Member of the reality-based community of progressive (not anonymous) Massachusetts blogs
So Patrick has decided to propose a gas tax increase instead of a toll hike. I generally approve, with some caveats.
1) A $.27 increase is going to cause a political uproar. I suspect that’s sort of the point - pick a pie in the sky amount, expecting people to talk you down. If you started at $.11, chances were that the legislature might cut that amount. However, personally, I don’t object to the $.27 increase (though, all at once? that might be difficult for people). I think gas tax should be over a $1 per gallon, if only to discourage the use of gas. Suddenly a hybrid pays for itself much faster, doesn’t it?
The only thing I hate about the gas tax is that it’s rather regressive - the people who tend to drive distances are the ones working for a living, and many already just barely making ends meet. If much of that money went towards improving regional and statewide public transit, that helps. But it’ll hurt working class folks more than the wealthy, because they use the roads just about as much but have less disposable income.
On the other hand, isn’t preserving our planet worth at least that much per gallon?
2) The second caveat, and the bigger stickler for me, is this:
Tolls would be removed west of Route 128 by the end of next year. Tolls within Route 128, from Weston to Boston, would come down as the state shifts to a program of tracking — and charging — all Massachusetts drivers based on the miles they travel.
Trips would be measured by a chip installed in a vehicle inspection sticker as soon as 2014, and in-state drivers would receive a gas-tax refund for their mileage to avoid double payments. Out-of-staters would remain subject to the higher gasoline tax.
Now, look, we all carry cell phones and GPS systems and by golly, we are so trackable in this day and age that whole companies are devoted to collecting that data and selling it. But the idea of such a large database of where I’ve been all year in my car, well, that’s a little scary. If there were guarantees that data would be deleted after the tax surcharge figured out, and NOT collected to give out to other agencies or even given to police for investigations, I might be assuaged. The problem is, even if you start out with such assurances in the law, there’s no guarantee that the law won’t change (say, if there’s a push for “law and order” in some dystopian future). Of course, something being in law doesn’t mean it won’t get abused, as we found out under the Bush administration, and even if you trust this guy in charge now, in five years from now, or ten, who’s going to be at the reigns?
It’s just all a little too Big Brother to me. Get rid of the tolls entirely, don’t stick us with a system that could potentially be so badly abused. (Then again, with all the OnStar type of services people use these days, and everything else, maybe we’ll all be wired up one way or other anyway…)
It is true, that like a cigarette tax, you put such a tax on gas to discourage its use, and with diminishing use, comes diminishing revenues. But I don’t think we have to worry about that for a few years yet…unfortunately.
So there you have it. Any thoughts?
(If you want to hear us hash out our thoughts more thoroughly, check out our 2:30pm podcast this afternoon on LeftAhead, where this will be sure to be discussed. Listen live here.)
[powered by WordPress.]
43 queries. 0.689 seconds
February 10th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
The proposal to track vehicles should be the end of the career of the politician who tries it.
February 10th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
My god, we agree on something..
Its a camels nose under the tent thing.
First theres a database.. then along comes one single case of
“this little girl was raped at so-and-so park, and this database proves that such-and-such a car was there at that time, shouldn’t we be able to use that data?”
And suddenly, every divorce case will include searches of automobile traffic history to see where someone was at what time, speeding tickets will be basically issued by your own car… causing a whole list of issues regarding witnessing against yourself, etc.
Oh, and on the gas tax, as I’ve said earlier, I live on the border. I get mine in Pelham anyways.
February 10th, 2009 at 2:22 pm
Shawn: I am a libertarian liberal. You are a libertarian conservative. Of *course* there are things we can agree on! A whole range of them, in fact.
February 10th, 2009 at 2:28 pm
Lynne, I’m a fairly casual reader so excuse me if you’ve touched on this. As a group of Greater Lowell residents, what do you think about Beacon Hill, which is as just about as deep inside Massachusetts borders as is physically possible, passing or at least considering, one tax after another that negatively impacts the business viability of the Merrimack Valley in particular? Sometimes I feel like we’re sort of second class citizens up here, when there are something like 600,000 people living along the Merrimack River.
I’m not suggesting that many people are going to drive an extra five miles to save money on gas (I’m assuming a normal tax burden increase of about $250 a year due to this tax), but, they very well might be more inclined to fill up while they’re up shopping in Nashua instead of waiting till they get home. Or, people that live in NH and work in MA might wait till they are home more often to get gas. I’m far more worried about increased taxes on things people already drive for, like liquor and cigarettes. Sin tax or not, this translates to profit and tax revenue losses for us.
Look at what’s going on at Town Fair Tire…unbelievable. Additionally, the Commonwealth is very thoroughly wording the “Use Tax” section on this year’s web tax return, telling people they owe taxes on things like cameras and computers bought out of state - yeah, right.
February 10th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
Someone mark the date! Lynne and Shawn agree! I feel faint — get the smelling salts!
February 11th, 2009 at 4:46 pm
The truly poor buy much, much less gasoline than middle class people, when you consider the regressiveness of this tax.
Agreed on the tracking transponder. Major foul.
Perhaps the proposal to put tolls at the border will cut down on people crossing the border to by gas. heh
February 17th, 2009 at 8:56 am
Once again proving that liberals believe that taxation used as social engineering is appropriate.
Taxation is only properly used as a means to fund the few but necessary functions of government.
For most normal families, a Prius is not a viable choice for a vehicle. It is too small for anyone over 5′6″ to sit in the back seat if the anyone up front is over 5′6.” There is not a vehicle made that gets over 30MPg that fits my family.
But as it typical of liberals, the approach is always punish those who make choice you don’t agree with even when they choice you do approve are not valid options.
I can’t afford to have a different vehicle for every task. I can’t buy a car that I can fit up front and drive to work and a separate car that my children can also fit in. And because if that liberals want to punish me. What’s next? A tax on children who grow too fast? How much would my 13 year old son that is 5′11″ cost me?
By the way, how many posters here check the “tax me more” box on their state income tax forms? Last published number was that only 6% state wide do so.