Support NeoGAF

[Ripclawe]

California is wacky.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/p...,print.story?coll=la-news-politics-california

November 16, 2004

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Monday appointed a new Department of Motor Vehicles director who has advocated taxing motorists for every mile they drive — by placing tracking devices in their cars.

The idea would mean a significant overhaul of how California collects taxes to maintain its often-crumbling roads. Under the plan, the state gas tax — now 18 cents a gallon — would be replaced with a tax on every mile traveled by each car and truck.

The notion has not been endorsed by Schwarzenegger but is gaining acceptance among transportation and budget experts. As Californians drive increasingly more fuel-efficient cars, state officials are alarmed that the gasoline tax will not raise enough money to keep up with road needs.

Charging people for the miles they drive also worries some owners of hybrid cars, because it could wipe out any gas-tax savings they now enjoy.

Dan Beal, managing director of public policy for the Automobile Club of Southern California, said altering the system would remove one incentive to buying new-technology hybrid cars like the Toyota Prius, because its owner would pay the same fuel tax as a Hummer owner.

"You are arguing against people taking risks on technology development," said Beal, warning that some mile-tracking systems could invite fraud more than the reliable tax meters at the pump.

Any change in the state's gasoline tax would have to be approved by the Legislature.

Privacy advocates worry about the government tracking the whereabouts of every car in California. In one scenario — currently being tested in Oregon — tracking devices send a signal to a GPS satellite following the car, and that information would be used to calculate the tax bill. Other devices send a signal directly from the car to the pump, which calculates the tax based on the odometer reading.

Annalee Newitz, a policy analyst for the Electronic Frontier Foundation in San Francisco, which monitors privacy issues, said if the device "can communicate with a satellite and then communicate back with another device on the ground, it could be used for something else. That would be my concern: How are limits placed on how this device could be used?"

Yet some transportation experts say the technology has wider implications. Officials are intrigued by the idea because California could begin taxing people for using specific roads at specific times. To keep people off freeways at peak hours, for example, per-mile fees for city streets could be pegged at a lower rate than the highway. That could prompt people to use alternative routes.

 

[bjork]

The cost of implementation would be too high for this.

Won't happen.

 

[SickBoy]

They should just hike the gas tax further if revenue is all they're thinking about...

 

[Azih]

18 cents... a gallon? What the hell? We pay like 40 cents per LITRE.

 

[Ecrofirt]

that's just the tax

 

[Escape Goat]

I think we should just start implanting computer chips in the base of our skulls at birth.

 

[bjork]

I think I paid $2.47 last week, and it'll be like $2.38 tomorrow when I gas up.

They should just make a car that never needs gas, and it's like $70,000 for a Civic equivalent. I'd be all for that.

 

[calder]

That could be the craziest idea I've ever heard. I always hope that shit like that happens because it's be kinda funny to see happen to someone else, but then I realize that if it worked at all and the State of California made more than like $3 a year profit doing it the idea would spread instantly.

 

[Azih]

that's just the tax

Yes, so's the 40 cents per litre.

 

[Christoff Yurievich]

They were talking about this in Oregon a year or so ago, but it didn't get much support. Why? The number of cars that go into Oregon from Washington. The WA cars wouldn't get the tech installed on their cars and therefore would be driving tax-free. That killed the idea pretty quickly.

 

[Vgamer]

This idea is insane. What if someone from California decided to go on a cross country trip. They would only be in CA for a little bit of the trip but would they have to pay tax by the mile for the whole cross country trip? Or does the tracking chip shutoff after passing the CA borders?

 

[impirius]

What a farfetched, crazy idea... I'm sure it'll go by the wayside just like that "traffic light camera" stuff

 

[way more]

The future is here. My economics prof was the first to tell me about this, he predicted California would implement the idea by 2010. They did a shitty job describing how it would work, it would most likely be a tax on certain roads at certain times, so it would cost you more to drive at noon or rush hour.

Annalee Newitz, a policy analyst for the Electronic Frontier Foundation in San Francisco, which monitors privacy issues, said if the device "can communicate with a satellite and then communicate back with another device on the ground, it could be used for something else. That would be my concern: How are limits placed on how this device could be used?"

Scary.

 

[Escape Goat]

What a farfetched, crazy idea... I'm sure it'll go by the wayside just like that "traffic light camera" stuff

Alot of intersections have cameras these days.

 

[Rorschach]

I think I paid $2.47 last week, and it'll be like $2.38 tomorrow when I gas up.

They should just make a car that never needs gas, and it's like $70,000 for a Civic equivalent. I'd be all for that.

I just payed 2.50 :|

 

[Miguel]

<---just paid 1.75.

SHUT UP THAT'S EXPENSIVE FOR HERE! I WANT MY 1.15 gas back!

 

[Flynn]

I'm for this tax, as long as the money goes towards building better public transportation.

 

[Vgamer]

I'm for this tax, as long as the money goes towards building better public transportation.

I almost think the invasion of privacy is worst then the proposed tax. I mean do you really want a chip in your car that the government monitors that tracks your location at all times? Just think what they could do with this chip. Next thing you know the chip will keep track of your speed to and you will automatically get sent tickets to you in the mail when you go over the speed limit. Once the chip is installed since its the most expensive part of this plan im sure they will all of a sudden think of a million things they can do with it. Seems very "Big Brotherish" to me.

 

[xsarien]

I almost think the invasion of privacy is worst then the proposed tax. I mean do you really want a chip in your car that the government monitors that tracks your location at all times?

You're too late, there are already "black boxes" of sorts in plenty of new model cars. The data can theoretically be used in crash investigations, and possibly as evidence in court.

 

[Christoff Yurievich]

Alot of intersections have cameras these days.

I think that was his point.

 

[videogamer]

As the article states, it would really take away some of the incentive to drive more fuel efficient cars. Perhaps they can scale the tax so that the higher the milage, the lower the tax.

 

[Deleted member 1159]

I just payed 2.50 :|

:O

is gas really that expensive in California now? I've been out of state the past few months

 

[Vgamer]

You're too late, there are already "black boxes" of sorts in plenty of new model cars. The data can theoretically be used in crash investigations, and possibly as evidence in court.

Well thats a little different then a chip that sends data back regularly to some database on your mileage etc... As far as i know these "blackboxes" are only checked in accidents.

 

[radioheadrule83]

Ah well you guys that side of the pond get the cheapest oil anyways. And you account for near a third of the worlds emissions. I have no sympathy if it means paying mroe sorry!

 

[Flynn]

The trend in taxation the past couple of decades is to hit wreckless behaviors, like smoking and drinking hard. It's about time that gas consumption falls into this category.

 

[Rorschach]

:O

is gas really that expensive in California now? I've been out of state the past few months

Yeah, although, I just drove by a 76 that had 2.25 for unleaded. I could have saved 7.25.

Last week it was 2.75. The highest I've seen it this summer was 3.50ish.

It's been rollercoasting for a while now, though.

 

[bjork]

I gotta gas up tomorrow... I managed to stretch it out today. $2.36/gallon like a mile from my house. Go me

 

[El Papa]

That's really stupid. What about people that drive alot for a living, like couriers or cable guys? Or students that drive a long way to school? This will never pass. What are they goign to tax next, how hay much oxygen we consume? Why not tax life, 1 cent per hour @ 24 hours a day x poulation of Southern California = $$$$!!!

 

[G4life98]

the government needs to start forcing the issue on alternative fuel vehicles...because gas is just gonna keep getting more expensine

 

[Lambtron]

Yes, so's the 40 cents per litre.

Canada - Lots and lots of social programs that help everyone
US - Not so much

I also doubt you're paying $1300 for health insurance benefits. It all kind of evens out.

$1.90 for gas here. I refuse to gas up in Winnipeg, too expensive.

 

[Flynn]

That's really stupid. What about people that drive alot for a living, like couriers or cable guys? Or students that drive a long way to school? This will never pass. What are they goign to tax next, how hay much oxygen we consume? Why not tax life, 1 cent per hour @ 24 hours a day x poulation of Southern California = $$$$!!!

Can I interest you in a subscription to Reason?

 

[Dilbert]

Upping the gas tax to pay for roadway improvements and punish those who buy large, wasteful vehicles -- good idea.

Taxing the hell out of commercial transport (e.g. 18-wheelers) since they do vastly more damage to the roadways than passenger vehicles -- good idea.

Taxing MILEAGE driven? That's dumb as hell.

 

[ManaByte]

I love my new Civic. I only have to gas up every two weeks or so, as opposed to my old gas guzzling Ford that would need gas every week and sometimes twice a week.

 

[Phoenix]

OKay. I visit California at least twice a year for conventions and shows so I have a little bit of experience with their road system. Charging people 'per mile' is lunacy as much of the region is so spread out it would make much of the area cost prohibitive to live in. When I was in San Francisco I saw: high gas prices / gas taxes, toll bridges, obscenely high parking prices, stupidly high insurance costs, crowded (and slow) public transportation, and miles upon miles of some of the worst traffic I've ever seen. I know people who drive almost 2 hours just to get to work (on an average day) and this is considered normal.

Charging these people "per mile" charges is going to drive up the cost of people just going to work so significantly as to be unreasonable. If you can afford a $550k house (yes) in the San Francisco area, you're still likely across the bay in Oakland with a couple hours of commute to deal with. Now given these increases in costs, what are the people actually getting? STATUS QUO for the most part. Prices are going up just so that the roads don't turn to shit on a daily basis. I think they need to investigate WHY its costing them such a stupid amount of money to maintain their roads and look to some other means to lower that cost (prison system).

 

[Ripclawe]

http://www.bendbulletin.com/news/story.cfm?story_no=14936

Oregon is preparing to test a mileage-tax system that sounded like science fiction just three years ago:

When cars wheel up to the gas pump, a short-range wireless signal will transmit an odometer reading to a receiver at the service station. And rather than adding taxes based on the gallons bought, taxes would be tacked onto the fuel bill based on the miles driven.

The Oregon Road User Fee Task Force on Friday laid out a timetable for a 280-vehicle pilot project that will start in November 2005, most likely in Eugene.

The state already collects taxes from heavy trucks based on the miles they travel, but has relied on gas taxes from passenger cars and light trucks to pay for road work.

Next year's experiment will be the equivalent of dipping a toe into a pool in which Oregon — and all governments that rely on fuel taxes — will end up eventually, said Jim Whitty, an Oregon Department of Transportation manager who is overseeing the project.

Whitty said Oregon's efforts become more viable if more states embrace the per-mile concept — because the program will rely on cooperation from car manufacturers and gas companies that would collect the taxes.

Road construction budgets are funded largely with fuel taxes, but cars of the future will need less.

That means less money coming in — while the volume of traffic is expected to keep climbing.

"As well as the gas tax has served the road needs of Oregonians in the past, it will soon become a declining revenue source," said Sen. Bruce Starr, R-Aloha, the chairman of the task force.

 

[Funky Papa]

18 cents... a gallon? What the hell? We pay like 40 cents per LITRE.

I pay $1.3 per litre :_(

 

[cvxfreak]

Arnold's the idiot who decided to repeal the profitable car tax. -_-

 

[Flynn]

I know people who drive almost 2 hours just to get to work (on an average day) and this is considered normal.

Hopefully taxing people will help them realize that this commute is not normal and that an alternative should be found.

 

[way more]

Hopefully taxing people will help them realize that this commute is not normal and that an alternative should be found.

This is the principle behind the tax. Highways are a public good and like most public goods the degree which is desired by the individual is poorly expressed. You can have someone who is crusing for a Del Taco while the guy in then next car is rushing to a board meeting. Therefore the business man's desire for the highway is greater and he would pay a premium to use it where as the other guy would pack a lunch.

Currently the system is comparable to everyone recieving a flat monthly bill for water. No one has an initiative to cut back on water use, but if charged by the amount of water used people will use less.

 

[Jak140]

http://www.bendbulletin.com/news/story.cfm?story_no=14936

Ugh, that's such a moronic way to tax people. What if all those miles were driven on private property? Not to mention that it does nothing to encourage people to drive fuel efficient cars. How the hell did all these dumbfucks get put into positions of power?

 

[videogamer]

Ugh, that's such a moronic way to tax people. What if all those miles were driven on private property? Not to mention that it does nothing to encourage people to drive fuel efficient cars. How the hell did all these dumbfucks get put into positions of power?

Our previous governor was quite unpopular, so Arnold got in. The person he appointed actually has a lot of experience working with transportation.

It's still a proposal. If it goes through, hopefully vehicles with greater fuel efficency would be taken into account, among other possible complications.

 

[Gek54]

Anything that helps further the infesting of H2s I am against.

 

[Phoenix]

Hopefully taxing people will help them realize that this commute is not normal and that an alternative should be found.

Heading from Oakland to Sun Microsystems or Apple's SF headquarters takes that long easily. Now if you mean alternative in terms of finding somewhere else to work, I think that's unrealistic. Most corporations in the Silicon Valley have employees that are at least an hour commute away - easily.

 

[SickBoy]

I still can't believe people are looking at this as the answer. If fuel tax revenues go down, hike the rate... but then again, I suppose the most politically important people are those who drive the biggest gas guzzlers.

When I have the cash I'm strongly considering buying this car as the second car for my wife and I... in no small part to reduce fuel consumption. Will it be such a good idea if road infrastructure money comes out of how many miles you go in it?

 

[Flynn]

Heading from Oakland to Sun Microsystems or Apple's SF headquarters takes that long easily. Now if you mean alternative in terms of finding somewhere else to work, I think that's unrealistic. Most corporations in the Silicon Valley have employees that are at least an hour commute away - easily.

No, an alternative way of getting to work.

Next time you're on a two hour commute look at the cars to the left and right of you. Everybody's driving themselves in huge, wasteful cars to get to approximately the same place.

Carpooling and public transportation need to happen. If your job is 2 hours away from your home, you need to be taking a train. If there is no train, you need to be demanding one.

 

[fart]

the registration tax was a great idea since it scaled with the value of the car. this is just stupid.

yes, public transportation should be developed and gas taxes and vehicle value taxes and so on should probably be used to develop pub transport systems, HOWEVER this is an impossible to implement and completely nonsensical way of going about it, not to mention it will tend to tax the middle class and mid-lower at equal or greater rates as the upper class, which is just a hundred shades of retarded.

god i can't wait to move the fuck out of this place