

It's Baaaack. Oregon, Once Again, Pursuing GPS Driving Tax - mattmcknight
http://techdirt.com/articles/20081230/1926303261.shtml

======
ejs
I don't understand how this would ever work... what is to stop someone from
covering it in aluminum foil so it thinks they never move?

I mean I understand the idea, tax for road usage... ok but why GPS? There is a
mechanism for measuring mileage built right into the vehicle, the odometer.
Its already there on all vehicles and I would assume less people would try to
defeat it. I don't know if Oregon has an annual inspection but it could easily
be read then and reported.

It seems like the cost of outfitting all cars with GPS devices would be
costly... plus it would never work anyway.

~~~
spc476
But the odometer doesn't track where you drove, say, to California, Washington
or Idaho. Why should I pay for Oregon's roads when I drove 2,000 miles in
another state?

------
tjic
What I don't understand is how this is in any way better from a policy
perspective than a gas tax?

A gas tax is already a proxy for distance driven, and - although I disagree
with it - it builds in a policy that social progressives like: rewarding folks
who emit less carbon per mile travelled, and punishing folks who emit more.

What is the defect in the current system that this seeks to remedy?

~~~
LogicHoleFlaw
I wondered about this myself, but I do see potential long-term effects of a
purely gas-tax based system. Even electric vehicles contribute wear and tear
to the road system though they don't contribute emissions. The need for
maintenance doesn't stop just because cars would be non-gasoline based.
Eventually we will need to acknowledge this point from a purely pragmatic
stance. Encouraging high-efficiency vehicles via a gas tax is a reasonable
incentive now but it's not sustainable.

I suspect that the eventual system will bear a resemblance to the one in use
for long-haul trucking, where operators keep a detailed log of how many miles
they drive in each state as well as loaded weight. GPS is one way to
facilitate such a system.

~~~
Goronmon
Agreed, while I definitely do not support a system that allows the government
to track the citizens at all times, I do think people miss the fact that
things like roads aren't free and need to be paid for somehow.

As awesome as fuel-efficient cars are, if they are cutting down revenue from
gas tax then the state does have to look for alternate tax sources.There is no
way around it.

------
mtrichardson
I'm from Oregon.

There's very little support for this in the state.

See <http://www.blueoregon.com/2007/04/gpstracked_mile.html> \- a bit old, but
still relevant.

------
biohacker42
I haaaate catchy headlines.

------
tlrobinson
This is so absurd. The government installing GPS tracking devices on every
citizen's car? Reducing the incentive to drive an efficient car?

No thanks.

~~~
mnemonik
The very possible privacy issues are enough for me to form an opinion, let
alone that this policy would be no better than a gas tax, and arguably worse,
at reducing emissions.

------
agotterer
The idea is terrible. But to play along... wouldn't it be cheaper and easier
if they just recorded the miles driven during inspection each year and taxed
you on that?

------
jonknee
I'd much rather this for insurance purposes. I drive very little (350mi/month
maybe) but pay the same to insure myself as I would if I drove around all day.

------
wans
Congestion is an externality that gas taxes don't correct. GPS-taxes charge
less for driving at different _hours_ creating incentives to drive at off-peak
times.

