CA wants to tax the number of miles you drive

You Shall Not Pass!
Donator V5.0
CEJ's picture
Location: Southern California

Newspaper Article #1
Newspaper Article #2

The meat of this is as follows;[=1:f9a0e53dac]

  • CA has the 4th highest gas tax in the US
  • The funds for this are to go toward highway improvement, but it's get raided from the general fund each year due to the financial crisis the state is in.
  • The state generates enough revenue in LA County alone to broaden one of the most congested freeway segments in the US. Again, from the revenue that is generated from the gas tax, you could widen the Ventura freeway through downtown. Pricing based on the build out of the century freeway (I-105).
  • The current system rewards you for driving an efficient automobile by lowering the amount of gas you burn. The lighter the vehicle, the less tax you pay. The heavier the vehicle, the more gas you burn, and the more taxes you pay. NOTE: Heavier vehicles cause more damage to the roads so you should pay more taxes.
  • [*] The new system would place a GPS in your car and ding you for the total mileage, regardless of the efficiency of the vehicle. This after the State Assembly has beaten us over the head to buy more fuel efficient vehicles and now, this has them worried that they will loose their tax revenue.
    [/:o:f9a0e53dac]
    The Orwellian aspect of this is not to be denied. Oh well, if this happens, it's time to move.

    [/]
    Throat Specialist
    Donator
    Dr.Ghastly's picture

    I can''t see how they can do this and fight the invasion of privacy lawsuits at the same time....

    Unfortunately, if I slash my wrist with my lightsaber it cauterizes instantly. - PurEvil on emo Star Wars plots.

    You Shall Not Pass!
    Donator V5.0
    CEJ's picture
    Location: Southern California

    "Dr.Ghastly wrote:
    I can''t see how they can do this and fight the invasion of privacy lawsuits at the same time....

    *chuckle* Well, they will have an increase in tax revenue since most folks out here cannot afford to live anywhere close to where they work.

    Throat Specialist
    Donator
    Dr.Ghastly's picture

    I don''t really see this holding up in court. But then, it is TPROCA so you never know. Maybe it will go federal and they will told to shut the hell up.

    Unfortunately, if I slash my wrist with my lightsaber it cauterizes instantly. - PurEvil on emo Star Wars plots.

    You Shall Not Pass!
    Donator V5.0
    CEJ's picture
    Location: Southern California

    "Dr.Ghastly wrote:
    Maybe it will go federal and they will told to shut the hell up.

    Here''s to hoping, but I doubt it. I agree this will not likely get off the ground, but damn, it just kills me that these people have nothing better to do than come up with ideas like this.

    They should make a state wide mandate to come up with alternative ways to tax the population and then fire everyone who actually submits an idea.

    Rifle Lovin Whore
    Donator
    Mayfield's picture
    Location: Running around in circles trying to get a nut

    The insurance companies are already implementing GPS systems in order to track how/where you drive, so that they can ""give you better rates if you are a safe driver"". Yeah right. The caveats are:

    #1. This is still in the testing phase
    #2. You have to sign up for this voluntarily.

    If any gov''t dared to attempt to force a GPS system in my car, I would fight it on every line of the Bill of Rights. This could be used for anything.. but of course if you are doing nothing wrong what do you have to hide? *chuckles*

    What they *could* do is, when you get your car inspected they get your mileage. They *could* take the difference between each year, and then hike up your inspection charge based upon how much you drove. This would have no privacy concerns but still is a nasty tax.

    Be prepared for all kinds of attempts to track your driving in the future from the insurance companies.. and they will proabbly get away with it. yay!

    Playing WoW as: Vilius (70 NE Druid)

    “The only function of economic forecasting is to make astrology look respectable.” John K Galbraith

    ...of Love
    Donator V2.0
    Supertanker's picture

    I wonder what this would do to the business vehicle tax deduction? You already get to deduct state taxes from your federal taxes, so would this be in addition to the $0.35/mile (or whatever the rate is) that you can deduct now? I''d much rather my tax money go to the state than the feds, since California is a federal donor state.

    "Raise high the black flags, my children."
    -- Gebhard von Blucher.

    Executive
    Donator V2.0
    WineGlass's picture
    Location: The Copa Room at the Sands... errr... Springfield, OR

    I think something similar is being tested out in Oregon, as well.

    Plan to be spontaneous... tomorrow
    Xbox Live: DoubleFour
    Wii: 1438 1409 5584 0427 | PSN: DoubleFour | Twitter: DanOsborne
    http://notrational.blogspot.com

    Executive
    Donator
    Location: Fountain Valley, CA

    If this BS comes to pass, you can damn well bet I''ll be practicing some civil disobediance. We get a lot of whacky stuff come from the socialists in Sacremento, but this is one of the goofiest ideas I''ve seen yet. What''s more, this proposal is coming from a team of Schwarzenegger''s!

    Johnny Dangerouslier
    Donator V2.0
    GioClark's picture
    Location: Invoking the Firemind.

    They might not even have to track it via GPS.. They might just make you come in and have your mileage checked when you get your car smogged. Change it to once a year or something.

    Still a bad idea though.. A tax on movement?!? Next thing you know, we''ll all have pedometers and have to pay a tax on walking. As if that would ever fly.

    Keep the consumption tax at the gas pump where it belongs.

    The question isn't "Who is going to let me?" It's "Who is going to stop me?"

    Metaphorically Speaking
    Logan's picture
    Location: Hollywood, California

    This is why the ACLU exists. To protect us from stuff like this, not from public Nativity scenes.

    "Time traveling terrorists are no laughing matter, Malor." - *Legion* quote #30201

    XBox Live: Novopain

    0 to Zen in under 6 seconds
    Donator V4.0
    karmajay's picture
    Location: St. Pete, Florida

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/14/eveningnews/main674120.shtml

    Just a more recent atory on the issue.

    These quotes strike me as funny:

    Quote:
    ""So, if you drive 10 miles you will pay a certain fee which will be, let''s say, one tenth of what someone pays if they drive 100 miles,"" says Kim.

    Quote:
    The system could also track how often you drive during rush hour and charge higher fees to discourage peak use. That''s an idea that could break the bottleneck on California''s freeways.

    How are people not supposed to drive in ''rush hour''? Doesn''t that depend on what time everyone gets out of worK?

    I don't think I've ever said this sentence before, but man would I love to hump that butterfly.-- KrazyTaco
    One phone call and you're melting like butter over my kettle pop. -- Edwin to Mex
    2005 GWJFFL2 Champion

    All that and a
    Donator V6.0
    baggachipz's picture
    Location: do() || !do(); $try=NULL;

    Quote:
    ""So, if you drive 10 miles you will pay a certain fee which will be, let''s say, one tenth of what someone pays if they drive 100 miles,"" says Kim.

    Whips out calculator, slide-rule, abacus, and EZ-Tip-Calc
    Eegads, the math is correct! Did she think of that on the fly!?

    This whole thing is a moronic idea. Taxing people for being normal, imagine. How about instead, they stop paying idiots like this, and put the money towards building more roads, hmmmm?

    I generated a virtual world in the toilet bowl this morning.
    -- Podunk on the PS3's mystical, magical abilities

    7.62mm Headache
    Donator V6.0
    Minase's picture
    Location: Seattle, WA

    Quote:
    How are people not supposed to drive in ''rush hour''? Doesn''t that depend on what time everyone gets out of worK?
    If they really want to end rush hour, they need to start offering incentives or pressuring employers to operate at times other than 9-5. In fact, they could start with themselves - wy can''t the Oregon Dept. of Transportation start requiring employees to be present between 11 and 7 to reduce congestion?

    I never minded piracy. Anyone who minds about piracy is full of sh*t. Anyone who pirates your game wasn't going to buy it anyway! -Warren Spector

    Throat Specialist
    Donator
    Dr.Ghastly's picture

    "Minase wrote:
    Quote:
    How are people not supposed to drive in ''rush hour''? Doesn''t that depend on what time everyone gets out of worK?
    If they really want to end rush hour, they need to start offering incentives or pressuring employers to operate at times other than 9-5. In fact, they could start with themselves - wy can''t the Oregon Dept. of Transportation start requiring employees to be present between 11 and 7 to reduce congestion?
    Because that would interfere with mom''s getting their kids to soccer practice on time.

    Unfortunately, if I slash my wrist with my lightsaber it cauterizes instantly. - PurEvil on emo Star Wars plots.

    All that and a
    Donator V6.0
    baggachipz's picture
    Location: do() || !do(); $try=NULL;

    Tax moms! Tax soccer practice!

    I generated a virtual world in the toilet bowl this morning.
    -- Podunk on the PS3's mystical, magical abilities

    7.62mm Headache
    Donator V6.0
    Minase's picture
    Location: Seattle, WA

    Quote:
    Because that would interfere with mom''s getting their kids to soccer practice on time.
    So why can''t the Oregon state government change school hours from 8-3 to 12-7? They can play soccer at night.

    I never minded piracy. Anyone who minds about piracy is full of sh*t. Anyone who pirates your game wasn't going to buy it anyway! -Warren Spector

    Rifle Lovin Whore
    Donator
    Mayfield's picture
    Location: Running around in circles trying to get a nut

    I am guessing none of you have heard of the usage fees that London has imposed during the last few years, and how it has reduced gridlock.

    http://www.sfexaminer.com/articles/2005/02/15/news/20050215_ne02_london....

    If you view congested roads as an economic situation (static supply of roads, high demand at peak hours, low demand at off peak) and create a system that uses economic principles, people should have to pay for the use of a limited resource. Why shouldn''t someone who drives in NYC pay for those roads during rush hours?

    And the solution is not building more roads... I am sick and tired of paying more federal tax dollars into road maintainence and you should be too. Plus there is no more room! Have you seen a satelite picture of LA or NYC lately? There is not much of Long Island left because of crappy land management. The time has come for managing what resources we have more effectively.

    Playing WoW as: Vilius (70 NE Druid)

    “The only function of economic forecasting is to make astrology look respectable.” John K Galbraith

    Goin' Commando
    Donator V5.0
    Edwin's picture
    Location: Miami, FL

    The amount of money Miami would make from this system would be astronomical. We have the problem here of traffic occuring on EVERY street no matter the time of day. I got stuck in traffic at 1 AM for christ sakes!

    It's Bacon!
    Location: WI

    Charging based on usage can reduce traffic in some places, but it would never work anywhere. It works in metro London, and could work maybe in NYC because there''s lots of public transportation available. That would never work here, since all we have are busses, and they don''t reach everywhere.
    All this would do is punush people that have to travel to go to work.

    "Anakin, as embodied by [Hayden] Christensen, is the kind of needlessly moody kid you might see getting punched out in a Dairy Queen parking lot."
    "”Paul Tatara on SW:Episode II

    The Confused Philosopher
    Demosthenes's picture
    Location: The corner of No and Where...

    "Edwin wrote:
    The amount of money Miami would make from this system would be astronomical. We have the problem here of traffic occuring on EVERY street no matter the time of day. I got stuck in traffic at 1 AM for christ sakes!

    Oh my god... that''s awesome!

    Anyway... I don''t drive. Yes, I know, a 20-year-old with no license, no car, and no desire for either of the previous two yet. But even I think this is pretty stupid. My mom had to get a job in Downtown Cinci because that was the only place that had any positions open for her profession... is she supposed to pay extra because the EPA operates there? That''s f*cking retarded. We already have home owner''s taxes and income taxes, LET US HAVE THE TIME BETWEEN THE TWO FOR FREE!

    "Just remember that sometimes you need to allow problems to just roll like water off of a duckilama's back." ~Reaper

    Duke of York
    Donator V3.0
    Yoyoson's picture

    Kriegshund wrote:
    Charging based on usage can reduce traffic in some places, but it would never work anywhere. It works in metro London, and could work maybe in NYC because there''s lots of public transportation available. That would never work here, since all we have are busses, and they don''t reach everywhere.
    All this would do is punush people that have to travel to go to work.

    Well the article that Mayfield points out that bus usage has increased since imposing the toll:

    San Francisco Examiner wrote:
    Six months after the system went on line, traffic was reduced by 18 percent, with a 30 percent reduction in cars and 20 percent increase in buses and taxis, according to the Commission for Integrated Transport, an advisory body to the British government.

    So maybe they'd expand the bus service in your area?

    In Ultima Online I used to poison hams and leave them on the ground in cities for people to pick up and eat. I can't believe how many people thought street ham was a good thing to eat. -Elliottx

    Finger of God
    Donator V4.0
    Staats's picture
    Location: Minnesota

    Kriegshund wrote:
    Charging based on usage can reduce traffic in some places, but it would never work anywhere. It works in metro London, and could work maybe in NYC because there''s lots of public transportation available. That would never work here, since all we have are busses, and they don''t reach everywhere.
    All this would do is punush people that have to travel to go to work.

    Ditto on that. London essentially outlawed cars for the less than rich, which is well and good when public transportation is around. I shudder to think what would happen if things like this spread to the boonies.

    Xbox Live: StaatsM

    This tag has been moved to P&C
    Donator
    Paleocon's picture
    Location: Cabin John, MD

    Why do they need a GPS to do this? Why not just have quarterly odometer readings? I would think that would be a LOT less invasive privacy-wise. A GPS to track your mileage is like bugging someone's house in the name of monitoring their electricity usage.

    This is the internet! In our natural environment, atheists run in packs and have dictionaries! --- JoeBeDurndurn

    It's Jolly Time
    Donator V3.0
    Jolly Bill's picture
    Location: Allentown, PA

    CEJ wrote:

    The Orwellian aspect of this is not to be denied. Oh well, if this happens, it's time to move.

    Yup

    Kriegshund wrote:

    All this would do is punush people that have to travel to go to work.

    Don't you pay an Occupational Privilege Tax where you are? I know Pennyslvania has one. This year I (and everyone else in my county) paid $52 for the privilege of having a job.

    Hyperbole - THE BEST THING EVER

    Executive
    Donator
    Al's picture

    Paleocon wrote:
    Why not just have quarterly odometer readings? I would think that would be a LOT less invasive privacy-wise.

    Too easy to cheat. People would just disconnect their speedometer for a month or so each quarter. One of my uncles used to do that with his cars so he'd get more when he sold them. (Yes, he's an as-- I mean, yes that's not a nice thing to do. That's the way it goes though.)

    Plus that system would be very hard to automate. You'd end up needing too many people to administer the odometer checks, making it too expensive.

    Either way, this wouldn't happen. Even without the desperately needed redistricting reform it'd piss off way to many voters.

    XBox Live: Alex C

    This tag has been moved to P&C
    Donator
    Paleocon's picture
    Location: Cabin John, MD

    The potential for abuse of the system is there irrespective of what technological solution you employ. What, for instance, is stopping someone from simply putting a bucket over the GPS antenna? Truckers do that all the time to evade surveillance.

    And if any system is primarily to keep the honest people honest (the best you can hope for), why do you need one that gives a detailed record of where you drove and when? It would seem a lot less invasive to use odometer readings.

    Btw, odometer tampering violates both state and federal fraud laws. Doing so carries with it penalties a little on the stiff side.

    This is the internet! In our natural environment, atheists run in packs and have dictionaries! --- JoeBeDurndurn

    Forum Ornament
    Donator V5.0
    Location: Louisville

    Quote:
    Plus that system would be very hard to automate. You'd end up needing too many people to administer the odometer checks, making it too expensive.

    I'm sure California like a lot of other states have eCheck. And they read the odometers anyway when you get the eCheck, just piggyback on that.

    Main Gauche
    Donator V6.0
    Robear's picture

    Funny. You could make a lot of money selling removeable GPS hoods made of, say, 4mm lead sheets. Put it on once every few days. "Gosh, I don't know why the odometer doesn't match, maybe your GPS broke?"

    "Sometimes I go around saying, 'Kommisar Paulson has seized the commanding heights of the economy!'" - Paul Krugman, asked if recent changes to banking are socialistic.

    PIE MASTER
    fangblackbone's picture
    Location: bay area

    Maybe we could all start driving backwards so the government will have to pay us instead.

    If we are driving backwards what do we care about the road conditions of the streets in front of us?

    Being fangoriously devoured by a gelatinous monster.

    This tag has been moved to P&C
    Donator
    Paleocon's picture
    Location: Cabin John, MD

    Al wrote:

    Plus that system would be very hard to automate. You'd end up needing too many people to administer the odometer checks, making it too expensive.

    I don't see how an odometer reading would be hard at all to automate. The infrastructure for that is already there. First, there is self-reporting for the purpose of purchasing automobile insurance. Second, there is annual vehicle emissions testing. And third, there is the reporting of mileage during the transfer of title of vehicles. In none of these cases is a GPS ever needed to determine the efficacy of mileage.

    GPS, on the other hand, could be incredibly expensive. First, there is the purchase, maintanence, and replacement of a GPS device for every vehicle in the entire state. There is the building of an entirely new infrastructure from the ground up to accomodate the collection of that data. And finally, there is the non-trivial cost of litigating privacy lawsuits against suspicious folks like me that are convinced that this is just another ploy to collect information about where I'm going and when that isn't any of the state's business.

    This is the internet! In our natural environment, atheists run in packs and have dictionaries! --- JoeBeDurndurn