Posted on 11/16/2004 11:58:34 AM PST by Kaslin
If you drive a car in California, you could soon find yourself being taxed for it.
That's because the state's Department of Motor Vehicles chief wants to tax drivers for every mile they drive.
Newly appointed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to head up the DMV, Democrat Joan Borucki has long advocated a tax-by-the-mile scheme.
Schwarzenegger hasn't signed off on the plan, but he appointed Borucki. What does that say?
According to the L.A. Times, her scheme would require each car be fitted with a mileage tracking device that beamed a signal to a GPS satellite. A driver's tax would then be calculated based on total miles driven.
The plan would supplant the state's current means of deriving revenue from drivers – the 18-cent-a-gallon gasoline tax.
But the scheme is illustrative of the failure of the liberal-socialist welfare state mentality.
For years, liberal California environmentalists have been pressuring their Democratic allies in state government to tighten automotive emissions and gas mileage standards.
Hence, for years California residents have been penalized for wanting to drive any vehicle larger than a beer can with a motor.
Now that residents have finally responded to all this pressure and penalization by buying high-mileage, cleaner-burning vehicles, the welfare socialists in state government are afraid the current gasoline tax won't be sufficient to maintain the state's roadways.
They can't get the money from other budgetary line items because it's all earmarked for entitlements, such as paying for education, medical care and welfare benefits for the state's vast illegal alien population.
So, the end result is all of those Californians who were pressured into buying and driving tin cans will have done so for naught, as a driving tax generates revenue on miles driven, not gallons of fuel bought.
That means, as one opponent of the plan told the Times, it won't make any difference if a driver is operating a Toyota Prius hybrid or a Hummer.
There are also privacy concerns, say opponents of this scheme. A global tracking system device on your automobile will allow government snoops to monitor you wherever you drive – which may be the underlying goal of this entire plan anyway.
The liberal answer to this constitutional privacy concern is to ask, "If you're not doing anything wrong, what are you worried about?"
Never mind the fact that in America, without provocation, the government has no need or right to track you in the first place.
On another note, the air in California's major cities is smoggy and dirty, with no relief in sight, no pun intended. What's next – a tax on every breath of air?
Bet me.
I doubt they will repeal the gas tax if this passes.
Is there a tax Arnold does not like?
Defeat the Hatch Amendment. I prefer Arnold
on the big screen.
MV
Good, they deserve it. They keep sending Leftwing Senators who vote against ANWR and any sensible energy bill deserve to be taxed out the a$$.
Go ahead and sign off on another tax hike, Arnold. Watch business FLEE the state.
It's not likely that they mean that each car will be fitted with an antenna powerful enough to broadcast to a satellite. It's more probable that the plan is to include a GPS device in every car, which can determine distance travelled using the GPS satellites, then broadcast a report (probably by data over a cell phone call) to the taxing authority.
It's a common misconception that GPS satellites can track anyone - all they do is broadcast their position, and your GPS device figures out where it is by the angle of the satellites. The GPS device doesn't tell the satellites anything, though, any more than your car radio reports back to the radio station.
Cool! Cheap (low-tax) gas for visitors, and the Loonies get to suffer even more!
I am with you...Arnold on the big screen, ONLY.
We are losing our rights by the day
Of course this only applies to liberal schemes - the Patriot Act does not warrant the same argument...
-Eric
Everyone in So Cal knows that when we get in our car, we never go anywhere...we just sit there. Takes 1 1/2 hours of driving time to go 16 miles. I'd be all for it if they built a decent public transportation system in this stinkin' town.
The fact that so many people must commute is because they can't afford to live near where they must work. They must do this in order to survive the higher cost of living. So now they want to add another tax on these same people?
If the state does bring a "driving tax" that is monitored by GPS, don't believe for a minute that they won't penalize drivers of heavier vehicles. They'll simply tie the GPS tracking ID to the registered vehicle and bingo they know what kind of car you have and can charge more per mile because the vehicle is heavier.
If they don't do it at first, give it some time. Money hungry socialists don't know when to stop.
Further, if I drive an SUV or other gas guzzler I AM PAYING MORE TAX PER MILE than drivers of sedans or of more fuel-efficient vehicles.
So how would this new plan be an improvement? Let me guess:
1. The "tax per mile" would be higher, on average, than the current gas tax is.
2. The penalty-per-mile for driving an SUV would no doubt be higher than it is under the current tax-per-gallon scheme.
And one question: How would out-of-staters be taxed? Their cars won't be equipped with the devices. Nor would trucks from Mexico.
Actually, can't they get the milage from the onboard diagnostics. Just download the milage when they do the emission testing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.