Mark Nickolas makes a fairly common mistake in a recent blog posting in which he blasts Kentucky Senate President David Williams for supporting a “new tax on Kentuckians — bridge and road tolls.”

Well, it’s not a tax. It’s a fee. The distinction is more than semantic.

First of all, the fee is on drivers, not Kentuckians. I would wager to say that half or more of the people who cross the Ohio River into and out of Kentucky do not, in fact, live in Kentucky. The cost is borne only by those who choose to use the bridge. To the extent that the toll is used to support only that bridge, it’s all to the good. The users of the bridge pay for the maintenance while drivers, voters and taxpayers who do not use the bridge are better off. They don’t pay for something they don’t use.

Second, supporters of transparent government - Mark says he is one - favor fees over taxes just about any ol’ day of the week. Agencies funded through fees know that raising those fees might invite questions from fee payers of how efficiently the operation runs. Fee-for-service transactions make clear to consumers of those fee-based services just how much they’re paying and what they’re getting for the money. That’s the best a good kind of T&A: transparency and accountability.

Taxpayers usually don’t have that luxury. They just pay money into a pool (the General Fund) and lawmakers pull money out of the pool to pay for stuff. Taxpayers are none the wiser about what they’re getting and what they’re paying to get it. That kind of system invites the big troublesome three: waste, fraud and abuse.

Whether or not the tolls end up paying to support only the relevant projects is an open question. It would be stupid to charge a fee on a bridge in Paducah to pay for one in Louisville. If that’s what Williams and his allies have in mind, then that’s a problem.

As to Fletcher removing tolls on a few roads, if he did so to shift the cost of road maintenance onto taxpayers, then maybe his political ambitions have once again gotten the best of him.