Highway Trust Fund: Send $$$
[Guest post by DRJ]
The Obama Administration has discovered that the Highway Trust Fund will go broke by August because Americans aren’t driving as much, and their change in behavior has reduced federal gas tax revenue:
“Sen. Barbara Boxer, chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said at a hearing the administration has told senators the Federal Highway Trust Fund will need an estimated $5 billion to $7 billion to keep current construction projects going.
The California Democrat said another $8 billion to $10 billion will be needed to keep the fund solvent through the year ending Sept. 30, 2010.
Transportation Department spokeswoman Jill Zuckman confirmed those figures.”
One tone deaf Republican Senator, joined by “a consensus of transportation experts and lawmakers,” agree we need to raise taxes:
“Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, said it’s clear that Congress must raise the federal gas tax, which is now 18.4 cents per gallon.
***
Two congressionally mandated commissions have called for an immediate increase in the gas tax. The first commission, which issued its report in early 2008, recommended a 40-cent per gallon hike. The second panel, which issued its report earlier this year, recommended the tax be increased 10 cents per gallon for gas and 15 cents per gallon for diesel, and that both be indexed to inflation.The two panels also said fuel taxes are not a sustainable source of revenue over the long term as drivers shift to more fuel efficient vehicles. Both panels recommended Congress find a new revenue source to pay for highway and transit programs.
Their top recommendation was to tax motorists based on how many miles they drive. That would require equipping cars and trucks with devices that use GPS technology to record not only how many miles the vehicle was driven, but whether the driving took place on interstate highways or secondary roads and whether it was during peak travel periods. The device would calculate the amount of tax owed and the bill could be downloaded.”
Taxes are the answer to everything in this Hope-and-Change world, but even Barack Obama will have trouble selling Americans on a $0.40 per gallon tax on gasoline. As for asking us to download and pay a monthly driving tax bill? Heh.
— DRJ
Rush was talking about this recently — the supposed savings from high-mileage vehicles will be taken away by higher gas taxes.
Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R., (1e4cb0) — 6/2/2009 @ 1:56 pmA tax on lawyers would probably fly.
Kevin Murphy (805c5b) — 6/2/2009 @ 1:59 pmBecause if there’s one way to get people out driving again, it’s a $.40/gal gas tax.
tjwilliams (cb1b1c) — 6/2/2009 @ 2:04 pmThe trust fund is separate from the $48 billion in transportation projects included in the economic recovery law enacted by Congress and signed by President Barack Obama earlier this year.
The second grader raised her hand and asked why are they building new roads when they can’t finish building and fixing the old ones? And why are you in our classroom?
allan (7fc978) — 6/2/2009 @ 2:04 pmDRJ: “As for asking us to download and pay a monthly driving tax bill?”
So, If I go to visit my grandson, I gotta pay for the privilege? What happened to the rest of the village raising this child? Can’t the non-drivers pitch in? After all, paying higher taxes is everyone’s PATRIOTIC DUTY and we have to “share according to our ability”
I’ll also note airplanes use fuel and that fuel tax should be chipped in with treble expense for kongress kritters – especially Speakers of the house who use a military jet to waft home as the urge arises.
GM Roper (85dcd7) — 6/2/2009 @ 2:08 pmThe sad thing is that there is a decent conservative argument to be made for raising gasoline taxes, provided it is coupled with a correlating drop in income taxes so that it works out to be a wash for the average family. I don’t get the sense that George “so sorry I screwed up the whole John Bolton thing” Voinovich quite understands that argument.
JVW (fdc303) — 6/2/2009 @ 2:15 pmThere is never a decent conservative argument to raise taxes.
EVER.
What happened to all that there stimulus money that was goinf for “shovel-ready” projects?
Guess it only matters when the shovles are being used to shovel the same old bullshit.
Dr. K (0fdffa) — 6/2/2009 @ 2:22 pm“…Guess it only matters when the shovles are being used to shovel the same old bullshit.”
Well, that is a project that George understands.
AD - RtR/OS! (f5973e) — 6/2/2009 @ 2:49 pmThe per mile tax is too difficult to administer. I would suggest a Value Added Tax on new automobiles, based on their MPG rating — the better the rating, the higher the tax — in addition to a $0.60/gallon gas tax.
the nk who wants every single idiot in Washington to fail (157acd) — 6/2/2009 @ 3:08 pmThere is never a decent conservative argument to raise taxes.
Let’s not get too Howard Jarvis about this. I take a backseat to no one in my disgust at the ridiculous tax structure on the federal level and in my home state of California, but from time to time I have agreed to temporarily increase municipal taxes and fees in order to refurbish schools, trim the trees near powerlines, and take care of various other details.
Read the Krauthammer article to which I linked; he makes a very solid case for the gas tax increase, though it doesn’t answer all the reservations that I have. Know too that he advocates the corresponding income tax credit so that the net effect on families would be zero, so instead of using the tax increase as a revenue generator this is just an attempt to switch it to a consumable item that potentially has desirable foreign policy side effects.
JVW (fdc303) — 6/2/2009 @ 3:14 pmgood luck putting a GPS on my fat chassis!
Giant Bob (3f1c9f) — 6/2/2009 @ 3:19 pmMiddle Class won’t pay more taxes.
That is what I kept hearing 95%!!!
HeavenSent (1e97ff) — 6/2/2009 @ 3:22 pmYou’re missing the best part! The mandatory GPS device, and mandatory installation of it, will be FREE from soon-to-be government-owned Tom-Tom-Garmin. FREE!
Mitch (890cbf) — 6/2/2009 @ 3:23 pmNothing is more expensive than something that is FREE!…especially if its’ from the gummint.
AD - RtR/OS! (f5973e) — 6/2/2009 @ 3:30 pmSorry, I left off my /sarcasm tag.
Mitch (890cbf) — 6/2/2009 @ 3:36 pmMitch…I recognized the sarc, but felt compelled to pile-on anyway.
AD - RtR/OS! (f5973e) — 6/2/2009 @ 3:43 pmThe ideology that runs rampant in DC will destroy this country, and all it stands for, if not stopped in its’ tracks.
First it was the Big Banks, next it was the Big Three (they got two, and they’ll slowly asphyxiate Ford). It won’t take long until, under the guise of improving the health of everyone, they go after the food-stuffs industries – can’t have any more of those sugared, fatted, salted, and otherwise good tasting food-stuffs on the shelf at Costco/Kroger/etc.
Yeah, too many people are driving little, fuel-efficient cars that don’t chew up the roads much, so we need a per-mile tax to make them pay for… er… wait a minute, here.
Eric Wilner (3936fd) — 6/2/2009 @ 3:50 pmWeren’t there persistent proposals the past several years to impose higher taxes on SUVs, ostensibly because they tear up the roads more?
The per-gallon tax scheme to fund road maintenance makes sense as long as you assume that wear and tear on the highway and fuel consumption are both roughly proportional to vehicle weight times distance driven. When someone starts demanding a completely different scheme, I tend to assume that either he’s completely out of his mind or he has some other motive that he’s not telling us about.
I wonder how OnStar will play into this now that the Obama owns it with GM.
P Johnson (e521dd) — 6/2/2009 @ 4:03 pmThat’s assuming that the Obama administration does not allow the GPS satellite constellation to fail as it appears to be on the verge of allowing.
SPQR (72771e) — 6/2/2009 @ 4:07 pmThese people have no shame whatsoever. It’s always the fault of the citizen. Drive “too much” in a good economy and you (and your vehicle) are evil, cut back in tough times and you must pay more (because you’re depriving the State).
Wait until they hit us with cap and tax.
Chris (a24890) — 6/2/2009 @ 4:26 pm#10 JVW:
I respectfully submit that there is no such thing as a temporary tax.
Prior to the Civil War, there was NO income tax; it was phased out shortly after the war ended. Once the government decided that it was proper to confiscate a portion of wages from the general public, the real damage began.
If I had the option of trimming the trees around my house or paying a tax – I’d trim the trees. Simply because the government would find another “temporary” thing that needed to be done. My village wanted to increase taxes to cover the cost of plowing sidewalks.
Thay also wanted to add a levy for “preserving green space” (that was thankfully defeated in a referendum).
Do you really believe there would be “no net effect on families”? that sounds an awful lot like Obama’s pledge to not raise taxes on amyone making less than $250K/year.
I thought you were smarter than that.
Dr. K (0fdffa) — 6/2/2009 @ 4:48 pmThere is never a decent conservative argument to raise taxes.
Actually, I thought Gore’s proposal to add a 50 cent a gallon gas tax back in the 90s was a pretty good idea if it was linked to something like the defense budget. The idea was that it would have reduced the incentive for big gas guzzling cars without the bureaucracy of the CAFE standards. They never tried to sell it and it would have been regressive, a killer for Democrats. Remember that was when gas was about $1.25 per gallon.
Part of the problem is that no one trusts them on taxes. And with good reason.
Mike K (2cf494) — 6/2/2009 @ 5:06 pmSince when is behavior modification a “good conservative argument” to raise taxes?
It’s simply another infringement upon personal freedom, with the government getting their cut.
And when the behavior becomes what is desired and revenues fall, they just look for another source.
Unfortunately, taxes have become a method to transfer personal wealth to people connected to government. Want to build a highway? Get government money and make sure you pay UNION wages (driving up the costs),
I simply cannot wait until they raise the marginal tax rate to 105% of the first dollar, and make it progressively higher.
Dr. K (0fdffa) — 6/2/2009 @ 5:13 pmToo funny:
http://site.despair.com/governmentmotors/
Dr. K (0fdffa) — 6/2/2009 @ 5:25 pmdrill drill drill, and collect a royalty on the oil. Helps the trade deficit also.
Hazy (996c34) — 6/2/2009 @ 5:46 pmGood idea! A royalty is just another word for tax, isn’t it?
Dr. K (0fdffa) — 6/2/2009 @ 5:51 pmCan’t they just print a few more billion? Or, maybe borrow it from the nearly $800,000,000,000 stimulus bill? Or find a line item for it in the $3,500,000,000,000 budget?
JD (1910a1) — 6/2/2009 @ 5:53 pmHere in Chicago we pay the highest confiscatory gas taxes in the country – one for the state, another for the county and finally one for the city. Over the past decades the tax has been proven to be regressive in nature, and it’s only punished the least well – off citizens, since they’re the ones most likely to live the farthest from their workplaces, and must commute longer distances than the average worker.
Dmac (1ddf7e) — 6/2/2009 @ 6:11 pmGeez, these people never learn.
Paul (creator of "Staunch Brayer") (290fb9) — 6/2/2009 @ 6:14 pmI think Obama is accomplishing exactly what he intends to accomplish, i.e., move as many people as possible into mass transit.
DRJ (180b67) — 6/2/2009 @ 6:24 pmGah. The only answer is to saddle up and ride a horse.
Comment by the nk who wants every single idiot in Washington to fail — 6/2/2009 @ 3:08 pm
I’m loving your new handle – gives me a giggle every time. 🙂
Dana (aedf1d) — 6/2/2009 @ 6:25 pmVoinovich. Hmmm. Where have I heard that name before? Wait, wait…Something about tears?
brobin (c07c20) — 6/2/2009 @ 6:28 pmRepublicans need to hand the RINO’s their ass in the primaries. Better a real Democrat win the general that a RINO. Enough real ones with a backbone can jam Obama and the Communists in their tracks. No one wants a lite version of a Democrat, either full strength or out the door but nobody wants a weaker beer version.
cubanbob (409ac2) — 6/2/2009 @ 8:38 pmInsanity!
Even if Obama were impeached and removed tomorrow, wouldn’t it be too late to reverse his disastrous course? How do you stop the biggest high speed train in the world when it’s lost its brakes?
Patricia (2183bb) — 6/2/2009 @ 8:41 pm“Their top recommendation was to tax motorists based on how many miles they drive. That would require equipping cars and trucks with devices that use GPS technology to record not only how many miles the vehicle was driven, but whether the driving took place on interstate highways or secondary roads and whether it was during peak travel periods.”
Taxing gas is better than taxing miles because it encourages efficiency. But taxing miles driven doesn’t need GPS. Just odometers.
imdw (c990d8) — 6/3/2009 @ 5:04 amPatterico; please in future put quotation marks around “trust fund”, since of course there is no such thing. I understand that there is a Supreme Court ruling in back of it, but whatever the reason, the gasoline tax money is spent as it comes in, and if there aren’t any problem highways it is spent on horse trails or whatever “transportation related” pork the thieves in Washington can come up with.
The problem isn’t to little tax money. The problem is too much for too long; the Political Class believes that the spigot will never get shut off.
C. S. P. Schofield (2f879a) — 6/3/2009 @ 5:52 amDiesel is already taxed more. It’s much more of a green fuel, originating from waste from the refinery process and also giving the same weight vehicles much greater MPG efficiency.
So tax the crap out of it to make people drive horribly inefficient ethanol E-85 vehicles? Oh right… it’s worse than that. They’re taxing the crap out of diesel and subsidizing E-85 by charging less than the regular tax!
You couldn’t expect worse from a government that was intentionally trying to sabotage things.
HatlessHessian (cca288) — 6/3/2009 @ 7:07 amGreat, just great. SKYNET will be able to pick us off one by one rather than risk EMP damage from a set-up nuclear exchange.
But, seriously, this is just plain creepy. Why in the world would some DoT bureaucrat need to know why I took US281 instead of IH35 to San Antonio?
furious (a74982) — 6/3/2009 @ 10:04 amWhat’s the problem? Just print more money.
jwarner (0a2a75) — 6/3/2009 @ 11:10 amWe have always accepted that highways are built/maintained with user fees – the various gas taxes. There is no need to go to an intrusive GPS system that will have its own infrastructure costs and one federal plus 50 state oversight agencies staffed by people who perform no useful service. Let’s not even think about the spoofing that could occur to avoid or minimize the GPS mileage tax. Instead, keep the gas tax as an access fee. Additionally, read the vehicle odometer and calculate a sliding scale tax based on vehicle weight, not engine displacement or size of vehicle. Why? Roadways wear out two ways. One is weathering – covered by the gas tax/access fee. The other is cumulative damage caused by the weight of the vehicles on the roadway. This damage is highly non-linear with weight – varies by weight to the 4th power. A five axle 25 ton truck doesn’t do 12.5 times the damage of a two axle 2 ton car. It does 1500 times the damage. Trucks will be hit by this and for the liberals, so will SUVs. A 3 tonner will pay 6x the rate of a 2 ton car. And you can pick up the appropriate fee owed by electrics, if they ever happen in any significant numbers. And because the truck owners will pass along the tax, non-car owning urban dwellers will also pay their fair share for the privilege of having the necessities of life delivered by road vehicles.
chuckR (305825) — 6/3/2009 @ 4:46 pmchuckR – Why do you just assume that raising taxes is the appropriate way to do things?
JD (45f9ae) — 6/3/2009 @ 4:52 pmEvery state that requires periodic inspection, and/or smog testing, already has the means to check the mileage covered by licensed vehicles, since that data must be included on the inspection report.
AD - RtR/OS! (4a0d27) — 6/3/2009 @ 5:27 pmThey already have the data, they just don’t have the political cover to use it, YET!