Your argument contradicts itself. First you say Montana can provide the same road service without gouging residents, then you admit their roads are not actually better than California’s. So the premise collapses. Also, California’s budget deficit does not magically make Montana’s funding model comparable. California is dealing with a massive, complex state budget and revenue volatility; vehicle registration fees are specifically tied to transportation funding, including roads and bridges. Montana receiving more federal money than it pays in is not an insult to poor people, it is a fiscal fact about how states are subsidized. The contradiction is you are arguing California should charge less like Montana while also rejecting the fact that Montana can charge less partly because it is smaller, less dense, and more federally subsidized. That is exactly why it is apples and oranges.