Big Brother is riding shotgun: Oregon blames mandatory GPS for cars on hybrids
Where does the state government get the money to maintain roads? Gas taxes. What if your car does not use gas? How is the state suppose to know if an electric car is using the road? Some states are planning on requiring GPS units in cars, tracking the distances you travel, then tax you for every mile you drive. Oregon just finished testing a year-long "virtual tollway" and will probably be the first state to have a GPS car tracking system working. Oregon's FAQ for the program explains why state-mandated GPS in cars is all the Prius' fault:
- "Fuel efficiency of Oregon's automobile fleet has eroded fuel tax revenues over the past 30 years. Further improvement of automobile fuel efficiency, particularly with the adoption of the hybrid electric vehicle engine, will have an even more dramatic effect on fuel tax revenues in the not-too-distant future."
- "From the transportation revenue perspective, fuel-efficient vehicles produce less fuel tax revenue because they consume less gasoline. While it is good policy to preserve our environment and our resources, it is not good policy to let transportation revenues decline so that the transportation system cannot be properly maintained or modernized. This may sound like a policy contradiction, but it need not be."
[Source: USA Today, Oregon DOT]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Willow wood 4:05PM (5/29/2008)
The shocking thing is there is such bureaucratic waste at ODOT and lack of any will to pave roads. One half the current two year budget (over $3 billion) is sufficient to re-pave every mile of state run road with pavement thick enough to last 25 years!
Let's look at corruption and impotence in government before finding new ways to bring about the Soviet state in a new continent.
Reply
ddf 12:37AM (5/27/2009)
The gov is also requiring your biometric data... Yeah, your drivers license is being scanned in to a database and compared to other photos... Sounds great doesn't it? Article in USA todays talks about the requirement to not smile.. Um what about your privacy?
I do not need the GOv tracking my car. Figure it out people.
Reply
billNW 11:27AM (9/25/2007)
This might make sense if they adjusted the tax for vehicle weight, so that heavy trucks and SUV's paid for the 99% of the damage they do to the road, but I'm sure the legislature will figure out a way around that. Mandating lower insurance rates for low-mileage vehicles would be possible too, but, again, don't hold your breath.
Reply
Rick 11:30AM (9/25/2007)
Wow. I'm in such dismay that I can't think of anything to say about this other than wow.
Reply
Snowdog 11:53AM (9/25/2007)
Inanity in action. Instead of doing the sane thing and increasing fuel taxes and which by the way are fair, since size/mass of vehicle is a much larger determinant of fuel consumption and road damage. Hybrids make some difference in fuel economy, but it primarily mass that significantly affects fuel economy. Ever see the real world fuel economy numbers on Hybrid SUVs? Perhaps 1MPG improvement.
So instead of sane/fair/encourage conservation, they put a GPS in every car and make small cars pay twice as much for fuel at the pump (in one scheme I saw, you pay at the pump).
It is a total disincentive for driving fuel efficient vehicles.
Reply
guy guy 12:00PM (9/25/2007)
Why not attach an EV fee (tax) at the DMV every year?
Reply
Evan Brom 1:23PM (9/25/2007)
What about when your car is being towed? Should one be charged a tax for that? What about when my car is on a private road / race track those also are non taxable miles.
Reply
MarkR 12:14PM (9/25/2007)
Another point to ponder. I like to do off road driving. Someday when/if I have vehicle that can't be taxed by a fuel tax. Would they be able to tell how much of my driving was on Public maintained roads or not? Because if I drive 500 miles or so off public maintained roads I sure as heck don't want to pay for those 500 miles to maintain roads I didn't drive on. This is another reason not to use the odometer.
There isn't an easy solution to this problem. and I totally disagree with Snowdog. While hybrids certainly shouldn't be double taxed, they should pay there fair share to maintain the roads. Which includes use of the vehicle on public roads while running on electric or other fuels that don't collect a highway tax. God forbid, Maybe all "public maintained" roads should be toll roads?
Reply
Rolf Oldeman 1:33PM (9/25/2007)
Is it already April 1st??
Reply
Domenick 1:17PM (9/25/2007)
I think I'd rather not drive than have a government issued GPS system in my car. This stuff creeps me out.
*Crosses Oregon off list of places to live.
Reply
Seth 12:55PM (9/25/2007)
YES! I live in Oregon, and this means FREE GPS FOR EVERYBODY! W00T!
Actually, although they're experimenting with this technology, I have a feeling it won't get past the legislature. If nothing else, we'll probably have something on the ballot soon afterwards that cancels it out.
Reply
Snowdog 1:28PM (9/25/2007)
MarkR:
How are hybrids not being fairly taxed? A hybrid Accord gets worse gas mileage than a normal non hybrid Civic. So this hybrid pays more tax. How is it getting special treatment?
Hybrids don't result in magical fuel savings that exempt you from taxation. You get a small improvement in fuel economy that is swamped by vehicle size. So a hybrid SUV will pay more gas tax than a sedan. A midsize hybrid will still pay more tax than a lighter weight economy car.
All that need be done is tweak the gas tax until there is actually a real issue. Like half the cars on the road being pure electric.
Until then a gas tax more fairly reflects the damage a Prius does to the road, than what a Hummer does.
Implementing a dual tax system, with two bureaucracies, GPS tracking etc, is pure insanity thought up by gutless politicians unwilling to take a chance doing the sane thing.
Reply
kballs 1:20PM (9/25/2007)
If they can implement a GPS "meter" in your car, then why can't they implement a charge meter in electric cars that they check at the end of the year to see how many kwh you put into the car (which will show approximately how many miles you traveled near home).
It's not like electric cars can do much driving out of state anyway (since there aren't many charging stations and most electric cars still don't have a large range).
As for hybrids, most of them still burn gasoline. The ones that don't on daily trips (plug-in hybrids) would fall into the above scenario for 99% of their electric driving.
Reply
shmuupy 1:59PM (9/25/2007)
I thought that when you factor in SUVs the average fuel economy has gone down, not up.
I support road pricing but I want it to be on the highways, with gantries, so that when I pass thru them it senses a unit on the dash of my car and charges me. The rest of the time I keep the unit in the door and it can't be read. That way I pay my toll electronically, I am only tracked on paid areas and my privacy is more protected the rest of the time.
I'd rather see my gas tax go up a few cents then have this sort of 100% tracking.
Reply
Lascelles Linton 1:36PM (9/25/2007)
Snowdog, it's not dual. If you have the GPS system, you would not pay a gas tax. I guess you can deduct it or something. They would not get rid of the gas tax because it would cost too much to force all cars to use the system. So there are two taxes, at the same time, but a single person won't have to pay both... at least not at first. It's actually pretty complicated if you think about it. It was not central to the point of the article, Oregon blames hybrids, so I did not write about it. Oh and Rolf, not this it's not an April Fools day joke. This is real! Death and taxes...
Reply
GoodCheer 1:41PM (9/25/2007)
This does seem like a totally stupid solution. How long will it take to pay of the infrastructural costs of making ??-million GPS units and installing them in cars?
If you wish to encourage smarter use of gasoline, a fuel tax seems like the simplest solution. Oregon also (I believe) subsidizes the purchase of hybrids. If the loss of gas revenue is such a problem, they could simply eliminate that subsidy.
As others have mentioned, vehicle weight damages roads. Damage increases as the 3rd power of vehicle weight, but (obviously) only as the 1st power of distance traveled. If you're really worried about developing "representative revenue", weight is a much more important factor than distance traveled. Weigh also happens to correspond nicely with mileage (though that relationship is more nearly linear, rather than cubic), so once again fuel tax seems far better than distance tax. [eg. With my motorcycle I weight about 600 lbs, about 1/5 what I do in my car or 1/12 what I might in a mid-sized SUV, so I do about 1/125 as much damage to the road, while the SUV dirver does about 14 times more. A 60,000# semi does about 8000 times as much damage as I do in my car.]
And for PHEVs or EVs, doesn't Oregon already tax the sale of electricity? I know my state does. Since that tax revenue will presumably increase, that could be used to offset the decline in gas tax revenue right?
Reply
robu 2:40PM (9/25/2007)
How about a GPS scrambler you turn on for an entire day so that it thinks you never left your garage in the morning?
Reply
matguy 10:32PM (9/25/2007)
Anybody know what percentage of road repair/construction/maintenance in Oregon is actually paid for by Oregon's state fuel tax? Do property, sales and income taxes contribute to road work as well? My guess is that they do, and that this GPS system would only take a load off the fuel tax portion of the burden, not the sales and income tax portions.
Reply
mike 10:47PM (9/25/2007)
WOW!
Insanely expensive Requrirement for GPS systems, instead of simply raising the Gas Tax 10 Cents? You've got to thank those Republicans. They really know how to run government into the ground.
And by the way. A Republican "Tax Cut" is really a DEFERRED TAX WITH INTEREST.
Reply
mike 10:48PM (9/25/2007)
Note: A Gas Tax IS a Usage Tax.
Reply