Posted on 11/22/2004 4:26:38 PM PST by absalom01
POSTED: 10:16 am PST November 16, 2004
UPDATED: 6:19 pm PST November 16, 2004
SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- Tired of high gas prices? Right now, drivers are paying a tax of 18 cents for every gallon of gas bought. The new chief of the state Department of Motor Vehicles has an idea that would wipe out the gas tax, but at what cost?
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's newly appointed director of the DMV, Joan Borucki, wants to charge people for every mile they drive.Schwarzenegger said Tuesday that the idea has yet to receive in-depth consideration, but talk of a "mileage tax" is causing a political commotion.Honda dealer Katina Rapton says that the idea of an "mileage tax" is crazy, and that California already requires the manufacture and sale of clean-burning, fuel-efficient cars, which cost consumers more to drive off the lot."To me it doesn't make much sense," Rapton said. "And then turn around and penalize them on the backside for using their cars and getting better gas mileage? It doesn't make much sense."The mileage could be tracked with a device placed in the car. It's an idea that Borucki included in the governor's recently completed California Performance Review. The idea is echoed by transportation planners.
Mmmm, doesn't that cool aide taste good?
I don't see what hydrogen has to do with natural gas.
Hydrogen can be produced by fractionating water.
I GOT IT!!!
A BREATHING TAX, YEAH THAT'S THE TICKET!!!!
That takes electricity. Use a solar cell and you'll take about 85 years to get back your energy investment.
I think it's illegal only to sell a car with a tampered odometer without disclosing the fact, but if you never sell the car, who cares if the odometer is broken? So, this stupid per-mile tax scheme would require its own odometer or GPS recorder.
In the interests of simplicity, a usage tax unrelated to gasoline consumption could be applied to tires, since higher usage of those correlates with more driving, even on hydrogen/electric/lng cars, instead of a per-mile tax. Not everyone will go out-of-state to buy their tires. Oh, wait, there's already a tax on tires, and the liberals probably would raise those taxes in addition to the per-gallon fuel taxes.
Or, how about a simple per-car surcharge when you buy a car, with a pro-rated rebate if you sell or crash your car or if you move out of CA? If it's estimated cars will go an average of, say, 200,000 miles, simply apply the tax up-front. If you crash your car at 30,000, you get a pro-rated rebate, and if you drive your car past 200,000, you're lucky. Since construction requires money before the roads get used, this scheme would provide the construction money earlier than the current taxes would. The first few years would provide a windfall for the tax-and-spend liberals. Unfortunately, I wouldn't count on them to replace the fuel taxes with this system; instead, they might just think of it as novel additional tax. And, since the current fuel taxes don't go towards the roads, I doubt any other transportation-related tax could be guaranteed to be used for improving roads either.
Atomic power produces plenty of electricity.
Well duh. Next nuke you get licensed in California, please let me know. Until then, hydrogen is a scam serving the interests of the natural gas business.
I read a post on here a long time ago from a civil engineer. He said California pays the most per person in road maintenance taxes and spends the least.
Where's the money going??
I just wrote my reprentative about it. Here's my letter (not a pretty thing, perhaps, but mine own!):
Dear (Representative):
Regarding the "mileage tax" recently proposed by the new director of the DMV, Joan Borucki: I want to weigh in on this subject and let you know that in my estimation, her proposal is a completely harebrained idea and should be buried forthwith.
There are two ways to implement Borucki's idea. One is to require people to bring in all of their autos on a yearly basis and have the odometers read. As you can imagine, this "simple" proposal will, in fact, create a whole new layer of bureaucracy devoted to implementing this idea, which will cost our already cash-strapped state untold millions which could certainly be put to better use.
The other proposed way of implementing this idea is to attach a GPS unit to every auto. Perhaps you will gain an idea of how I feel about this by the fact that when I first heard the idea, I burst out laughing. I thought it was literally a joke and that someone on the radio was having a little fun at the listeners' expense. When I realized that this was a serious proposal, I was appalled. I cannot think of a more egregious way to invade my privacy. It is NOT the government's business where I go and how much time I spend on the road. Also, I'm sure you will agree that if GPS units are attached to autos, it will be merely a matter of time until someone decides that the information gathered should be used in a criminal case. This may seem logical, but in fact it would be an incredible invasion of privacy and a deathblow to our free society.
I am not given to hyperbole, so I hope you will listen when I predict that if this proposal comes to pass, there will be widespread civil disobedience, and otherwise law-abiding citizens will spend their free time figuring out ways to "game" the system and provide false information about their movements to the government.
I understand that this proposal was brought forward because gasoline taxes are no longer bringing in sufficient revenues because autos are using less gas now. Well, then, either raise the gasoline tax (not that I like that idea, but at least it does not invade my privacy), or find another way to raise revenues that does not add a whole new layer of bureaucracy and does not invade my privacy as a free citizen.
Yours sincerely,
Elsewhere: “Critics had worried that the technology could be used to track where vehicles go, not just how far they travel, and that this information could be stored by the government.”
“In interviews with the Democrat-Herald and others, James Whitty, the ODOT official in charge of the project, tried to assure the public that that was not in the plans.”
=> Yes...indeed...and when the police asked for Tasers, Tasering pre-teens and the wheelchair bound wasn’t in the plans -either.
You do realize that you’re responding to a four-year old post, right?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.