Taxing Drivers By The Mile 1758Matthew Russotto) Of course they do - through sales taxes, property taxes, and other indirect means. Of course, this means that NON-drivers also pay...
The argument in favor of GPS tracking is that then they will only charge you for the miles you travel in your state. For example, imagine OR pbuttes this, and then you take a roadtrip from Portland,OR to Portland, ME. 7000 miles later you get back to OR with your transponder. You pull up to the pump, and suddenly they charge you $24.00 for gas and $87.00 for miles. GAAAK!
And these politicians aren't going to charge *you* anything to get the transponder - they'll just make it mandatory equipment on new cars, and let the automakers pay. Yeah, right - guess who ultimately pays for that? Either the cost is pbutted on to the consumer, or the automaker goes broke and the cost is pbutted on to the newly unemployed. Not to mention your 401(k).
If you need more money, raise the gas tax. Index it to keep it "constant dollars" - either make it a gas sales tax by percentage, or better yet index it to general inflation (which removes the vagarities of oil price fluctuations).
As far as mbutt transit, that generally costs more to provide than automobiles. It also doesn't necessarily go where you need to go - ever try to bring home a dozen 2x4's from Home Depot on the bus? or 15 bags of groceries? If mbutt transit suddenly gained millions of riders, there would be even less money raised through gas or mile taxes - so now how you gonna pay for it? (Remember, fares *don't* cover expenses.)
If congestion pricing is really needed, then just make the roads rush-hour-only toll. You can't get on that freeway from 6:00-9:00 am unless you have an EZ-Pbutt. Gains gov't the money, makes it optional for the driver - but that's probably too simple.
