Go Back   Club Lexus Forums > General Forums > The Clubhouse > The Debate Forum

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-16-04, 08:36 PM   #1
ylen13
Driver School Candidate
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: California
Posts: 12
Default charge by mile, big brother comming

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...=la-home-local

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.

The governor and other top aides are exploring ways to alter our gasoline-driven society: Schwarzenegger wants more hybrid and hydrogen-fueled cars, and his new EPA secretary, Terry Tamminen, is writing a book about ending the use of oil entirely, calling it a "dinosaur."

For the state budget, the trend looks grim. Revenue from the gas and diesel fuel tax — about $3.3 billion — will have declined 8% between 1998 and 2005, adjusted for inflation, but the amount of miles traveled by cars and trucks on California roads has increased 16%, according to a February report by the legislative analyst. The California Transportation Commission has said the state needs about $100 billion in road and freeway repairs.

The appointment of Joan Borucki, a Democrat and longtime Caltrans official, has placed an advocate for a per-mile transportation tax within the top ranks of the Schwarzenegger administration.

She included the notion in the California Performance Review, a top-to-bottom audit ordered by Schwarzenegger last year. Borucki was the leader on the transportation section and pushed the idea of an odometer-based fee at an August public meeting in Riverside.

The idea has been circulating because more Californians are driving fuel-efficient cars, the review warned. Less gasoline consumed means less money for the state's coffers from the gas tax — even though people are driving and damaging roads just as much. "Electric vehicles, fuel-cell vehicles or other future fuels would not be taxed under" the existing per-gallon system, the report said.

The administration said Borucki was not available Monday, but she said in a statement that she wants to transform the DMV "into a customer-friendly, service-oriented unit of our government." Borucki, who was on the California Transportation Commission for two years, still needs state Senate confirmation for the $123,255-a-year job. She started at Caltrans in 1980 and worked her way up to manager of new technology and deputy district director for planning.

"She's devoted, and she's knowledgeable about the state's situation," said Elizabeth Deakin, a policy expert with the UC Transportation Center who has known her for 15 years. "She understands the state's concerns about wanting good service, and she understands technology."

In Orange and San Diego counties, some freeways are using what is called "congestion pricing" — vehicles pay to use certain lanes at peak hours. And two similar systems are being tested in Oregon.

Around Seattle, the Puget Sound Regional Council is placing global positioning devices in 500 cars to monitor where they drive — and then calculating a usage fee based on the roads they use and the times they drive. In Eugene, Ore., test cars are being outfitted with tracking devices that link up with special gas pumps around the area.

Currently, cars with high fuel efficiency and large trucks don't generate enough revenue from fuel taxes to pay for the burden they place on roads, said Randall Pozdena, managing director of ECONorthwest, an economic consulting firm. A large truck, he said, can do as much damage on a city street as 10,000 cars, but it still pays the same amount of per-gallon gasoline tax, assuming the gas was purchased in California in the first place.

Drivers "can start allocating how much time they spend on each type of street," said Andrew Poat, a former Caltrans official who works for the city of San Diego. It could get even more detailed: Large trucks could be charged higher fees for using residential streets rather than more fortified freeways.

"It's just like water. We're trying to get water and energy meters to tell you what time of day you use energy. You use energy at peak hours on a really hot day, you pay more for that…. We need to start sending those price signals to users."

Still, privacy advocates worry about "usage creep" — like how the driver's license has evolved into official identification for nearly everyone. The information collected about mileage potentially could be subpoenaed in a court case or used to track someone without their knowledge, they fear.

But Pozdena and Deakin, the transportation experts, said most people don't care about this issue as much as privacy advocates, especially when presented with the possibility that as much as 25% of the road could be used by hybrids in the future. Drivers of non-hybrid cars have said it's unfair to pay the larger burden of gasoline taxes, they said.

"While some people are concerned about civil liberties, most people are not," Deakin said. "One of the things we found from focus groups and surveys is that most people said if the government wanted to track you, they have other ways to do it."
ylen13 is offline  
Old 11-17-04, 01:11 AM   #2
nthach
Lexus Champion
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: California
Posts: 2,105
Default


I think they should just tax SUVs more then, they do most of the damage to the road.
nthach is offline  
Old 11-17-04, 05:46 AM   #3
LexRoc
Lead Lap
 
LexRoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: New York
Posts: 600
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by nthach

I think they should just tax SUVs more then, they do most of the damage to the road.
Ive heard people complain about that before, but never provide any evidence to back the claim. Is it even true??
__________________
____________________________
LexRoc is offline  
Old 11-17-04, 06:43 AM   #4
Lil4X
Ol' Inkslinger
 
Lil4X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Houston
Posts: 6,963
Default "Granola" thinking

Quote:
Originally posted by nthach

I think they should just tax SUVs more then, they do most of the damage to the road.
Doesn't the gas tax already do that?

Some wonk wants to produce revenue for the state by placing a "tracking device" on cars? At what cost? Forget the cost of the "device" and installation, what about the cost of monitoring? Then you have the costs of tracking, billing, and administration . . .

This kind of insane fiscal policy sounds familiar. Has former governor Davis found a new job yet?
__________________
Lil4X is offline  
Old 11-17-04, 07:52 AM   #5
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia
Posts: 25,969
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by LexRoc
Ive heard people complain about that before, but never provide any evidence to back the claim. Is it even true??
No...it is NOT true. Most of the VEHICLE-induced road damage is not done by SUV's as we know them, but by large trucks and 18-wheelers....especially overloaded ones. But much MORE damage is done by water freezing and thawing and road salt......a BIG problem in snow-belt areas, but which in CA you usually don't have to worry about at low elevations. In CA the worst road damage is usually done by earthquakes and landslides.
mmarshall is offline  
Old 11-17-04, 12:54 PM   #6
EmeraldLexuSC3
Lexus Champion
 
EmeraldLexuSC3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: California
Posts: 2,458
Default

California better start investing/building infrastructures for alternative transportation, (i.e. high speed and local city rail systems) and take examples of Europe's transportation systems! As well as changing the mind sets of California drivers. The day they start imposing a "drive by mile tax"...is the day I move out of Cali!
__________________
Impress your Lex, Dress Appropriately
  • 93 Lexus SC300 -SOLD
  • 00 Lexus GS400
  • 01 GMC Yukon SLT
  • 09 Dodge Challenger R/T

Last edited by EmeraldLexuSC3; 11-17-04 at 12:54 PM.
EmeraldLexuSC3 is offline  
Old 11-17-04, 04:36 PM   #7
nthach
Lexus Champion
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: California
Posts: 2,105
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by mmarshall
No...it is NOT true. Most of the VEHICLE-induced road damage is not done by SUV's as we know them, but by large trucks and 18-wheelers....especially overloaded ones. But much MORE damage is done by water freezing and thawing and road salt......a BIG problem in snow-belt areas, but which in CA you usually don't have to worry about at low elevations. In CA the worst road damage is usually done by earthquakes and landslides.
Well, in my city, there are roads where nothing over 3 tons is allowed, even dial-a-ride vans aren't allowed, Now with people in their Hummers and Suburbans, the roads now have potholes and cracks.
nthach is offline  
Old 11-17-04, 06:25 PM   #8
bitkahuna
Going with the flow...
 
bitkahuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: FL
Posts: 29,973
Default

Sounds like such policies would encourage people to find ways to register cars out of state and thus avoid the tracking.

But resistance is futile - it's all down hill from here in terms of the 'fun' you can have on roads. Pretty soon there will be no need for speed enforcement with actual police officers using radar and laser. Instead the car will simply report the driver automatically when speed exceeds the limit (calculated by GPS) and the fine will be *taken* from the driver's account. If the driver wants to fight it there will be a process but it will be basically futile.

Sorry guys, the party's ending.
__________________
TLN #911 President * Stop Global Whining * Star Evil Gnoma Su
personal blog infinite competition blog
bitkahuna is online now  
Old 11-17-04, 07:32 PM   #9
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia
Posts: 25,969
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by nthach
Well, in my city, there are roads where nothing over 3 tons is allowed, even dial-a-ride vans aren't allowed, Now with people in their Hummers and Suburbans, the roads now have potholes and cracks.
Yes, Hummers and Suburbans put a little more stress on roads than regular cars do, but nothing like big 18-wheelers and severe snow / ice / salting conditions. When was the last time these roads in your city were repaired or repaved? ANY road......trucks or not......will need resurfacing after some years. The state almost went bankrupt under Gray Davis. Though it is starting to recuperate, it is very likely that road maintenance has suffered in the meantime.
Case in point.....Washington, DC's inner-city streets don't see much, if any, large trucks. They are all out in the suburbs and on the Beltway.....but, thanks to an incredibly poorly run city government for years, they became literally some of the worst roads in the country.
mmarshall is offline  
Old 11-17-04, 07:39 PM   #10
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia
Posts: 25,969
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by EmeraldLexuSC3
California better start investing/building infrastructures for alternative transportation, (i.e. high speed and local city rail systems) and take examples of Europe's transportation systems! As well as changing the mind sets of California drivers. The day they start imposing a "drive by mile tax"...is the day I move out of Cali!
London already has one...you pay the American equivalent of $8 to go in and out of certain places in the city by car.

As far as CA building more alternatives......hasn't the extensive fault system underground and the earthquake danger prevented more subways from being built...and extensions of existing ones? I ask because I'm 3000 miles away on the East Coast...I'm not really that familiar with CA's policies on this.
mmarshall is offline  
Old 11-18-04, 12:01 AM   #11
Vegassc400
Lexus Champion
 
Vegassc400's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Glued to my desk.
Posts: 3,742
Default

Just when I thought too many people from CA were moving to Vegas (close to 6000 new people every month and mostly from CA) here comes another reason for more people to move.
__________________
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v679/judoguy/sig2.jpg
The more you sweat in training the less you bleed in combat.

2005 Toyota Sequoia Limited
1995 SC400. Platinum with black interior.
Performance - Custom exhaust. Injen Intake. CD/Slotted Rotors.
Exterior - 19" Racing Hart M5's. BFGoodrich g-Force T/A KDW tires. Painted Engine Bay. D-Speed clear corners.
Interior - Pioneer DVD Head Unit. Sylvania Silverstar headlights. Lextech Gauge Cluster. Leatherseats.com Two Tone.
Vegassc400 is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:18 PM.

Go

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0
Copyright © 2000-2008 Internet Brands, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Terms of Use | JOBS