Virginian-Pilot: How to Deal with the Abuser Fees

By: Lowell
Published On: 8/8/2007 6:15:58 AM

The Virginian-Pilot argues in an editorial this morning that there's a simple way for Virginia voters to deal with the hated "abuser fees":

..Those who would like a more straightforward approach to raising money for transportation can vote for candidates who prefer to raise the gasoline tax. Those who think our roads and bridges don't need another dime can elevate the anti-taxers who are fueling much of the protest.

And those who think the state needs more money for transportation but don't want to raise taxes statewide can stick with the set that enacted the driver fees. What we don't need is a slapdash solution concocted in the fever of a summer heat wave.

Yep, those are pretty much the options at this point.  Obviously, the last option - sticking with  "the set" that got us this mess - is not acceptable.  And obviously, the "anti-taxers" are not going to solve anything, let alone fix our aging bridges, roads, rail and other transportation infrastructure.  I believe that leaves only option #1.  Does anyone have any other options?

P.S.  According to the Virginian-Pilot, a circuit court will rule this morning with regard to the constitutionality of the abuser fees.  This will be interesting, but doesn't fundamentally change the options listed above.

Comments



Let's Revisit Kaine's Original Transportation Plan (elevandoski - 8/8/2007 6:48:42 AM)
Brian Kirwin and I are having a bit of the same discussion over at Bearing Drift. His panties are in a knot over the fact that the "right's fringe" of his party, i.e., the anti-taxers.  "Everyone bashes the plan on the table, but they have absolutely no idea how they'd pass anything different," he says.  Whaaa! Wha!

I say there is another option... let's look a little closer at Kaine's original plan!  There we see a 2% increase in motor vehicle sales and use tax. It generates $360.7 million in FY08 and up to $433.0 million by FY13. Brian then questions "Eileen, Hampton Roads has a 1% registration fee added to cars in this plan. You want to add 2% on that now?"

But I see an increase in motor vehicle registration fees in both HB3202 and Kaine's original. The GOP plan nets $62.4 million with a $10 increase, while Kaine's nets between $107.0 million in FY08 to $148.8 million in FY13 with a $15/$20 increase. Brian's right that the Hampton Roads plan has a 1% "initial vehicle registration". It nets between $17.2 million in FY08 and $43.6 million in FY13. We get it assuming that the HRTA indeed decides to go that route. How about they just don't go for it?

Believe it or not, Brian comes around to agreeing with me... sorta. "Not on top of the regional one we just got, Eileen.  On balance, I have no problem with making the sales tax on cars the same as everything else, but adding 2% now would make it 6% for cars, and I'd oppose that. But who are we fooling. No matter what the plan was, you'd find something to do differently."

Ah, just like a Republican to be so pessimistic!!! 



The "right's fringe?" (Lowell - 8/8/2007 6:53:05 AM)
He means Jim Gilmore and Tom Davis, I take it?


Other option (desfido - 8/8/2007 7:14:33 AM)
Perhaps there is some aspect of state law which makes this not practical (and I can certainly understand why it might be politically unpopular), but why can't corporate and income taxes just be raised to get the needed funds? That would seem to be less harsh on the less well off than increases in the gas tax (or other regressive taxes of various sorts), to me.


Yes, they could be. (Lowell - 8/8/2007 8:08:18 AM)
Virginia has among the lowest tax rates in the country.


One favorite rhetorical point of GOP "realists" (Randy Klear - 8/8/2007 11:09:54 AM)
has been to say that a gas tax increase or carbon tax would be the best solution, but that it's "politically impossible".  Perhaps we should just call them on this and vote them out.


Raise the Gas Tax (David Campbell - 8/8/2007 11:41:38 AM)
I have always favored Republican Sen. Chichester's plan, which would have raised the gas tax by five cents. It is elegantly simple, a user fee on everyone who drives (including out-of-state tourists and truckers), would would not require any additional staff or infrastructure (unlike tolls), and would provide an incentive for conservation and efficiency. It would still be less than the gas taxes in neighboring states.

In a rational world (which obviously excludes the world of politics), this would pass with broad bipartisan support. Governor Kaine, Democrats in both Houses, and moderate Republicans in the Senate have been willing to compromise to obtain adequate funding for transportation. The only thing preventing the passage of a responsible plan is obstructionist anti-tax Republicans in the House of Delegates. Failure will mean the loss of federal matching funds to other states, worsening traffic gridlock, and a drain on business operations.