The lane closure scandal surrounding New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie may seem at first glance to only be of interest to residents of the Garden State and those who follow Presidential politics. However, this incident offers lessons that go well beyond those groups. In addition to asking whether or not Christie knows something that he isn’t telling us, people should take it a step further and ask whether it is appropriate for the government to have primary responsibility for building and maintaining roads. Although to many, government led transportation planning seems to be the most obvious solution, incidents such as the scandal currently engulfing New Jersey demonstrate the need for major transportation reform.
Looking at the circumstances of the event, it becomes evident that the same events wouldn’t have unfolded if the bridge were run by a private company. The closures were allegedly ordered as political payback for a city whose mayor did not support Christie in his reelection campaign. The bridge at the center of the controversy is a toll road, but the proceeds go to a government agency, meaning there was no profit incentive for the operators of the road to keep the lanes open. If the bridge had been run by a private company, the loss of business from closing usable lanes would have been disastrous to their bottom line, and thus, would have never occurred. In addition, the politics at play in the incident wouldn’t have made a difference if a business ran the bridge, as business owners don’t have to worry about elections, only customers, customers who in this case would have been irate and taken their business elsewhere.
Regardless of what Christie did or didn’t do, the real scandal is that politicians are entrusted with the responsibility of managing our transportation infrastructure. A better solution is to privatize our roads and transit systems, doing so would make them more responsive to user complaints and provide greater incentive for leaders to ensure their smooth operation.