The Greensboro Telegram | In terms of replacing the gas tax, North Carolina legislators who are hoping to pass a bill to install transponders in citizens' cars to track their movements and tax how many miles they drive have an uphill road in terms of selling the idea to the public, according to a recent poll.
A recent Civitas Institute poll showed that the public is vastly against the proposed "mileage tax."
The group says that out of 600 voters who were polled, 70 percent were against a system that charges drivers based on the number of miles they drive. Only 21 percent responded favorably, while nine percent said they were not sure, said the group.
As cars become more fuel efficient and as new electric cars are on the way, North Carolina state officials are looking for a way to fund roads and to supplement the state gas tax, even though it is already one of the highest gas taxes in the southeast.
One proposal by the 21st Century Transportation Committee is to install GPS-transponder tracking devices in all North Carolina cars and trucks. The GPS devices would track the cars' movements across the state and would levy a tax based on how many miles a person drove instead of a tax on gasoline.
The proposal has drawn the ire of many across the state who have voiced their concerns in letters to newspapers and other means as they see several problems with the idea.
One of the main concerns is what the government would do with the information. Many say that the state would essentially have access to an itinerary of every citizens' daily travels, prompting privacy and "big brother" issues.
Already some prosecutors in North Carolina have used so-called black box information from vehicles' computers as evidence in criminal trials to show vehicle speed or or actions by the motorist. In addition, the location of a person's car based on GPS tracking devices has already been allowed as evidence in criminal proceedings across the country.
Those claims that the information would be used for tax information seem to fall on deaf ears, as critics of the vehicle mileage program cite recent internal audits of terrorism database programs run by the federal government show "mission creep" as the information is increasingly being used for non-terrorism criminal prosecutions.
Other critics believe that those who are seeking to reduce their carbon-imprint are being punished. Under the current gas tax, those who drive hybrid or fuel-efficient cars obviously pay less tax per mile than those who drive larger SUV's or older inefficient vehicles.
Under the proposed tax per mile program, some of those incentives to drive more efficient cars would be eliminated.
Critics say that one of the most pressing concerns about the mileage tax proposal is that it would unfairly tax rural citizens more than those living in cities and would penalize those living in remote areas of the state.
As city dwellers can usually find goods and services within a short drive and also can take city transportation such as buses, shuttles, or trains, rural citizens would likely drive more miles for their everyday needs.
It is not uncommon to find that those living in rural areas may have to drive 20 miles to work, to the grocery store, to the doctor, to church, or to schools which are not always located in their own community. Individuals in the country who are on fixed incomes, such as those who are on Social Security, may find themselves "shut-in" as they cannot afford to drive on public streets.
In addition, these poor rural areas that are already experiencing manufacturing job losses and economic hardships would continue to suffer as new companies may refuse to locate or open up offices in more remote regions of the state.
Or worse, some existing businesses in those areas may decide to leave altogether if they have to pay even more extensive taxes for trucking their products to markets or brining in supplies or raw materials.
POLL NUMBERS
"Legislators are looking at a number of ways to increase, and make more reliable, the tax stream that supports transportation funding. A VMT adopted without engaging the support of the public would be a very bad political mistake," said Executive Director of the Civitas Institute Francis De Luca. "With seven out of 10 voters skeptical of simply the idea of a VMT, proponents of it have much work to do to convince the public it will be successful."
Although other states are looking for ways to replace the gas tax entirely, North Carolina is looking at adding both the Vehicle Mileage Tax and keeping the current gas taxes.
"We know that relying on revenues from the gas tax is an unsustainable model. As people drive more fuel efficient cars and as we seek different sources of fuels to power our cars, gas tax revenues will continue to decline," De Luca said. "The VMT may be an option to replace the gas tax in the future, but voters are not ready to go there yet."
