Skip to comments.Oregon Looks to Legislate GPS Mileage Tax, Faces Privacy Fears
Posted on 12/31/2008 12:34:02 PM PST by hreardon
While the exact details are still being ironed out, Gov. Kulongoski's web page gives the basics of the plan. In it he states, "As Oregonians drive less and demand more fuel-efficient vehicles, it is increasingly important that the state find a new way, other than the gas tax, to finance our transportation system."
He is creating a task force "to partner with auto manufacturers to refine technology that would enable Oregonians to pay for the transportation system based on how many miles they drive." Key studies were performed in 2006 and 2007 that indicate that such a program would indeed be possible.
In the 2007 test which lasted 10 months with 300 motorists at two service stations, drivers were taxed 1.2 cents per mile and were refunded the 24 cents a gallon state gas tax. When the motorists got to the pump, their vehicles connected to government computers informing them of the mileage (calculated via GPS tracking) and issuing tax. Equipment for the test came from Oregon State University.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailytech.com ...
Not on my hooptie!!
Will the ACLU eventually sue itself?
They will mandate that GM’s OnStar system provide all of the mileage info to the state government ... how? By threatening to terminate all of the business licenses for GM dealerships.
We are losing freedom every time a liberal wins, we are losing heritage every time they are successful at passing their socialist agenda. We are drowning in the ocean of debt because of their preaching that there is no accountability there is only the state and we forget how to solve problems when we say that we simply MUST raise taxes to solve instead of growing an economy to take care of it.
I hate liberalism more and more each day...it is leading us to a country that will never again be able to be free.
Thinking of moving to Oregon, are we?
Because they want Big Brother in your back seat. Its easier to then get Big Brother in your front seat.
Make it as easy as possible!
Screw 'em all!
Few know it but ONSTAR can be easily deactivated by removing the fuse . Im sure newer models wont have this defect in the future.
Problem solved with an older car that doesn’t have GPS.
Unless they’re going to declare themselves Communists and say every car in Oregon must have a GPS.
It isn't the fault of liberalism. Without the willing encouragement and enpowerment of the voters, liberalism and its twisted view of society and economics would be buried in the landfill of history. We have a major problem, alright, but it's with the dupes who put these characters in office (and re-elect them again and again).
Put some Aluminum foil over your GPS antenna a couple days a week, presto your not using the roads as much.
But if “Oregonians drive less” shouldn’t the roads require less maintenance and therefor last longer, thereby costing less to maintain? Or does Oregon just want more money?
If all they wanted to do was tax based on mileage, they could accomplish that through an annual inspection. Most states already have the infrastructure in place to do that.
I trust that Oregonians will flame their legislators.
This proposal illustrates how government regards citizens as a resource to be plundered.
I’m having trouble seeing how it would be a problem in raising the gas tax at the pumps to fund roads, versus, getting a tax via GPS, through mileage.
I know that they’re saying that some vehicles are getting better mileage, so that vehicle’s gas tax is lower than what it should be, compared to a lower MPG-vehicle. But, if that’s the case, just average all the cars together and get a gas tax that works, overall, to fund the roads.
I really don’t see the necessity or the “problem” that this GPS-system solves...
You said — “Oregonians will allow this and those socialist bastards who have never learned what America was fully all about will open the box of hell-on-earth tax and track liberals want so badly.”
The article had this line in it — “The proposal also calls for a punitive tax against those not adopting the new device — the gas tax will continue for vehicles not equipped to pay the mileage tax, but it will be increased 2 cents.”
So, it would seem that all Oregonians don’t have to comply with it. It’s only for those who *want* to be tracked like that, who will comply. If it were me, I would not do it and would simply pay the money at the pump (i.e., without the GPS system)...
Besides the privacy issues, just look at the lack of logic in it.
So, technology is supposed to improve how many miles per gallon your car can run (hybrids??), making it possible for you to drive more miles on the same car-fuel budget, which with state-mandated GPS-tracking on your vehicle will get you taxed more for driving more miles.
The people who propose things like this are pure Fascists.
Ah yes apparently this is the prelude to the:
Air-Use Tax (for breathibg a state’s air)
The latter will tax us for maintaining a body temperature that is above the ambient temperature and as a result, ruining the environment.
You asked — “But if Oregonians drive less shouldnt the roads require less maintenance and therefor last longer, thereby costing less to maintain? Or does Oregon just want more money?”
Well, it’s not that they drive less, but rather, they use less gas, but drive as much. Thus, you got a car that does as much miles on the road, but takes less gas, thus causing the same damage to the road, but not paying its share of “use”.
And, yes..., they want more money, but I would say that the money is going to be allocated according to what is *allowed* for gas tax and not for a “general catch-all” in the state budget. So, the tax is going to go to things that are listed on the budget that is for roads (and the associated things, per legislative permission).
But, in my mind, I don’t know why they simply don’t increase the gas tax to make up for what is needed in the budget for the roads. It’s an easier process to simply raise the tax to meet the budget, than it is to put into effect an entirely new program and install all those devices at stations and on all cars.
Wouldn’t “simply” raising the gas tax — be a lot easier?
Did it ever occur to the Oregonian lawmakers to perhaps...wow, this is a wild idea...cut spending somewhere else? No, instead of analyzing departments, programs and employees to find savings, they pour their resources into finding more taxpayer arteries to tap. Legislators are vampires.
I suspect this program has less to do with revenue and more to do with control of drivers. The future implications of such a program are horrifying. Speeding tax. Idling in traffic tax. Taxes from individual municipalities for road use. Extra taxes if you drive on snowy days. Extra taxes if you drive on sunny days. Extra taxes if you drive, period.
"Democracy in America will last until the voters find they can vote themselves largesse from the Public treasury." De Tocqueville.
We're just about there.
And these are the same people that bitch about monitoring calls between the US and terrorist nations.
That statement is not exactly true. Cars that get better gas milage (25 MPG or more) tend to be smaller in size and lighter in GVW thus the strain they put on the roads tends to be much less.
Why stop at road users? To be sure, millions of Americans support the public school system, whether or not they have children or, whether they utilize the public schools, in the form of property “taxes”. (That I may profoundly disagree with what children are taught, and not taught)
In this same vein, everyone can be assumed to use public freeways and thus benefit. Once you get the hang of it, anyone can think like a “liberal”.
Needless to say that a mandatory designation would soon follow.
Nothing against Truckers (and they pay dearly for it) but I don’t think autos and pickups have much an effect on road surfaces. It’s the big trucks and the like that trash even the interstates. Shoddy materials, installation, and lack of maintenance doesn’t help.
I can think of a way to get around this GPS-system — relatively easily, actually (I mean without “technology” to get around it...).
Since the “gas tax” will be based on the “mileage” driven and *not* the MPG, you can make your car “look” like it’s getting low mileage, so that you’re getting 1/4 the mileage that you’re actually getting.
How do you do that? Well, you have to have about (let’s say) three or four or five gas cans of about five gallons each (depending on your car). And when you fill up, you take half the gas out of your tank and put it into a can (or cans). And then you run it down to near empty and then fill up again. Take 3/4 of the tank out again.
You’ll “show” that you’re only getting 1/4 the mileage that you’re actually getting. When you’ve got a tank of gas (in the cans), you just “fill it up” on your own and get an almost “tax-free” tank of gas... LOL...
Of course, that’s assuming that they are really taxing you according to strictly mileage and not some combination of a “flat tax” for filling up and then an additional “mileage tax”. I’m assuming that they are going to be taxing you exclusively on “mileage” alone. And if so, that’s how you get a “tax-free” tank of gas... That would be pretty slick...
It would be a little bit of work, for the first few tanks, but then you’ll get a *bonus tank* pretty quickly for just about *no gas tax*...
You can’t track peoples every movement if you do that. And those movement records will most likely discoverable in any civil action.
No offense but that horse hockey. Targeted tax use (this tax only for this, the rest of the $ refunded or rolled over to the next year's budget...) is non-existent in almost all state budgets. It is almost always thrown into the general pot and one "need" that be lacking in funds is "paid" by raiding another. You are asking liberals to be given the keys to the car and alcohol in the back seat.
You said — “Needless to say that a mandatory designation would soon follow.”
Well, I think it would be impossible for a “mandatory” designation to follow — because you’ve got a lot of out-of-state traffic. So, you can’t make it mandatory. The out-of-state cars won’t have the equipment and so the pumps have to be allowed to just “pump” the gas and charge a gas-tax at the “pump-rate”.
I think that they’ll always have a “gas-tax” differential to “persuade” people to get the equipment — but that they *always* have to have provision for cars who don’t have the equipment, because of many reasons...
You are right about that. Just drive in the outside 3 and 4 lanes of a freeway and you can tell. But there are many reasons for roadway potholes and such. Cracks from tree roots causes many problems too and once water gets under the subgrade from a crack, it never dries up. As you know a tree is the same above and below ground. Pretty soon a piece of asphalt or concrete pops out and it just gets worse
They are also considering this in North Carolina. And in New York City, they are actually considering an “obesity tax” on higher fat foods !!
You said — “No offense but that horse hockey. Targeted tax use (this tax only for this, the rest of the $ refunded or rolled over to the next year’s budget...) is non-existent in almost all state budgets. It is almost always thrown into the general pot and one “need” that be lacking in funds is “paid” by raiding another. You are asking liberals to be given the keys to the car and alcohol in the back seat.”
I think that the Oregon gas tax is confined to certain areas by law. But someone would have to check on that one. I seem to remember reading that somewhere in the distant past... :-)
You said — “That statement is not exactly true. Cars that get better gas milage (25 MPG or more) tend to be smaller in size and lighter in GVW thus the strain they put on the roads tends to be much less.”
Yeah, in terms of averages, but you can find variances regardless. The point is that they’re wanting to tax “flat rate” according to mileage and not gas used (taking away the MPG factor). And that is supposed to make it easier to fund the roads part of the budget.
I can see how that can happen, you’ve got certain vehicles that have been the same weight, but have been getting better mileage over the years. For example, I’m pretty sure that I’ve got a car (weight-wise) that is just as heavy as one of my older cars (of years past) but it certainly gets a lot better mileage now (on this newer car). So, I would be paying more gas tax on the older car for the same amount of weight, than I am on the newer car of same weight.
This is STUPID...do the math. Lets say you drive 300 miles on a tank. The new tax would be 300 miles x 1.2 cents= $3.60.
Same scenario. 300 miles driven at 20 mpg = 15 gal of gas. 15 gal x 24 cent per gal tax is $3.60 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Its just a way to PUNISH low MPG cars !!!
Blago's toll roads in Chicago do this. The toll doubles if you don't have the auto pay device..
You said — “Why stop at road users? To be sure, millions of Americans support the public school system, whether or not they have children or, whether they utilize the public schools, in the form of property taxes. (That I may profoundly disagree with what children are taught, and not taught)”
Well, when you said why stop at road users — you have to keep in mind that road users are already paying a gas tax. It’s a different way of paying it and apportioning it according to mileage instead of apportioning it according to gas used. It’s the same tax but a different way of “counting” it. It could be slightly more for some and slightly less for others
I’m really not sure how “counting the gas tax” on a particular car by a different methodology affects all other forms of taxes or thinking differently like a liberal. What I’m saying is that we’re already getting taxed on gas taxes. If they aren’t getting enough funds to fix the roads then raise the taxes. It’s that simple. If they think that apportioning it more according to strict mileage will work out better then it’s still a tax that people are paying, they are just paying it by a different “methodology” — not that they aren’t paying it at all.
My only concern would be in terms of “tracking” — which really has nothing at all to do with paying gas taxes...
Out of state cars have nothing to do with the issue at hand. You are saying this would remain a “voluntary” tax but the fact is it would the first step leading to the mandatory second step. I won’t even take the time to enumerate how many times liberals have made proposals with opt-out (or temporary) provisions just to turn around and make the issue a mandate (or permanent).
You said — “Blago’s toll roads in Chicago do this. The toll doubles if you don’t have the auto pay device..”
Well..., the “toll road capital” of the United States is Tulsa, OK... LOL.. Just about every direction you go out of Tulsa is a toll road. I’ve never seen worse...
But, I don have an “auto-pay-device” for both Oklahoma and Texas. It saves me time and saves me money. So, it’s not such a bad deal.
Be careful what you wish for.
This is just like the old argument that we should raise taxes on corporations, so that the public doesn't have to pay.
Follow the money, people...and you'll see that a gas tax is the same as a mileage tax is the same as a CO2 tax. It's only a question of who pays more.
You said — “Out of state cars have nothing to do with the issue at hand. You are saying this would remain a voluntary tax but the fact is it would the first step leading to the mandatory second step. I wont even take the time to enumerate how many times liberals have made proposals with opt-out (or temporary) provisions just to turn around and make the issue a mandate (or permanent).”
No, I’m not saying that the “gas tax” is a voluntary tax. Not at all. The “gas tax” is a *mandatory tax* that everyone pays, regardless — and they pay it when they get gas at the gas station. That’s *already done* — as it stands right now.
The only thing different here is that they are wanting to have a *methodology* of computing that gas tax to be by (1) mileage-based, instead of (2) fuel-based [i.e., “by the gallon”]
So, you’re going to pay the *mandatory tax* regardless. There is not “voluntary” to it. That will never happen and has not happened.
What I’m saying is that there will *always* be a “gas-based” methodology in effect — because they *have to have it* because out-of-state vehicles won’t have the other “methodology”. That’s why.
It has nothing to do with “voluntary”...
Never go to Oregon. If you live there, leave now.
You said — “Be careful what you wish for.”
It’s simple arithmetic. If the roads are falling apart and you’ve got damage to vehicles because of bad roads and you have dangerous driving conditions (on those roads) — it’s simple arithmetic that if the current funds are not enough to fix them — then you have to raise the taxes.
There’s no other way around it — other than letting the roads deteriorate where hardly anyone can drive on them without damaging your car or having dangerous driving conditions (like bridges falling down, for example... LOL).
If people drive on the roads, they’re gonna have to pay the bill...