[mobile site, backup mobile]
[SoapBlox Help]
Menu & About Calitics

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

- About Calitics
- The Rules (Legal Stuff)
- Event Calendar
- Calitics' ActBlue Page
- Calitics RSS Feed
- Additional Advertisers
Daily Email Summary


View All Calitics Tags Or Search with Google:
 
Web Calitics
Event Calendar
February 2010
(view month)
S M T W R F S
* 01 02 03 04 05 06
07 08 09 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 * * * * * *
<< (add event) >>

Wire Services
Advertise Liberally

MBA Member

Blue CA Ad Network
Join Our eMail List
Email:

Photobucket

Green vehicle fees: an idea whose time has come

by: David Dayen

Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 09:52:23 AM PDT


The governor exacerbated the budget problem on his first day in office by slashing the vehicle license fee and denying the state billions of dollars in revenue.  He could return money to the state's coffers without going back on his promise, by hewing to his supposed environmental credentials and following the will of the people:

Californians support the idea of charging "green" vehicle fees that would make drivers of gas guzzlers pay higher taxes and offer discounts for those driving less-polluting vehicles, according to a survey by a transportation researcher at San Jose State University.

The state now charges drivers registration and licensing fees and gasoline taxes at rates that do not take into account vehicles' pollution levels. But the survey, conducted by Asha Weinstein Agrawal, a research associate with the university's Mineta Transportation Institute, found that Californians would support a variety of taxes and fees to raise money for transportation improvements as well as combat global warming, including:

-- Raising vehicle registration fees, which now average $31, to an average of $62 and having higher-polluting vehicles pay higher rates and cleaner cars lower rates.

-- Offering rebates of up to $1,000 for people who buy new cars that emit very little pollution and levying a surcharge of as much as $2,000 on those purchasing gas hogs.

-- Levying a mileage-based tax that would replace the 18-cents-per-gallon gasoline tax. The per-mile amount would vary depending on how much a vehicle polluted the air.

"The public is very supportive of these green taxes and fees," said Agrawal. "This shows that it is realistic to improve the way we collect transportation taxes in this state."

You could even make this revenue-neutral for all I care and it would still have a meaningful impact.  But if the budget could be improved and the air quality at the same time, all the better.  The governor talks a good game on global warming but hasn't yet called for the kind of action necessary.  This could be coupled with a direct investment in mass transit and incentives for transit riders, so that those who can't afford low-emitting vehicles aren't adversely affected.  We're not going to get rid of the car culture in one fell swoop, so encouraging consumers to buy clean energy vehicles while implementing the proper smart growth and transit policies (along with massive renewable infrastructure) will get us there in stages with a meaningful reduction in emissions right at the beginning.  The people want it, the government needs to give it to them.

David Dayen :: Green vehicle fees: an idea whose time has come
Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Well, if Republicans insist (0.00 / 0)
on call taxes punitive, they might as well "punish" those who choose to drive such cars rather than punishing the State's Education system and our CHILDREN.

Crazy isn't it?

OC Progressive
Progress, not perfection!


One comment (8.00 / 1)
Taxing cars according to pollution is certainly a great idea, but it needs to be coordinated with better public transit.  Many lower income Californians rely on older model, polluting cars to get to work. We need to ensure that these folks can still get to work reliably.

In the end, the people that we really need to tax are those who can afford to buy clean cars but choose otherwise.  Those who purchase big SUVs so that they can "ride higher" or what not. Large, new cars need to bear their true costs.

I'm proud to work for Kamala Harris for AG.


Agreed (0.00 / 0)
And many who have to drive further do so because they can't afford to live anywhere closer to where they work.  It's a very complicated issue and the State of California has failed to meet the needs of it's workers.

If I were to take public transportation, it would add a good hour or two to my day even though I only live 10 miles from my work.  People are already crunched for time.

And privatizing roads isn't going to help anything either, then it's only those who can afford the tolls that will use it and the rest of us get congested freeways.

OC Progressive
Progress, not perfection!


[ Parent ]
Which is pretty much what I said (0.00 / 0)
In the line "This could be coupled with a direct investment in mass transit and incentives for transit riders, so that those who can't afford low-emitting vehicles aren't adversely affected."  

The rebate/tax plan presumably would only be applied to new cars, and those too poor to buy a new car wouldn't be affected.  And a mass transit rebate for qualifying riders could help as well.  I would also support a "turn in your jalopies" program.  We actually have a lot of cars impounded or donated that we can juggle to ensure the cleanest possible fleet on the roads.  There are a lot of creative solutions to this.


[ Parent ]
Definitely a good idea (0.00 / 0)
It's long past time for drivers to actually start paying for the numerous costs their activity creates. And it should be no surprise that Californians support this - the average voter has long been far out in front of Arnold on both fiscal and environmental policy.

The mileage based tax is something that has been considered elsewhere, such as in Oregon, but it runs the very real risk of collecting less money for the transportation fund - which is going to be needed to build the kind of mass transit alternatives folks will need to actually be able to get out of their cars.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave


Mileage vs. Gasoline Tax (0.00 / 0)
Some of this makes a lot of sense but I honestly can't see why it would be of any benefit to replace the gasoline tax with something else (e.g. a mileage tax, whatever that is).  A per-gallon gasoline tax automatically gives a benefit to cars with higher miles-per-gallon.  A mileage-based tax wouldn't do so unless made to do so.  Plus, the gasoline tax is dead-simple for the state to collect.  How is the mileage tax, whatever that is, going to be collected?  Whatever tax scheme is devised it must be simple and preferably transparent to those paying the tax.  People don't object to taxes that are fair and support worthwhile goals, but they do object to unnecessary hassles and red tape.

Calitics in the Media
Archives & Bookings
The Calitics Radio Show
Calitics Premium Ads
Photobucket


Support Calitics:

Shop on Amazon.com

Advertisers

California Friends
Shared Communities
Resources
California News
Progressive Organizations
The Big BlogRoll

Referrals
Technorati
Google Blogsearch
Powered by: SoapBlox