Shortly after Secretary of Transportation Roy LaHood raised the idea of a transportation tax based on mileage, rather than gas, the idea was curbed in both a written statement from the department and by White House spokesman Robert Gibbs. LaHood's proposal, which would have placed GPS devices in cars, suggested people could be taxed by how much they drive, rather than how much gas they purchase. LaHood said that the plan, which could have raised additional funds for infrastructure, was something "we should look at."
The Department of Transportation issued a statement that addressed LaHood's idea: "The policy of taxing motorists based on how many miles they have traveled is not and will not be Obama administration policy." The idea of a mileage tax is still being floated around by a few states—namely, Idaho, Rhode Island and North Carolina. Oregon has actually run a pilot program, and found the program to be viable.
This proposed tax would have environmental implications–some good, some bad. When people buy more efficient vehicles, they use less gas, which is a good thing. Still, they're driving as much as they did, and their cars have the same effect on the road, so the government doesn't get as much revenue from these drivers to fix our highways and bridges. As more people begin driving hybrids and using less fuel, this will become a greater problem.
Meanwhile, green bloggers have pointed out that presently, a mileage tax would punish them for consuming less gas, and take away the incentive for others to purchase hybrids. Morgan Clendaniel of Good offers a solution that would be a weight-per-mile tax, which would reward drivers of lighter vehicles (like the Prius) which presumably do less damage to the road. The problem with all of these ideas, though, is that they still require a GPS to be installed in each car. This is widely considered to be a privacy concern.
Where do we go from here? The taxman cometh, but, thanks to enforced GPS tracking, we'll see him coming from a mile away.
No comments:
Post a Comment