murdoch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Robert:
This response was posted in the SCHighways group. I thought
you might be interested. Your comments did not make it to that group
because you're not a member. They'd probably be interested in some of
what you're saying.
MM:
Feel free to forward any of it you feel they can use. I will look into joining
the group. 50+ emails a day is tough on the time frame as it is already.
They are basically saying exactly what I am just using different words.
Simply put, voluntary compliance is easier to deal with than Government force
which will be the ultimate end in this matter if we don't do it first.
There has always been a path to complying with this on a voluntary basis
through the California State Board of Equalization in California and one in
every State in the union. To the best of my knowledge it still costs nothing
and requires only an annual report with a check included for the taxes owed. It
is totally on the honer system and always has been. I personally used this
system from 1976 to 1995 at which time I voluntarily terminated it since I now
use a gasoline vehicle and am retired.
As to the statement of showing folks better idea's for funding roads is
concerned; There is without a doubt a shortfall in the necessary money supply
today to build roads and maintain the ones we have. Is the problem with the
cost of the maintenance or is it a wasteful Government entity called Cal-Trans?
At present, I don't think we really know. One thing for sure, we give them a
lot of money every day simply due to the number of vehicles out there using the
roads. Our failure to build more roads in the near future will result in
gridlock more than it presently does.
>> If we can show folks better ideas for funding roads, perhaps we can
>> see less resistance to some alt-fuel and better-mileage vehicles.
>
>Exactly. This is why our group is stating in our Statement of
>Position that we support the taxation of alternate fuels that
>penetrate the market significantly. Whether the cars are powered by
>gasoline, electricity, hydrogen, or whatever, their users are still
>responsible for paying for their fair share of building and
>maintaining our highways.
>
>There was an interesting article in the Spring 2003 (#22) issue of UC
>Berkeley's Access magazine about the changing face of transportation
>funding. The article is entitled "Local Option Transportation
>Taxes: Devolution as Revolution", and it discusses the trend toward
>local sales tax measures like Orange County's Measure M, San
>Bernardino County's Measure I, and LA County's Measures A and C. The
>article can be found online, for those who are interested:
>
>http://www.uctc.net/access/access.asp
>
>Mike Pratt
Also, on your comment here:
>It is reasonably considered by most that the 2,500 pound compact car does far
>less damage to the road than the 80,000 pound 18 wheeler. The cost in fuel
>economy for the 18 wheeler is 8 times what the little compact car is. Does
>this sound like the 18 wheeler is paying 8 times more than the little compact
>to move down the road? Yep, and it is directly related to the fuel needed to
>propel it down the road.
I wonder about this. There was an article in the local paper
detailing San Diego's very bad pothole problem, and one of the city
engineers emphasized that just one of the particularly heavy vehicles
would do more damage than a large number of smaller vehicles.
My statement above refrences only the fact that an 18 wheeler runs 8 times the
cost per mile of the compact car. It was intended to point out that they pay 8
times as much in taxes per mile. Whether or not it is a fair share or that they
are paying their part is up for debate and probably up to an entity like
Cal-trans to determine for a fact that their percentage of the cost is correct.
Your statement printed above does not say whether or not the big rigs do indeed
not pay their fair share.
I do also know that for about the last 6-8 years, Interstate 18 wheelers have
worked overtime to purchase the majority of their fuel out of State in a
boycott of State policy directed toward them. Are they right? I simply don't
know for sure but it has done a lot to shorten the money supply directed toward
road maintenance and sales tax collections. I think fuel price per gallon is
also a factor in this boycott but I don't know how much of a factor the fuel
price alone is.
This is why I have taken the time to point out in these groups the importance
of voluntary compliance verses dictated force. If the end user feels unfairly
treated in the matter but has no recourse, this is the end result.
The trucking industry and the 18 wheelers have another item they use which you
see on the back of their rigs called a partial plate. This partial plate is
offered by all States to truckers who do not operate their trucks entirely
within the State in which they are registered. It is a rather massive paper
undertaking for them but simply put, is a requirement for them to report
milage and pay road taxes for the miles driven in each particular State.
What happens then is the different States on the report share the road taxes
based on the milage driven and who collected the tax money from the trucker.
Example; trucker bought fuel in Cal., drove 250 miles in Cal. entered Nev.
drove 600 miles. What happens here is that Cal. has to pay Nev. their share of
the road taxes for the 600 miles the truck drove in Nev. and Cal. gets to keep
the rest.
Are the truckers shorting one State in favor of another in their reports? Is
this how they are hitting Calif. in the wallet? Well, we havn't yet devised a
cop to police every trucker and if we do, what will happen then? This question
again pushes us right back to the problem of dictated force and no way to argue
what one feels is unfair but can be eliminated by voluntary compliance thus no
dictated policing by Government.
Today, another possible 18 wheeler revolt is being openly debated in the papers
over the registration fee increase which they claim will wipe them out. Will
they have to relocate and live in Oregon or Nevada to avoid the problem? It's
still up in the air.
Again, this only reinforces my statement that voluntary compliance will
ultimately be an easier path to take when dealing with any Government entity.
Remember, "WE, THE PEOPLE" went to Government and asked for this road tax and
maintenance issue to be handled by them. Unfortunately for a lot of us, it
happened before we were born.
Is there a better way out there to do this road maintenance? I doubt it.....
Is there a better way out there to deal with people who feel that are not being
treated fairly? Definately, but it is not yet a fact of life.......
Bob
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Free shipping on all inkjet cartridge & refill kit orders to US & Canada. Low
prices up to 80% off. We have your brand: HP, Epson, Lexmark & more.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5510
http://us.click.yahoo.com/GHXcIA/n.WGAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/
Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
