The Reactionaries Speak

“The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) this week released a report that said taxing people based on how many miles they drive is a possible option for raising new revenues and that these taxes could be used to offset the costs of highway maintenance at a time when federal funds are short.

The report discussed the proposal in great detail, including the development of technology that would allow total vehicle miles traveled (VMT) to be tracked, reported and taxed, as well as the pros and cons of mandating the installation of this technology in all vehicles.

“In the past, the efficiency costs of implementing a system of VMT charges — particularly the costs of users’ time for slowing and queuing at tollbooths — would clearly have outweighed the potential benefits from more efficient use of highway capacity,” CBO wrote. “Now, electronic metering and billing are making per-mile charges a practical option.”The report was requested by Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), who held a hearing on transportation funding in early March. In that hearing, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said the Obama administration is hoping to spend $556 billion over the next six years, much of which would go to federal transportation improvement projects.

Conrad said in response that federal funds are tight, and in asking for recommendations on how to raise that money, he noted the possibility of a VMT tax as a way to solve the problem of collecting less in taxes as people move to more fuel-efficient vehicles.

“Do we do gas tax?” Conrad asked. “Do we move to some kind of an assessment that is based on how many miles vehicles go, so that we capture revenue from those who are going to be using the roads who aren’t going to be paying any gas tax, or very little, with hybrids and electric cars?”

Conrad argued some recommendation should be made by his committee on these issues when the Senate considers a transportation spending bill later this year.

CBO’s report stressed it was making no recommendations but seemed to support a VMT tax as a more accurate way of having drivers pay for the costs of highway maintenance. The report said miles driven is a larger factor in highway repairs than fuel consumption and suggested that having drivers pay for the real costs of highways “would involve imposing a combination of fuel taxes and per-mile charges.”

But CBO’s assessment of “costs” was broader than just those costs associated with maintaining highway systems.

Check out our Transportation Report blog
for all the latest news about trains, planes and automobiles.

“Any given driver’s highway use also imposes costs on other users, on nearby nonusers, on the environment, and on the economy in the form of congestion, risk of accidents, noise, emissions of greenhouse gases and pollutants that affect local air quality, and dependence on foreign oil,” CBO said.

On how to implement the idea, CBO said it is unclear how much it would cost to “install metering equipment in all of the nation’s cars and trucks.”

“Having the devices installed as original equipment under a mandate to vehicle manufacturers would be relatively inexpensive but could lead to a long transition; requiring vehicles to be retrofitted with the devices could be faster but much more costly, and the equipment could be more susceptible to tampering than factory-installed equipment might be,” CBO said.

The report added that VMT taxes could be tracked and even collected at filling stations. “If VMT taxes were collected at the pump, each time fuel was purchased, information would be sent from a device in the vehicle to a device at the filling station,” it said.

CBO also suggested different VMT tax rates might be assessed to different vehicles because heavier vehicles do more road damage, and rates might change depending on whether miles are driven at peak use times or during less congested hours.

CBO did acknowledge that privacy concerns may be a hurdle to implementing a VMT tax because electronic tracking of miles driven might provide too much personal information to the government. However, CBO noted that some have proposed restricting the information that would be transmitted to the government.”

Now THIS is freaking chilling. Aside of the idea that it’s a clear case of double taxation that effects the driving public, it’s also yet another way to acquire information about people who do nothing except add to the economy.

At this point who just goes to the gas station to just get some gas? A fella like me, for example. Usually I’m picking up a soda, or whatever else I forgot when I was at the store earlier. I’m supporting the station owner, the guy who supplies the soda, cookies, and milk.

Now, we all understand that this is just a first “floating” of an idea to re-distribute wealth from the producers of the economy, to the “takers” from the economy. And the “takers” are the Government, the slackers who rob us by using the welfare state, the environmental whackos who believe that being productive is a sin against Gaia.

It’s about trying to move the population to urban areas, and keeping them in a mass transit system that restricts movement and allows more and more control ceded to the Government.

It won’t fly right now, but consider this the first salvo in a war to take away your privacy, your freedom to move about as you see fit, and to do it unencumbered by the ever-tightening noose of a Government that has lost it’s way.

There will be no such device installed in ANY of my vehicles, EVER.

Take that for what it’s worth, Big Sis.

Be seeing you!