Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Almighty Buck Transportation Government United States Politics

2 US Senators Propose 12-Cent Gas Tax Increase 619

An anonymous reader writes There are several proposals on the table to stave off the impending insolvency of the Highway Trust Fund (which pays for transit, biking, and walking projects too) in two months. Just now, two senators teamed up to announce one that might actually have a chance. Senators Bob Corker (R-TN) and Chris Murphy (D-CT) have proposed increasing the gas tax by 12 cents a gallon over two years. The federal gas tax currently stands at 18.4 cents a gallon, where it has been set since 1993, when gas cost $1.16 a gallon.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

2 US Senators Propose 12-Cent Gas Tax Increase

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Good! (Score:5, Informative)

    by rogoshen1 ( 2922505 ) on Thursday June 19, 2014 @03:59PM (#47275497)

    We need more regressive taxes in this country! Screw the poor people!

    (Yes, consumption taxes on essential goods with demand tending towards inelasticity are regressive)

    (my tinfoil hat tells me Corker likes this due to Toyota manufacturing in his state, and the increase in hybrid sales due to gas price hikes.)

  • Re:Good! (Score:2, Informative)

    by FatherOfONe ( 515801 ) on Thursday June 19, 2014 @04:05PM (#47275581)

    With all due respect. Are you crazy? New taxes are never the solution. Ever. This is like helping someone who is addicted to cocaine, more cocaine! How about this, they truely balance the budget first, then we can argue about how we should spend the money. You want new roads, awesome, then we cut social security, medicare and medicate. I am all for it! There is nobody on this planet that is as inefficient as our government and thus giving them more money is akin to being insane.. Their only solution to problems is to tax more, yet spending never really goes down.

    Next you bring up building new roads in other countries. We somewhat agree on that one, but it sure is sad to see this administration snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory. Could you imagine if we actually took the oil, and sold it for a profit? Then again all those crazy nuts who said the war was about oil could scream that they were right.

  • by Solandri ( 704621 ) on Thursday June 19, 2014 @04:10PM (#47275635)

    The federal gas tax currently stands at 18.4 cents a gallon, where it has been set since 1993, when gas cost $1.16 a gallon.

    Since the gas tax is ostensibly for the construction and maintenance of roads and highways, it should be compared to that. The cost of maintenance and construction scale mostly according to CPI, not the price of gas. I can't think of any reason why you'd compare the tax to the price of gas unless you're deliberately trying to mislead people into thinking it needs to go up more (political arguments about energy taxes aside).

    Putting $1.16 into an inflation calculator [bls.gov] yields $1.90 in 2014 dollars, or a 64% increase. 64% of 18.4 cents is 11.7 cents. So a 12 cent increase is exactly what's needed for the tax to keep pace with inflation.

  • Re:Good! (Score:5, Informative)

    by Maxo-Texas ( 864189 ) on Thursday June 19, 2014 @04:11PM (#47275639)

    I think the tax needs to be a percentage tax.

    I agree that our infrastructure is suffering due to lack of funding.
    Adjusted for inflation, this tax has lost almost 75% of the purchasing power it had 20 years ago.

  • Re:Good! (Score:4, Informative)

    by bobbied ( 2522392 ) on Thursday June 19, 2014 @04:12PM (#47275651)

    Say: "Social Security Trust Fund!" 100 times, then go count the IOU's that are in it... No dollars there, we spent it all.

  • Re:Bad! (Score:2, Informative)

    by afidel ( 530433 ) on Thursday June 19, 2014 @04:17PM (#47275717)

    Gas tax increases are a good pricing signal to increase fuel efficiency (better than CAFE standards or cash for clunkers). They also happen to be regressive so ideally you put in a credit to offset some percentage of the net increase to the poorest folks. I've been saying for a decade that we should have an automatic 5c per year increase in the federal gas tax, it's gentle enough that it doesn't screw over people who just bought an inefficient vehicle but the net effect is enough that future purchases will naturally tend towards more efficient vehicles. If we had started a decade ago today we'd have an extra 50c per gallon incentive to buy a more efficient vehicle and the insolvency of the highway trust fund would be another decade plus in the future.

  • Re:Good! (Score:4, Informative)

    by SailorSpork ( 1080153 ) on Thursday June 19, 2014 @04:21PM (#47275779) Homepage
    80.7% of the US population lives in an Urban Area [census.gov], as defined by US Census.
  • Re:Good! (Score:5, Informative)

    by Maxo-Texas ( 864189 ) on Thursday June 19, 2014 @04:24PM (#47275805)

    http://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/a... [ssa.gov]

    1993 Average income: 23,132.67
    2013 Average income: 44,321.67

    Roads and Bridges, like firefighters and law enforcement offers, are a legitimate function of government. Funding for the roads has been cut in half by inflation and the infrastructure is becoming dangerous. Especially bridges.

    If the tax had been set at 18%- then it would have scaled with gasoline prices. But with the increasing share of hybrids, much higher mileage of gasoline cars (33mpg vs 28mpg), many more trucks used for shipping (70% more in 2007 than in 1997) (roughly 15 million today vs 4 million in 1993), and now purely electric cars the tax needs to be changed to reflect today's reality.

    What we really need is to remove the gasoline tax and replace it with a mileage tax.

    I read a lot of 1850's newspapers and it's funny because with the civil war approaching, the voters and legislators then seemed more rational than our voters and legislators today.

    You *can't* *have* the roads for *free*.
    It *costs* money to build and maintain the road system.

    Grow up.

  • Re:Good! (Score:4, Informative)

    by roninmagus ( 721889 ) on Thursday June 19, 2014 @04:27PM (#47275837)
    I used to be like you. "Read my lips, no new taxes!" Taxes are bad, taxes are the devil, they get so much and waste so much already. Until I became treasurer on my homeowner's board. We are required by our master deed (which is approved and registered with the city, therefore is legally binding) to provide certain services. A new regulation from Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac states that we must take on a certain expense or they will not back loans issued in our neighborhood. If they do not back the loan, then 95% of mortgage companies will not issue it because they can't sell the liability. Therefore, no one in our neighborhood can sell their home unless the buyer pays 100% cash.

    This expense represents a 35% increase in our budget. We cannot legally cut services. So we have to issue a "tax" (dues increase to the HOA) to cover the cost. The benefit to the community is that they will be able to sell their homes again--we've already seen a 20% loss in value.

    So yes, taxes are sometimes necessary. In my case it's forced from the outside. In the government's case, it could be due to waste and inefficiency but I'm willing to bet that is a very small percentage (and a study I've read of welfare waste backs this up). It could also be due to increasing population, increased infrastructure regulatory requirements, dwindling resources, etc, etc, etc.
  • Re:Good! (Score:4, Informative)

    by GlassHeart ( 579618 ) on Thursday June 19, 2014 @04:32PM (#47275893) Journal
    According to the CPI Inflation Calculator [bls.gov], 18.3 cents today is worth about 11 cents in 1993, so a loss of around 40%, not 75%. But your point stands.
  • Re:Good! (Score:5, Informative)

    by Luthair ( 847766 ) on Thursday June 19, 2014 @04:41PM (#47275985)

    While we're on analogies - what you're saying is you can live on a wage from 20-years ago today and ignore the inflation that has happened in that period?

    Remember that this is a fixed rate set 21-years ago, while the costs associated maintaining infrastructures have gone up. Further, cars have also became substantially more fuel efficient reducing the per km value of the tax as well without corresponding reduction of wear or demand on the infrastructure.

  • Re:Good! (Score:5, Informative)

    by darkwing_bmf ( 178021 ) on Thursday June 19, 2014 @05:17PM (#47276367)

    Our petrol costs $NZ2.20/L. It's been over $2 for years now.

    Translation:
    Our gasoline costs $7.24/gallon. It's been over $6.50 for years now.

  • What? (Score:4, Informative)

    by s.petry ( 762400 ) on Thursday June 19, 2014 @05:20PM (#47276387)

    The US Government has spent over a trillion dollars funding a war in Iraq and Afghanistan, over 6 billion dollars funding a revolt in the Ukraine, at least 9 million dollars funding rebels in Syria (I have not looked at any numbers past what Obama did last September), Billions in beefing up US Local police forces, Billions more on DHS, FEMA, and the TSA, Billions more funding Egypt's various revolutions, and untold amounts in "black budgets" all over Africa. Even the GOA who is supposed to ensure accountability for spent tax dollars, spends millions on a lavish party for 33 people in Las Vegas.

    And you think average people who's salaries and average wealth has gone down by nearly 30% in the last decade alone should pay even more money because they could not spent anything on Roads and Infrastructure whilst they pissed away your money everywhere else?

  • Re:Good! (Score:3, Informative)

    by codepigeon ( 1202896 ) on Thursday June 19, 2014 @05:24PM (#47276425)
    Using Average Income is dishonest/misleading. You should use median income:

    1993: $48,000
    2014: $52,000

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States
  • by erp_consultant ( 2614861 ) on Thursday June 19, 2014 @05:32PM (#47276507)

    Instead of taking a hard look at where the money in the Highway Trust Fund is going, their solution is to simply bring in more money. The HTF was originally set up to fund the building of the Interstate Highway system. Period. That was it's sole purpose. Those funds were transferred to various States to build and expand the IH system as needed.

    Fast forward to today and the HTF resources are being funneled into Transit systems, ferry boats, bike paths, and nature trails. All worthy causes but the money should not come out of the HTF. That's why it is underfunded.

    This is the same trick that politicians play time and again. It happens with Education, Social Security and other items.

  • Re:Good! (Score:5, Informative)

    by Alex Zepeda ( 10955 ) on Thursday June 19, 2014 @07:48PM (#47277623)

    And you'd be wrong.

    https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/motor... [dot.gov]

    The revenue from the collected Federal fuel taxes are deposited into the Highway Trust Fund, which has several accounts. Though the percentages vary depending on the fuel type, the majority (approximately 83 to 87%) is deposited into the Highway Account, to be used on road construction and maintenance. An additional amount (approximately 11 to 15%) goes to the Mass Transit Account, and for many fuels, 0.1 cents per gallon goes to the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund.

Our OS who art in CPU, UNIX be thy name. Thy programs run, thy syscalls done, In kernel as it is in user!

Working...