"America...goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy...The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force. the frontlet upon her brows would no longer beam with the ineffable splendor of freedom and independence; but in its stead would soon be substituted an imperial diadem, flashing in false and tarnished luster the murky radiance of dominion and power. She might become the dictatress of the world: she would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit."- John Quincy Adams, 4 July 1821

Friday, February 20, 2009

http://www.wikio.com

(2) Comments

Day 32 - In the History of Stupid Ideas...

Hrafnkell Haraldsson

, , , ,

Here is a plan the Obama administration will absolutely NOT support: a mileage tax. Secretary Ray LaHood of the Transportation Department had earlier called it an idea "we should look at." Typically Republican:
Speaking to The Associated Press, Transportation Secretary LaHood, an Illinois Republican, said, "We should look at the vehicular miles program where people are actually clocked on the number of miles that they traveled." The remark was part of a discussion about various options to help make up for the highway funding shortfall on the federal level.

Just crazy. Why would anyone think this is a good idea? CNN reports:
In a written statement, the department said, "The policy of taxing motorists based on how many miles they have traveled is not and will not be Obama administration policy."

The idea -- which involves tracking drivers through Global Positioning System (GPS) units in their cars -- is gaining support in some states as a way of making up for a shortfall in highway funding. Oregon carried out a pilot program and deemed it "successful."

This is how it would have worked, according to the report:
Under a VMT (vehicle miles traveled) tax program, GPS units would allow the government to keep track of how much each car is driven and where -- though not necessarily with exact street locations. The government could also track other things, including the time each car enters a certain zone.

I can understand the reasoning behind a program such as this - funding our infrastructure, and apparently helping the environment and reducing reliance on foreign fuel hurts the cause because with consumers buying less gas, the government takes in less money. "Last fall, Congress approved an $8 billion infusion into the depleted federal highway trust fund," CNN tells us. Unsurprisingly, people were not enthused by the idea. There are privacy issues, for one thing. Do we really need the government looking over our shoulder as we drive and watching our movements?

There has to be a better way, and I'm sure something will be found. Some possible solutions have already been suggested:

  • tolls

  • higher registration fees

  • and other types of taxes

The Republicans complaining about big government will no doubt fail to take notice of this action by the Obama administration. They will find something else to attack and if there is nothing else to attack, they will invent something. Welcome to 2009, my friends. The loyal opposition is not so loyal after all.
2 Responses to "Day 32 - In the History of Stupid Ideas..."
Grant said :
February 20, 2009 at 9:55 PM
It never occurred to you that possibly, any Republican that Obama appointed is completely liberal and might as well be a Democrat with an elephant lapel pin?

This quasi-democrat that proposed a rediculous idea of taxing cars based on milage is only doing what everything else the Obama administration is: trying to get as much money as possible while they can in the next four years.

This guy is no where near the standard Republican beliefs which is exactly why my party is in shambles at the moment. So please do not say "typical Republican" if you can't clearly see past a liberal Republican's agenda when he was appointed by Obama.
February 27, 2009 at 10:14 PM
Grant, thanks for commenting. You're suggesting that I'm mislabeling somebody while you're busy doing the same thing. I don't think that's a very convincing argument.

And by the way, yes, I do believe Obama can appoint Republicans who are, in fact, conservatives. He tried, twice, and both Republicans backed out under threat of reprisal from their own party. It is clear that Obama has tried to be bipartisan in his approach and to include Republicans in his administration. It is equally clear that Republicans have chosen to obstruct rather than help in restoring US fortunes.

It is possible, Grant, that you cannot see past a conservative Republican's agenda - but I can.

Post a Comment

Share your thoughts