Mileage tax proposed for state's drivers

This is possibly becoming a multi-state issue, therefor it's here instead of the CA forum.

<snip>Officials in car-clogged California are so worried they may be considering a replacement for the gas tax altogether, replacing it with something called "tax by the mile."

Seeing tax dollars dwindling, neighboring Oregon has already started road testing the idea.

"Drivers will get charged for how many miles they use the roads, and it's as simple as that," says engineer David Kim.

Kim and fellow researcher David Porter at Oregon State University equipped a test car with a global positioning device to keep track of its mileage. Eventually, every car would need one.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/14/eveningnews/main674120.shtml

http://www.ocregister.com/ocr/2004/08/19/sections/news/news/article_208035

<snip>Joan Borucki, chief deputy director at the California Transportation Commission and a member of the California Performance Review team that made the recommendation here, insists the device could not track residents' whereabouts.

I don't buy it. GPS, by definition, is capable of tracking almost anywhere on the planet.

I can see the subpoenas now: divorce cases in which one party is accused of philandering get the record subpoenaed to prove that spouse "A" parked at 123 Any St. at 2:00 P.M. every Tuesday for an hour, cops investigating all manner of crimes, etc. I can even see it being used in the future to track routes and travel times so speeding tickets can be delivered in the mail: gotta keep that revenue stream going, dontchaknow.

The are upsides to it: pinpointing the vehicle used in a crime, finding stolen cars similar to LoJack (bright spot - LoJack is at the owners option).

It's potentially far too large a can of worms with too many opportunities for abuse by both the courts and the private sector for my taste.

Ever know anyone who went through a messy divorce that had ties to the courthouse? I do. It was me. My ex-wife harrasses me constantly despite an unlisted phone number and using a P.O. Box. Can't hide you physical address legally if you want to register a vehicle or obtain a license. A program like this would allow the unethical to track anyone anywhere anytime.

Also, a primarily CA problem: no one should ever doubt that the press or paparazzi won't "buy" this information with a little green grease.

Now think about political candidate implications. It could cut both ways - and cut very deeply.

I can think of more possible use and abuse but I'll quit ranting.

but this looks like a typical Detroit based (right out of Ren Cen) attack on high mileage cars.

Whether is it frivolous law suits against high mileage cars in the "High Occupancy Vehicle" lanes, or frivolous patent law suits against almost any and all high mileage technology, or paid off "energy economists" like Lester Lave and Andrew Kleit testifying before Congress ("Google" their papers and presentations)

In point of fact -- this smells like the Ren Cen crew protecting their position in gas guzzlers.

I have been in alternative, renewable, and green energy for most of my career.

high miles per gallon cars would be taxed the same as low miles per gallon ones. I also worry about rural vs urban. In the rural areas we have to drive further for services than in the urban areas where they can literally walk to the grocery store.

than in Urban areas with "stop and go traffic".

Per mile you are using fewer resources and creating less pollution, but you are taxed just the same.

The tax isn't just about paying for the roads - it should be used to discourage socially undesirable aspects of automobile use.

Besides, if they want it propertional to raod use, they would also have to factor in vehicle weight, too.

IN Illinois we are sort of accounting for that with very high tolls for trucks -- 9.50 at some toll booths. The idea was to reduce truck traffic during non-peak hours,(toll break during off hours) but they are all going to the old 2 lane highways (not all, but lots -- forgive the hyperbole)and tearing up those roads, as well as driving the locals crazy. And the trucking companies!! One said they used to pay 750,000 a yr in tolls, and this year it will be 2.2 million -- there goes jobs, or benefits.

And GPS on my car? Right. I've got a brother in law who can probably zap that sucker dead.

You drive more miles, you pay more in taxes on the gasoline you buy. If you do the socially conscious thing of driving a vehicle that gets good gas mileage, you are "rewarded" by paying less in taxes by consuming less gasoline. Same goes for you if you keep your car tuned up and in good repair, have the tires inflated properly, and avoid bad habits like jack-rabbit starts and stops.

It's an elegant mechanism which enforces good community conduct and penalizes bad conduct automatically. Which is apparently why it has to be junked in favor of more government intrusiveness.

People with 10 mile a gallon SUVs will get a tax break.

we are already taxed by the mile every time we buy a gallon. just convert the figures. The cost of implementing this would far out weigh any benefit...that is unless they are planning on charging 50 cents a mile instead of 50 cents a gallon....effectively turning all cars into Taxis,

This has to be fought hard...another strap in the electronic straight jacket

so the government can track movement?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA


riiiiigghhhttt

The January 2005 issue of Popular Mechanics feartured an interesting article titled "Who's Spying On You?", about GPS in our cars, etc.

The principal is not simply to charge per road-mile, but to charge as
well extra fees for using congested roads. This then allows economics
to sort out traffic problems, as drivers who do not "have" to be in the
heavy traffic, might avoid it to keep their road usage bill lower.

There are serious privacy concerns, but presuming that the charges are
related to the car, and not the indiviual, this is little different
that existing tracking systems that track light aircraft.

Road charging is a healthy way to make the people who are causing the
traffic, pay for the road-space-time they take up.

I say its a good idea, as long as they have varied charges based on
congestion, not just flat rates. AS it sounds, the flat rate concept
simply punishes people in rural areas who drive more miles without any
public transit alternatives. This is regressive, as rural areas are
inherently poorer.

Sadly, the people behind any "tax" idea in america seem to be from the
"regressive" party.

My primary concern is the idea that government agencies and their employees would have the ability to locate and track privately owned vehicles at their whim. Also, I doubt that I will ever be convinced that such a system wouldn't be abused by those with access to it at some point.

As I pointed out above, there can be some advantages to the tracking portion, but those are outweighed by the opportunities for abuse of the system.

Still too 1984 for me.

This is a scam. But I guess they have to come up with some way to steal more of our money.

On the radio where I live they were talking about doing the same thing with the emmision sticker. If you get an alternative energy car, such as electric or hydrogen, they won't be able to get emmision test money because hydrogyen powered and electric cars produce no emissions. (well hydrogen produces water, but that doesn't count.)

This would be murder for the stations that give emmisions tests and for the states that makes you pay for emmisions stickers.