Guns vs.....

[co.culliganman]

I dont look good in tin.........This is from the USDOT website. I do not expect the gubment will take our word for it so they need to mileage somehow. I do not know if it will comee to fruition or not. Electric cars are also a problem for DOT's as they use the roads but do not pay gas taxes. The insurance companies are pushing for the black boxes to be installed so they can lay blame and not rely on "eyewitnesses".

December 30, 2008

In Case You Missed It: Oregon Governor Pushes for Mileage Tax

The Associated Press reported on Monday that Oregon Governor Kulongoski is proposing that the state legislature adopt a state mileage tax to compensate for the state transportation funding shortfalls. The proposal is part of the Governor’s transportation bill for the upcoming 2009 legislative session.
“As Oregonians drive less and demand more fuel-efficient vehicles, it is increasingly important that the state find a new way, other than the gas tax, to finance our transportation system,” Governor Kulongoski said.
This is one example of the type of innovative solutions I have been encouraging local and state officials to consider over the last few months. There are fundamental problems to our current system of financing transportation infrastructure across the country, and these problems will only be solved if our community leaders tap into creative alternatives.
Read the entire story here and let me know your thoughts.
Governor Kulongoski's proposal is based on a yearlong Road User Fee Pilot Program that the Oregon Department of Transportation launched in April 2006. A thoughtful analysis of the pilot program by Anthony Rufolo, Professor of Urban Studies and Planning, Portland State University and Visiting Transportation Scholar at US DOT

This is from the National Motorist Association:

What's In Store For Black Boxes?

For years now, without any knowledge on the part of most motorists, several car manufacturers have been installing Electronic Data Recorders (EDRs), popularly known as black boxes, in the vehicles they produce.

There are more than 30 million cars and trucks on the road equipped with these devices, and that number is rising exponentially. The endorsement of this controversial technology by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) will only hasten its growth.

When questions arise regarding the use of black boxes, so-called experts at the NTSB respond with vagaries. In part, this is because of the difference between various types of EDRs. Put simply, black boxes are not created equal. All of these devices record data at the time of an accident; However, they vary greatly as to precisely what information is recorded, the duration of data collection, and how accessible their findings are.

To address these disparities, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) called for the standardization of EDRs, and issued guidelines requiring all black boxes to record the specific pieces of information in an easily downloadable format. NHTSA safety engineer, John Hinch, claims that the regulations were made solely to facilitate crash research.

Hinch, and others at both NHTSA and the NTSB, are quick to downplay the fact that insurers and lawyers are increasingly using EDR data to determine fault in accidents.

Despite their best efforts to mollify public concern, it's clear that this potential use of black boxes cannot be overlooked. Motorists have already had their insurance claims denied or even been charged with crimes based on the data collected by these devices.

Black boxes may be growing in prevalence, but this only increases the need for their regulation.

Laws stipulating that vehicle owners also own the data being collected by black boxes are necessary. The motorist, not his or her insurance company or the authorities, should have the sole right to release this information.

In addition, for motorists to truly be in charge of this data, auto dealerships must be required to tell consumers that such a device is in their vehicle and they must be willing to help owners who want to have their black boxes disabled. NHTSA does call for disclosure of the device in every owner's manual, but more widespread publicity is needed because few people consult the manual.

Carmakers expressed concerns that the disclosure requirements hinder the installation of more black boxes because of possible negative reactions by customers.

In other words, if the public were actually informed about this issue, they would never stand for black boxes being installed in their vehicles.

I dont know what the future holds but I know that my old cars will never support whatever electronic monitoring is required. I agree that Progressive snapshot might be a good thing for the good driver (BTW, I have never had any kind of ticket, I am 49YO). But the bad driver will be penalized or dropped. Peter Lewis is also the founder of Progressive, a very large liberal contributor.

Again, I look terrible in tin......

To add to point but not belabor it;

For those who purchased high-efficiency vehicles hoping to save more money, Oregon just might have your number.

Beaver State lawmakers, in their upcoming session, are expected to consider legislation that would impose a charge on vehicles that get at least 55 miles per gallon of gasoline, in an effort to make up for lost gas-tax revenue, according to reports.

After 2015, owners of these high-efficiency vehicles would either have to pay an undetermined per-mile tax calculated by GPS technology, or some alternative flat rate option.

According to the Salem Statesman Journal, citizens in Oregon currently pay 30 cents in tax per gallon of gas. The state has been considering how to make up for the decline in gas-tax revenue due to the advent of more efficient vehicles ever since it initiated its first task force to look at the problem in 2001.

“Everybody uses the road, and if some pay and some don’t, then that’s an unfair situation that’s got to be resolved,” said Jim Whitty, manager of the Oregon Department of Transportation’s Office of Innovative Partnerships and Alternative Funding, according to the Associated Press.

Oregon is not the first state to look at implementing a different type of tax in the face of high gas-mileage cars. In February, Washington state will begin charging electric cars owners an annual fee of $100 to make up for lost gas-tax revenue.

Opponents argue that the additional tax will deter consumers from purchasing high-efficiency vehicles, and burden the industry.

Despite the industry pushback, Salem Republican Rep. Vicki Berger argues that the tax would help level the playing field.

“There’s a basic unfairness around that tax, and everyone is looking for the magic way to at least get the ball rolling on a different way of doing this — one that reconnects mileage with taxes paid,” Berger said, according to the Statesman.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/03/or...#ixzz2GycVbGVu

[palepainter]

Damned if you do.....damned if you don't....