liberty and Volunteerism spreads, infecting more and more communities with more and more freedom. 

Or, maybe I’m crazy, it doesn’t work at all and the whole thing fails at the very beginning.  But what did you really lose to try it?  That road was already shit.  Everyone was already pissed off about it.  So why not try just a little bit of Liberty?  A tiny little dose of Freedom?  You never know, you just might like it.