Lenny Magsamen writes that "in 2006 when I got my E-ZPass, it was pushed as a way to speed traffic and for everyone no matter how little they used it. Now the state is charging monthly fees. Remember when ATMs first appeared, same deal."
This is a very apt comparison. When the banks wanted to get people to adopt a new technology, they subsidized it for while and called it "free." When the technology reached a critical mass, they ended the subsidy. So what the authority is doing is acting like a business. Isn't that what we're always asking government agencies to do?
Earl Grey of Abingdon wrote that the authority made the wrong decision on E-ZPass.
"I think tolls should have gone up in general. Now, it costs more to have E-ZPass than just pay with cash, which just doesn't make sense. ... I was never planning to get rid of my account though, I just think it's wimpy policymaking."
"Wimpy policymaking" - that's a fair criticism. A less spinally challenged board might have raised the Bay Bridge toll from $2.50 to $3. But that money should have been used to lessen the burden on truckers - who got hammered with 50 percent increases that should have at least been phased in.
E-ZPass customers are getting off easy. Yes, those of us who aren't on commuter plans will now pay more than cash customers. But we're getting something for it - the joy of breezing past tollbooths as the cash customers wait in line. Am I the only one in Maryland who got an E-ZPass for purely selfish reasons rather than to save the planet?
