A show of hands for the doohickey!
A show of hands. Who wants a little doohickey in their car to have a nanny state government monitor their driving habits?:
Legislature’s highway-needs committee in September will look at a wide menu of possible options for keeping road and bridgework going. Those deliberations will be South Dakota’s version of the national conversation about highway funding, said Rep. Shantel Krebs, R-Sioux Falls.
“In other states and nationally, everybody has their hands in the air, saying, ‘What are we doing here?’ ” Krebs said.
She suggests a vehicle miles tax modeled after an Oregon pilot program, which the panel will hear more about in September, is worth study. The program involves a tracking device in a vehicle that records travel. A per-mile tax is charged to target the cost of roads to the vehicles that are using them the most.
Okay, and I’m against. One for, and one against. Who’s next?
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
How is that any different from a per gallon gas tax? The more you drive the more gallons you use and the more you are taxed.
So why come up with an entirely new funding mechanism when it’s already in place? I’m not being sarcastic, I’m asking the question?
Thanks BH, if we need more dollars, raise the gas tax. We don’t need another arm of the government riding in our car.
Would Shantel allow a device to monitor the use of a woman’s uterus to help prevent unwanted pregnancies?
Of course not. This is equally as ridiculous. Take her out behind the Republican woodshed for the switch.
Look at all of the miles of gravel roads people travel on out west, many of these gravel roads are maintained by the person who lives at the end of that gravel road or the county.
That idea is about as stupid as telling a woman what an abortion is before she has an abortion, oh wait, that just became law in SD.
Need to raise more money for roads? Tax RV’s, motorcycles, ATV’s, etc. at the same rate as food and clothing, boy, isn’t that a novel idea.
Shantel, what’s it cost to purchase, install and monitor? Sounds like a way to ding people with fuel efficient cars.
I’d rather hear a saxaphone duet by her and Opie than any more on this idea.
“a tracking device in a vehicle that records travel” ?? This has got be some kind of a George Orwell bad joke. You hate to dignify it with a critical assessment, but… what about cars from Iowa and Minnesota and North Dakota and Wyoming and Nebraska - do they stop at the border and check their car bracelet out (and in what color)? Also, while we are at it, could we figure out how to tax the truckers and tournists from surrounding states that will drive on I-80 and I-94 to head east and west and avoid this car jewelry? A good idea?? Where’s an egg-timer when you need one? (for you political movie one-liner buffs)
I think they should mandate classes for persons placing pylons on the roads.
Don’t they like Odometers?
Seems that such a device, besides being intrusive, would not help give people an incentive to drive less or to buy vehicles that get good gas mileage or use alternative fuels. Someone driving a Hummer and someone driving a Prius who drove the same number of miles would ostensibly be taxed the same (unless classifications are based on size, etc. of the vehicle.)
I agree that we need to start looking at some new models to fund our highways but this one seems like a bad idea on a number of fronts, from civil rights to promoting wiser energy consumption.
Todd Epp
Cars and Krebs Editor
SD Watch http://www.southdakotawatch.net
P.S. I really don’t think there’s a need for personal attack on Shantel for merely bringing up this unorthodox idea.
The problem started eons ago when the Feds started using gas taxes for other than highways and bridges. The stone fish panels on Omaha in Rapid City? Highway Beautification Act. The trees at Tanaka in Deadwood. I believe that came to $870,000 out of gas taxes. That is just two examples there are a million more throughout the US that are a misuse of gas taxes.
I serve on the Transportation Study Committee and when Rep Krebs put forth that lame brain proposal I will to my best to keep a straight face.
Such a lovely idea!?? Before you start taxing me more for roads I already pay for, start streamlining state govt. Eliminate many of state cars and state trips; rely on internet for meetings. Combine state trips. Get rid of redundant state employees; if you work in state gov’t, I’m sure you can name quite a few. Maybe it’s time for a Janklow type cleaning house. Maybe it’s time to start with legislators who come up with these dumb ideas. Get rid of the wasteful student laptop program; have computer labs instead.
If this were in place, would I get to turn off the meter once I crossed the SD state line on vacation or business or whatever? After all, any miles I’d put on out of state wouldn’t be hurting our state highways.
This is D U M B!!
How about a state Bus Route for the legislature. Like starting in Sioux Falls and maybe pick up some in Salem or Mitchell. They could use the ones for the State Pen. It would be fitting.
Just call it what it is - an increase in the state gas tax. You either pay it based on gallons used or on miles driven, same thing. Higher gas tax. Just what we need when we are already paying through the nose for gas.
I am all for installing devices to track all of you. I implicitly trust our government. And I have no doubt if I wrap my car in tinfoil or drive backwards most of the time (both of which I do) they will not be able to follow me.
Makes me wonder if these devices will go in lawnmowers and boats.
Well, if they’re doing it in Oregon it has to be a good idea. Not! How would she feel about taxing fuel used for farm production? That’s one big tax exception that could be removed. Heck, toll booths would make more sense.
Shantel was always my lesser of all evils candidate to vote for. Now I get to decide between “Jump on a Bandwagon” Krebs, “One Issue” Hunt, or “Angry White Female” Gebink.
I’m not looking forward to November.
Jerry Apa you gave some good examples. May I add one. The Daschle Highway, a 4 lane, divided highway from I-29 to Aberdeen. I don’t think a 4-lane div hwy was really needed there, not that much traffic.
Maybe instead of totally redoing a hwy, if the bed is good just grind the top off and add a new mat. With money short, don’t have to really widen and straighten so much.
Forgot to add, that highway cost literally millions of dollars. Multiply that by all the rest of the pork highway spending nation wide… lot of money.
Yes, this is an absurd idea. Maybe Rick Haufe is already sending postcards out on this one. And don’t underestimate Rick, as PP can tell you.
Raise the tax on road diesel, trucks cause most of the damage and deserve to pay most of the cost. Bring back the railroads.
Finally I think we should all attach a monitor to Ms Krebs.
The idea originates from Oregon. I don’t see any reason to look to that state for any guidance to any problems we have. Some here are suggesting other things to tax instead…and, of course, they’re wrong.
Senator Apa and 24 recognize the problem. It’s that so many of our elected ones squander these resources on projects that they can brag about, but contribute nothing to the maintenance of the road way infrastructure. Eliminate this waste and we would have plenty for road maintenance with no new taxes. The collapse of the I-35 bridge over the Mississippi river in Minnesota I attribute directly to the decades of pork barrel waste of highway funds. You reap what you sew. We can find other ways to pay for bike paths, Michelson trails, pedestrian walk ways over I-90 to get to other malls, beautification projects and parks, etc….
It looks like this is an attempt to get “ahead of the curve” on electric cars. A true electric doesn’t burn any gas and doesn’t pay any gas tax, but still uses the roads.
Cutting the waste is always a good idea but the cost of building and repairing roads has skyrocketed along with the cost of crude oil. We are entering a new era.
This monitor proposal lacks the ease and simplicity of the gas tax and as previously mentioned might have serious constitutional problems.
Republican Candidates Take Note!
Shut Your Mouths about ANY tax increases even if it is qualified by “might” or “if” or “something to look at.”
Shantel calls herself a Republican. Well, at least we realy know.
Other factors: We already pay enough in taxes for the roads, or at least I feel I do. Don’t forget we already pay high taxes when we buy gas.
Nemec, It takes my phone 2 hours to charge(the fastest one I’ve had). If I don’t use it TOO much I can make it last a week.
So how am I going to go on a trip if they finally make a car that gets 100 miles a charge. Maybe battery cartridges, but then they could only have a limited amount of them and would have to charge for maintenance on them, service for the exchange, the surplus/excess issues of supply and demand, I’m sure there are others.
The efficiency is in the fuel. The economics is not yet feasible.
Bring back Tesla’s Towers and you may have something. But that would take 10 years to implement.
Guy, I didn’t say electric cars were the answer to all our problems. I just speculated that Shantel’s monitor tax was an attempt to get ahead of the curve.
Electric cars might have a use in low milage applications but long distance travel would be a problem.
How about the two lane from Mitchell to Huron? It is nice, I have to admit, but necessary? Get real! The only time there’s much traffic on the north end of it is during the state fair. Never much travel on the south half of it. Complete waste of money.
And use highway money for HIGHWAYS ONLY, ONLY, ONLY if money is tight!
This isn’t a new idea for Shantel. She has been talking about this since before the 2008 legislative session - starting at least at the January “Good Morning Sioux Falls” Chamber of Commerce Breakfast. Each legislator got to take the microphone and talk for 2 minutes, and this is what Shantel talked about. Everybody thought it was stupid then, but she just hasn’t learned.
Don’t worry folks. We won’t have Rep. Shantel to kick around anymore after November.
I read the story in the ARGUS and planned to post about it at Dakota Today. Not much need to do that with the discussion here and the comments pretty well covered everything I would have written.
I do wonder about Republicans who claim to fear big government and then propose legislation like this or legislation putting the hand of big brother on the crotch of every woman in South Dakota.
Another wacky intrusive idea is the idea of an internet sales tax. In the state coalition or compact form, it would require a bunch of state data bases tracking sales source and destination complete with accurate ZIP codes and tax rates, etc. that would need continuous updating.
If states really do want to tax internet and other distant sales, they should turn the job over to the federal government with the feds pealing off a few percent for a service charge and then dividing the total revenue by population and paying states on the basis of population. Such a federal tax would not require keeping track of buyers or sellers addresses. Tax rate could be an average of all state sales taxes.
This could do away with the legal fiction of “use taxes” as well.
NO! You have got to be kidding me.