National Academies Press: OpenBook

Public Perception of Mileage-Based User Fees (2016)

Chapter: APPENDIX D Media Story Coding Scheme

« Previous: APPENDIX C Resources for Identifying Public Opinion Research and Media Stories
Page 138
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX D Media Story Coding Scheme." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Public Perception of Mileage-Based User Fees. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23401.
×
Page 138
Page 139
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX D Media Story Coding Scheme." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Public Perception of Mileage-Based User Fees. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23401.
×
Page 139
Page 140
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX D Media Story Coding Scheme." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Public Perception of Mileage-Based User Fees. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23401.
×
Page 140
Page 141
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX D Media Story Coding Scheme." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Public Perception of Mileage-Based User Fees. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23401.
×
Page 141
Page 142
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX D Media Story Coding Scheme." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Public Perception of Mileage-Based User Fees. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23401.
×
Page 142
Page 143
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX D Media Story Coding Scheme." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Public Perception of Mileage-Based User Fees. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23401.
×
Page 143

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

136 APPENDIX D Media Story Coding Scheme This appendix presents the coding scheme used to analyze each media story. TYPES OF MEDIA SOURCES COVERING MBUFS Publication type: Who is the intended readership of the article? • Industry publication: Something people would read as part of their job (e.g., Bond Buyer) • General public: Newspaper, magazine like Business Week State/national/other: Where would the MBUF be implemented? • The name of the state where MBUF would be used • “US,” if talking about a national MBUF • “Other,” if neither of the prior categories is accurate MBUF type: Does the article discuss a pilot or hypothetical, future MBUF program? • Pilot program • Hypothetical program • Both (articles discusses both a pilot and a hypothetical future MBUF) Tone: What overall tone does the article take toward MBUFs? • Positive • Neutral • Negative • Mixed (some positive and some negative statements) Story type: • Opinion piece: Editorial, letter to the editor, or other story expressing the writer’s opinion • News story: Story that reports on an issue from a more neutral, journalistic viewpoint TYPES OF PEOPLE WHOSE VIEWS ARE PRESENTED IN MEDIA STORIES Professional • Definition: Article quotes or reports on an opinion(s) held by a specific person or organization with a professional or business interest in mileage fees • Types of people with a “professional” interest: Transportation planners or agency staff, researchers, trucking industry members/representatives, taxi drivers or industry representatives, or automobile clubs (CAAA, etc.) • Note: Excludes elected officials and members of the public Elected official • Definition: Article quotes or reports on an opinion held by a specific elected official

137 General public • Definition: Article quotes or summarizes an opinion expressed by a member of the public (someone who is neither a professional nor an elected official) Public opinion described • Definition: Statement describing or characterizing public opinion about mileage fees • Note: Includes statements where the context refers to… – Public support or acceptance for an MBUF or likely public support or acceptance for an MBUF – Public opposition to or disapproval of an MBUF or likely public opposition to or disapproval of an MBUF – The public disliking/hating the idea of MBUFs – MBUF is not/will not be popular with the public – MBUF is/will be popular with the public CONCERNS Privacy • Definition: Statement explicitly mentioning “privacy” or issues of privacy are implied through mentioning the “track- ing” or “monitoring” of drivers Fairness • Definition: Statement in which “fairness” or “equity” is explicitly mentioned • Note: Includes statements if the context of the user refers to… – Everyone paying their fair share (e.g., hybrid vehicles) – Heavier vehicles paying more of a tax (because they cause more damage to the roads) – Hybrid/electric vehicle owners paying an MBUF because they don’t pay a gas tax – Hybrid/electric vehicle owners should not be taxed because they are helping the environment/reducing emissions – Rural drivers having to pay more because they drive greater distances – Commuters have to travel greater distances to work – Lower-income commuters already have to travel greater distances to work – Funding burden shifting to urban drivers (higher prices for congestion zones) – People paying more for the roads if they drive more – People cheating the MBUF system (hacking GPS tracking; changing odometer readings) – Out-of-state drivers paying for road use as well Administration • Definition: Collecting the fee is too costly and/or difficult • Note: Could deal with billing/collections OR enforcement Technology • Definition: Statement that technology is or is not ready to implement a mileage fee Cost • Definition: Cost to drivers (is too much)—objection is to paying more (rather than the objection being to the type of tax itself) • Note: Could apply to all drivers, or could apply to just one type of driver, like truckers, rural drivers, or taxis

138 BENEFITS OF MBUFs Sustainable revenue • Definition: Any statement that mileage fees will produce sustainable revenue streams over time • Notes: – Could say mileage fees are or are not sustainable, but will likely be the former – Statement may often compare the mileage fee to fuel taxes Innovative • Definition: Statement explicitly mentioning “innovative” or a synonym in reference to the MBUF • Notes: If the context refers to… – New, novel solution/approach to provide funding for transportation infrastructure – “Forward-thinking,” “way of the future,” “cutting edge,” “inventive,” “original,” “experimental,” or any other synonym Other • Definition: Any quotes that seem important but do not fall into one of the other coding themes OTHER ISSUES Fuel efficiency • Definition: Statement that discusses fuel efficiency regarding mileage-based user fees Gas tax replacement • Definition: Statement that the mileage fee could be or will be a replacement for the gas tax/fuel tax • Notes: This may often be framed in a positive light, with the mileage fee as a “solution” to the problem of shrinking gas tax revenues Alternative vehicles • Definition: Any statement that mentions alternative-fuel vehicles in connection with a mileage fee Research conducted • Definition: Statement describing a completed research study (e.g., description of survey results) • Note: Pilot studies are a form of research Research underway • Definition: Statement that some commission/organization/researcher is studying mileage fees (state commission, fed- eral commission, RAND, etc.) User fee • Definition: Statement that a mileage fee is a “user fee” • Notes: This could be seen as good or bad, but probably the statement will have a positive tone Political will • Definition: Statements that support from politicians for mileage fees is lacking or unlikely

139 Congestion pricing • Definition: Any statement that combines the ideas of mileage fees and congestion pricing • Note: Could be a statement explaining how mileage fees could be set up with congestion pricing as part of the system OR a statement that seems to confuse the issues of mileage fees and congestion pricing Research needed • Definition: Statement that (more) research about mileage fees is needed or would be useful Trucking • Definition: Anything linking mileage fees and trucking • Note: Could be a statement by a trucker or trucking industry representative OR a statement about how mileage fees will impact the trucking industry Need for public support/acceptance • Definition: Statement that public support will be needed to adopt a mileage fee

NEED SPINE WIDTH TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2015 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE* OFFICERS Chair: Daniel Sperling, Professor of Civil Engineering and Environmental Science and Policy; Director, Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis Vice Chair: James M. Crites, Executive Vice President of Operations, Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, TX Executive Director: Neil J. Pedersen, Transportation Research Board MEMBERS VICTORIA A. ARROYO, Executive Director, Georgetown Climate Center; Assistant Dean, Centers and Institutes; and Professor and Director, Environmental Law Program, Georgetown University Law Center, Washington, DC SCOTT E. BENNETT, Director, Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department, Little Rock DEBORAH H. BUTLER, Executive Vice President, Planning, and CIO (retired), Norfolk Southern Corporation, Norfolk, VA JENNIFER COHAN, Secretary, Delaware DOT, Dover MALCOLM DOUGHERTY, Director, California Department of Transportation, Sacramento A. STEWART FOTHERINGHAM, Professor, School of Geographical Sciences and Urban Planning, University of Arizona, Tempe JOHN S. HALIKOWSKI, Director, Arizona DOT, Phoenix MICHAEL W. HANCOCK, Secretary, Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, Frankfort SUSAN HANSON, Distinguished University Professor Emerita, School of Geography, Clark University, Worcester, MA STEVE HEMINGER, Executive Director, Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Oakland, CA CHRIS T. HENDRICKSON, Professor, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA JEFFREY D. HOLT, Managing Director, Bank of Montreal Capital Markets, and Chairman, Utah Transportation Commission, Huntsville ROGER HUFF, Manager, Ford Global Customs, Material Export Operations, and Logistics Standardization, Ford Motor Company, Farmington Hills, MI GERALDINE KNATZ, Professor, Sol Price School of Public Policy, Viterbi School of Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles YSELA LLORT, Consultant, Miami, FL DONALD A. OSTERBERG, Senior Vice President, Safety and Security (retired), Schneider National, Inc., Freedom, WI JAMES REDEKER, Commissioner, Connecticut DOT, Newington MARK ROSENBERG, President and CEO, The Task Force for Global Health, Inc., Decatur, GA SANDRA ROSENBLOOM, Professor, University of Texas, Austin HENRY G. (GERRY) SCHWARTZ, JR., Chairman (retired), Jacobs/Sverdrup Civil, Inc., St. Louis, MO KUMARES C. SINHA, Olson Distinguished Professor of Civil Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN KIRK T. STEUDLE, Director, Michigan DOT, Lansing GARY C. THOMAS, President and Executive Director, Dallas Area Rapid Transit, Dallas, TX PAUL TROMBINO III, Director, Iowa DOT, Ames EX OFFICIO MEMBERS THOMAS P. BOSTICK (Lieutenant General, U.S. Army), Chief of Engineers and Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC JAMES C. CARD (Vice Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, retired), Maritime Consultant, The Woodlands, TX, and Chair, TRB Marine Board ALISON JANE CONWAY, Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, City College of New York, NY, and Chair, TRB Young Members Council T. F. SCOTT DARLING III, Acting Administrator and Chief Counsel, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, U.S. DOT MARIE THERESE DOMINGUEZ, Administrator, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S. DOT SARAH FEINBERG, Acting Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration, U.S. DOT DAVID J. FRIEDMAN, Acting Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S. DOT LeROY GISHI, Chief, Division of Transportation, Bureau of Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC JOHN T. GRAY II, Senior Vice President, Policy and Economics, Association of American Railroads, Washington, DC MICHAEL P. HUERTA, Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration, U.S. DOT PAUL N. JAENICHEN, SR., Administrator, Maritime Administration, U.S. DOT THERESE W. McMILLAN, Acting Administrator, Federal Transit Administration, U.S. DOT MICHAEL P. MELANIPHY, President and CEO, American Public Transportation Association, Washington, DC GREGORY G. NADEAU, Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, U.S. DOT PETER M. ROGOFF, Under Secretary for Transportation Policy, Office of the Secretary, U.S. DOT MARK R. ROSEKIND, Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S. DOT CRAIG A. RUTLAND, U.S. Air Force Pavement Engineer, Air Force Civil Engineer Center, Tyndall Air Force Base, FL BARRY R. WALLERSTEIN, Executive Officer, South Coast Air Quality Management District, Diamond Bar, CA GREGORY D. WINFREE, Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, Office of the Secretary, U.S. DOT FREDERICK G. (BUD) WRIGHT, Executive Director, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC PAUL F. ZUKUNFT (Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard), Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Department of Homeland Security * Membership as of November 2015. Abbreviations and acronyms used without definitions in TRB publications: A4A Airlines for America AAAE American Association of Airport Executives AASHO American Association of State Highway Officials AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ACI–NA Airports Council International–North America ACRP Airport Cooperative Research Program ADA Americans with Disabilities Act APTA American Public Transportation Association ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials ATA American Trucking Associations CTAA Community Transportation Association of America CTBSSP Commercial Truck and Bus Safety Synthesis Program DHS Department of Homeland Security DOE Department of Energy EPA Environmental Protection Agency FAA Federal Aviation Administration FHWA Federal Highway Administration FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration FRA Federal Railroad Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration HMCRP Hazardous Materials Cooperative Research Program IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (2012) NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASAO National Association of State Aviation Officials NCFRP National Cooperative Freight Research Program NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research Program NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NTSB National Transportation Safety Board PHMSA Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration RITA Research and Innovative Technology Administration SAE Society of Automotive Engineers SAFETEA-LU Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (2005) TCRP Transit Cooperative Research Program TDC Transit Development Corporation TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (1998) TRB Transportation Research Board TSA Transportation Security Administration U.S.DOT United States Department of Transportation

92+ pages; Perfect Bind with SPINE COPY = 14 pts Public Perception of Mileage-Based User Fees NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM NCHRP SYNTHESIS 487 NEED SPINE WIDTH Job No. XXXX Pantone 202 C TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 500 F ifth S treet, N .W . W ashing to n, D .C . 20001 A D D R ESS SER VICE R EQ UESTED A Synthesis of Highway Practice N CH R P SYN TH ESIS 487 Public Perception of M ileage-Based User Fees TRB

Public Perception of Mileage-Based User Fees Get This Book
×
 Public Perception of Mileage-Based User Fees
Buy Paperback | $67.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Synthesis 487: Public Perception of Mileage-Based User Fees explores proposals to replace the current motor fuel tax with a road usage charge assessed on vehicle-miles traveled, often called a mileage-base user fee (MBUF). The report identifies and assesses various measures of public opinion on the MBUF concept.

READ FREE ONLINE

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!