What a bunch of maroons - CBO on mileage taxes
I normally like the Congressional Budget Office -- they are amazingly non-partisan for an organization linked so closely with Congress but... This little bit of lunacy is over the top.
From
CNS News:
CBO Sees Benefits in Taxing Motorists Based on Miles DrivenA new Congressional Budget Office study says taxing motorists based on the number of miles they drive would be a fair and "efficient" way to charge motorists for the real cost of using the nation's highways. "Vehicle-miles traveled" taxes (or VMT taxes) also would provide a strong incentive for people to drive less.
Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood floated the idea of a VMT tax one month after President Obama took office, but Obama�s spokesman immediately shot it down. "It is not and will not be the policy of the Obama administration," White House press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters in February 2009.
But that was then.
The CBO study, released this week, says the federal government pays in part for about 25 percent of the nation's highways, which carry about 85 percent of all road traffic. Right now, federal spending on those highways is funded mainly by taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel, but those taxes do not raise enough money to support either the current federal spending on highways -- or the higher spending levels that some transportation planners advocate.
The CBO said most of the costs of using a highway, including pavement damage, congestion, accidents, and noise, are tied more closely to the number of miles traveled than to the amount of fuel consumed.
WTF?
More:
While raising fuel taxes would bring in more money, the CBO notes that a "fundamental" problem would remain: "By themselves, fuel taxes cannot provide a strong incentive for people to avoid overusing highways," the report said.
On the other hand, VMT taxes would have most motorists paying "substantially more than they do now -- perhaps several times more," the report said. "Such a system would maximize the efficiency of highway use by discouraging trips for which costs exceed benefits."
Tell me what drugs they are taking so that I can avoid this kind of stupid...
Parts of the government are talking about forcing automobile manufacturers to produce cars that are more fuel efficient.
Parts of the government are talking about forcing car buyers to purchase cars that are more fuel efficient.
Parts of the government are talking about forcing people to drive less.
This idiotic proposal removes the market incentive for people to desire more fuel efficient vehicles.
I own a big Ford F350 truck. Modern diesel engine, great ride and it gets about 15-20 in the city and 25-30 on the highway. If I fill my tank, I know that I will get about a 500 mile range. I use the truck for work and there is no way I could work with a Prius or other small car.
If the feds decide to meddle in my day to day life and make me report mileage or attach a 'black box' to my truck (HELL NO!), it will not change my driving habits one bit. I do what I need to do for work and we generally drive when we visit family -- giving up on flying with all the hassles.
If the feds want more highway money, they should increase their 18.4 cents/gallon tax to something that would temporarily sustain their greed. The states have their
fingers in the pie as well with
WA State taking 28�/gallon.
And of course, the reason why is that they want so much money -- "
On the other hand, VMT taxes would have most motorists paying "substantially more than they do now -- perhaps several times more," the report said. "Such a system would maximize the efficiency of highway use by discouraging trips for which costs exceed benefits."" -- that every driver would howl and de-elect anyone who voted for this turd if it was put into service as a tax at the pump.
We live in a time of soft tyranny and we need to get politically active. I vote and I talk with people about ideas.
Posted by DaveH at March 25, 2011 7:40 PM