Slashdot Mirror
California Wants GPS Tracking Device in Every Car
HTS Member writes "California has a new excuse for more taxes. Claiming losses due to fuel-efficient cars, such as Gasoline/Electric Hybrids, California is cooking-up a new system to punish people who aren't using enough gasoline. They want to tax commuters by the mile. How would this be accomplished? By requiring everyone to install a GPS device in their vehicle, and charge them their "taxes" every time they fuel-up. From the article: 'Drivers will get charged for how many miles they use the roads, and it's as simple as that.. [a] team at Oregon State University equipped a test car with a global positioning device to keep track of its mileage. Eventually, every car would need one.'"
They want to tax commuters by the mile. How would this be accomplished? By requiring everyone to install a GPS device in their vehicle,
I am hardly a tin foil hat wearing type but, the problem with this is that like every other means to create databases that track/document individuals or groups, they will eventually end up being mined for data that will likely violate your right to privacy. Just remember, Bush is pushing for the Patriot Act again and databases like this will simply be folded into devices like the Patriot Act.
As an aside: gawd, I hate their use of "patriot" that way, does anybody know the etymology of the word "patriot" with respect to this legislation? Whose idea was it to use "patriot" and why? It seems like the worst/most transparent type of label possible for such a group of laws that seek to strip away personal freedoms and rights to privacy.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
I am instituting use of the Slashdot search feature to accurately track Slashdot duplicates and tax appropriately:
;-)
November 17, 2004 was your first offense. A warning was sent via email prior to the story posting on February 15th, 2005 at 2:39pm CST but daddypants ignored our notification.
Please note that future violations will result in a hefty fine!
Why not just read the mileage once a year when you get your car inspected and base the taxes off that?
what are the smoking!!! I have a GPS and I can tell you this will NEVER work. 1. GPS is useless in areas with lots f tall buildings like Boston for example (my last trip there my gps was a total joke. Jamming the receiver would be a piece of cake do to the low power nature of it and if they try to get clever and make it so my car won't go with out a signal there going to be a lot of cars stuck in parking structures.
If the unit doesn't get power, it can't operate. Or you can pull it off your car and leave it in your driveway. Fill up cherry cans instead of your car.
Why not have the car's mileage checked annually and just get a tax statement then ? I don't have a problem with the concept of people who use the roads paying more for the roads . . . I just don't want to be tracked everywhere I go.
Yeah tax by the mile... they tried that here in Holland. It didn't require a GPS device though. It worked with certain portals. Once you had passed one it would add an amount of miles to your pile.
That's a user fee.
Pay-per-mile highways.
- Hail to our fearless misleader! Fool speed ahead!
Speaking of tin foil hats . . . I'd just get a tin foil hat for the GPS antenae . . . Then as far as CA government is concerned; my car never left home.
By the way, rather than a GPS unit on every car, why not just institute a smart toll system instead? Wouldn't this be cheaper, not to mention not being quite as scary from a privacy standpoint?
I Am My Own Worst Enemy
After decades of pushing for more fuel efficient cars, now they want to punish you for owning them.
And the next logical step will have to be requiring drivers to have them just to drive in from out of state.
Then the Federal government will have to standardize the units so that Oregon units cross-operate with California units.
Followed by insurance companies using them to determine not only how much you drive now (which is often done by the odometer), but do you drive in more dangerous areas, and hence should be charged more.
It will never end, except the the consumer will pay and pay and pay for something they never wanted in the first place!
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
This smacks of influence by the oil industry to hold on to its revenues while the people are moving to more efficient alternatives (hybrid cars).
It's not like you can't find the GPS unit and remove it, or just disconnect it so it won't show up until the annual inspection.
And here in Texas, there's an alternative to it - tollways. Beltway 8, the Westpark Tollway - they get tons of traffic every day, and at a buck-twenty-five a stop, they rake in plenty of cash, too.
Striking fear in the authors of godawful fanfiction, I am here, appearing in darkness, Tuxedo Jack!
Wow! This is such a great idea! I don't know why nobody came up with it first! As a strong supporter, I would like to nominate my company, TrackingStats4Sale, to aggregate and manage the information that's gathered from this.
I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
Here in Massachusetts the powers-that-be routinely go after people who live in the state but register their cars out of state, usually up in New Hampshire. Mass. has some strict regulations about auto insurance, but NH doesn't require insurance at all. So some people who live near the border with NH register their cars in NH. It also saves on state excise taxes. Of course once or twice a year the local news carries stories of how the police troll the neighborhoods looking for cars with NH license plates parked in MA driveways so that they can give out tickets (if the same car is seen there multiple days). I can see a similar huge upswell of out-of-state registrations in CA if this draconian Big Brother law is passed.
Don't live in California.
This is going to do so much damage to costs in business (think of anything that delivers). Why would I want to start my business in Cali when I can be far more successful in other states? I personally won't support it.
It's also hypocritical. It punishes success.
Berto
You are dreaming, or smoking.
Governments do not lower taxes once they have established them.
You will have a Gas Tax and a mileage tax.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Just fit one of these above the antenna. You can fake any journey or lack thereof that you choose.
Evil people are out to get you.
This is just stupid. What if you own a large ranch and drive around in it, not on public roads? What if you drive on (private) toll road freeways, like the one we have in Southern California? What about the people who will obviously find a hack for the system? What if you pick up your gas in a large plastic tank and avoid paying fees? This is ridiculous, and whoever thought this up should face electoral consequences.
A much better way to handle this problem is to simply track the number of miles that each vehicle is driven, from the moment that the vehicle has Californian license plates. California already has a system for mandatory smog checks. The technicians at the smog station transmit the results of the smog checks directly to the state computer system.
The technicians could also tranmit the odometer reading as well. Then, the state government could simply determine the number of miles that you have driven the car since the last smog check and could then send you a bill for the use of Californian roads.
So both my Ford Focus and Giant Urban Assault Vehicle get to pay the same tax, sure the UAV uses more gas, and tears up the road more, but if we both put 50 miles on the cars, then we both get taxed the same.
I would be in favor of jacking up the gasoline tax instead. This would put more pressure on the enviromental offenders that drive SUV's and other inefficient vehicles. Afraid that this will punish businesses? Give them a tax credit or tax rebate for business vehicles that are legitimately needed for the business.
Silly poster - the gas tax won't go away, this is just a bonus tax!
A fine is a tax you pay for doing wrong and a tax is a fine you pay for doing all right.
Recall.
RIIIIIIGHT. This is gov't we're talking about. Assuming and idea like this actually makes it into law I would bet a lot of money that it will be in addition to gasoline tax.
Something smells awfully fishy about the story anyway. If more and more people are moving to higher gas mileage cars (doubtful since the environmentalists have been screaming blue murder that average gas mileage in cars is decreasing as of late) then the simple solution would be to increase the gasoline tax. There has to be another angle.
This article smells of Sensationalism. Note the lack of detail in the article.
...
Officials in car-clogged California are so worried they may be considering a replacement for the gas tax altogethe
Who are these "Officials"? The Governor of California? A low-level bereaucrat? There are plenty of low-level bereaucrat in sector 7-G who consider ideas which never really materialize.
Changing the tax structure at this level in California or Oregon would require some approval by the State sentate and legistlature.
Smells of sensationalism
94% of Repubs and 21% of Dems voted to renew the Patriot Act
There are plans in the works that would replace the current UK system of road tax with a per-mile scheme similar to CA's or an increase in the number of toll-roads. Although it is true that paying £120 ($227) is extremely unpopular surely there's a better way to pay for our roads.
Seriously, cars have high gasoline consumption for one (or both) of two reasons:
1. They are big
2. They are fast
Bigger, faster cars do more damage to the roads and kill more people each year, so it makes sense that their drivers should have to pay more in gas taxes.
Like California needs any more laws that encourage people to drive bigger cars- they already have the loophole described in this article.
pi = 3.141592653589793helpimtrappedinauniversefactory7
Sir, why is your car completely wrapped in aluminum foil?
Never ascribe to malice what can be adequately attributed to ignorance. -Napoleon
That's just great. I think state senators need to have "REMEMBER THE LAW OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES" tattooed onto their butts.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Well, as scary as this is in theory, there is no substance to the article at all. No bill number, no names of politicians or agencies that are actually considering everything. I'm not going to loose any sleep over this until it sounds a lot less like vaporware.
San Francisco Photographers
If revenues are falling because cars are getting more efficient, why not encourage the trend by raising the per-gallon tax? That would increase the pressure on anyone driving a hummer and make better fuel efficiency revenue-nuetral. Make it automatic, by changing it to a total dollar amount and having it calculated yearly based on the prior years gas sales.
Isn't part of the reason that one would tax gasoline to get lower milage cars on the road? Especially in polution ridden CA?
They could always raise the gasoline tax more and then allow right offs for business purposes.
Or use incom tax to add. Or do what the insurance industry does and ask what your commute is and tax you based on it, audit enough that people won't lie. It can't cost too much to verify and address and then verify a place of work. With any luck an innitiative such as that would help reverse suburban sprawl and urban decay.
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
You are assuming that they will repeal the gas tax. Even if they do, with the additional fuel efficient cars running around, what is to keep gasoline at its current prices, or even recinding? Less demand on it? Yeah right.
You could reduce gasoline usage until it becomes a natural byproduct of making other fuels and plastics, where they have shitloads of it sitting around, and the price will skyrocket to keep profit levels at today's standards. They'll justify the cost in storage fees, etc.
Time to bite the pillow California, it's going in dry!
taxing by the mile favors the owners of inefficient cars. the gps devices can be blocked (and hybrid owners are more likely to know how to block them). this is a joke. it will never happen.
if the state is worried about losing taxes on the hybrids, then why not raise the gas tax? Penalize the inefficient cars that cause more damage to the roads and environment instead of wasting billions on gps devices, tracking databases, and gas-station upgrades just to support inefficient gas-guzzlers.
With the FastLane toll-paying transimtters here in Massachussets, the government tracks how long it takes you to get from one toll booth to another. From there, you can calculate the average speed of the car between the two booths. I this isn't theoretical; the government actually does it. I know someone who got a speeding ticket in the mail but was never pulled over; it turned out that his Fast Lane reciever had signalled that he was speeding.
I can deal with that because FastLane is an optional convenience. If California's transmitters become mandatory and they do track people's speeds (which seems likely), I see that as a serious invasion of privacy. Could they use these GPS devices to track criminals with a warrant? Might these transmitters fall under portions of the USA Patriot act that allow wiretapping and such without a warrant? (That's not a rhetorical question; INAL and I seriously don't know). I understand that California needs tax money to keep the roads in good condition, and it makes sense that the people who drive on them should have to pay for them. But there are some major problems with the way this is being done. If these transmitters become mandatory and nobody makes sure that the law protects our privacy, then we could have an invasion of privacy like none other on our hands.
I produce electronic music and write little games. Have a look.
There are roads that are not maintained by the government, and many people drive out of state on a regular basis. Sure it would be easy to read the odometer but that also counts the miles you drove on your private property if you have it, the miles driven in the private community that maintains it's own raods, and the miles driven around Las Vegas that one weekend. GPS allows them to set up tax/no-tax zones and is really the only way (besides toll booths) to keep things fair.
I bet fuel consumption in California is not falling...
Why should you be taxed per mile when heavier vehicles damage or wear the roads down more? Fuel tax seems like the ideal way that these heavier vehicles can pay for their road use. They pay more because they cost more per mile driven.
If the fuel tax is not generating enough revenue, perhaps its time to raise the fuel tax? Not spend $300+ dollars to equip cars with GPS...
My last threes cars cost under $400 each and I've put about 80,000 miles on them total. I dont want to double the cost of the car with GPS.
Like this.
I've seen a few people suggest that they use the odometer for such taxes. If in fact tax refenue was the true objective, they would. When you get renew your yearly registration they could tell you how much you owe.
The real point is to get people used to the idea that it's OK for the government to track your every movement. As soon as people accept something like this, how long do you think it will be before they mandate chips under our skin?
It's not about taxes, it's about acclimation.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
Let me get this straight... California, a state that cannot and/or will not stop and/or track the illegal immegrants who are in violation of federal laws, proposes to track every single vehicle in the state? Um...ok
In addition to the GPS being a potentially unlawful search, the tax, if deemed to be prohibitive, may be a breach of the US Citizens' right to travel. IANAL, but this site offers a perspective that may be applicable to this situation.
I've always felt that the gas tax is one of the fairest taxes around. Not perfect, but pretty good. The wear and tear you put on the roads is generally related to three things: 1) how far you drive, 2) how heavy your car is and 3) how you drive (hard vs. gentle acceleration, etc.)
In each of those three cases added road wear equals additional fuel use.
Given the government's actions to promote fuel economy and reduce air pollution (I just got a letter from the air-quality management board offering $650 to turn in my 1985 car which still passes the smog checks with flying colors) I'm really surprised that they don't do the obvious: adjust the gasoline tax as needed to pay for highway repair.
In fact, given the popularity of huge gas guzzling SUVs I find the assertion that revenues are being harmed by a few hybrids absurd to say nothing of the fact that all the money needed to install, maintain and track the devices could, instead, go toward maintaining the road.
If more revenue is needed and gas taxes have to be raised so be it. I am not going to feel sorry for the few people who have to give up their Ford Extinctions or GMC Expletives.
~~~~~~~
"You are not remembered for doing what is expected of you." - Atul Chitnis
Is this a chance to give Silicon Valley a boost by providing Hardware/software for this?
IMHO this would be a more practical approach:
- Put all cars into classes, based on milage per gallon, and the emissions. 1-10.
- Add tax to gas based on car as a percentile Hence if your car is an 8 (heavy emissions), it would be 8%.
For commecial vehicles, you can subtract 3. Simply because buses are good (keep people from driving themselves), and big trucks carry more with less emissions than several smaller ones. Also would put less of a burdon on commerce.
what does this solve?
1. No need for GPS
2. Puts emphasis on both cars that get better milage AND reducing milage.
3. Doesn't burdon a particular party.
That would be cheaper, and more inclusive.
IMHO this plan is an attempt to regenerate some electronic industries within the state, rather than serve a monetary, or ecologicial purpose.
Taxes are a lame reason to institute a technology, maybe its the only way a policy maker thinks though.
Me:"Hello, police, my car was stolen. Its a red Eclipse, 2001, my name is CrazyJim."
Police:"Ok, I entered you into the database, and I now have a trace on your car, its headed down I70 at 75mph. Heh, lucky you're not in it, I could have issued you a ticket just now. Anyway we'll have your car back to you by supper."
Maybe society is just retarded, but having stolen cars be a thing of the past would rock. Up until the thieves learn GPS bypass. At that time, you can play hide the GPS, and do multi-GPS. Not many thieves would be advanced enough to go very far though.
God spoke to me.
NPR had a story about this last month. First off, it's Oregon that's driving this project, not California, although California's interested in Oregon's results. Second, Oregon is currently testing a system that will work much like Mobil's SpeedPass system. Essentially, you'll have a GPS device in your car that'll keep track of where you drive. It can log your miles into zones. When you buy gas, it uploads the mileage info to the pump which then automagically adds the appropriate tax to your gas purchase.
The system as it is currently envisioned won't necessarily track exactly where you've been--just whether it was in-state or out-of-state. However, it promises to be able to do far more than simply track in-state or out-of-state mileage. It can also track whether any of your mileage was logged in a highly-congested area (much like London's congestion tax for driving in certain congested parts of the city), or during high congestion times (a rush-hour tax to encourage off-hours commuting), and tax you accordingly.
It remains to be seen whether the added cost of putting the devices in cars and equipping gas pumps with the readers is worth it, though.
As there is free trade across state lines, companies would move out of California if you raised the taxes. You realise companies shop around for tax rates when they decide to set up shop don't you?
The Cal govt needs a certain amount of tax income. If fuel efficient cars are lowering the tax they feel should be proportional to road use then they should raise the fuel tax (it's like, 50% in Oz). This has three big benefits:
Cameron Simpson, DoD#743 cs@cskk.id.au http://www.cskk.ezoshosting.com/cs/
... Why not raise the tax on a gallon of gasoline instead?
The proposed system makes no sense because people who drive more fuel-efficient cars will pay more mileage tax per GALLON than people who drive gas guzzlers. That's a strange way of encouraging more fuel-efficient cars.
Raising the tax on a gallon of gasoline would be simpler and actually promote fuel efficiency.
My bicyles
The Great State of California may be surprised to learn that all cars on the roads today already have the ability to report how many miles the vehicle has traveled. This amazing device is usually located either directly below, or in close proximity to the speedometer, and is often referred to as an odometer, or sometimes as a vehicle devaluator.
If they're really just interested in taxing by the mile, check the milage each year as part of the safety/smog inspection and charge accordingly.
Not to mention the inaccuracy or GPS.. If a car suddenly appears to jump 70 miles due to interference, will the driver be charged for that? And I guess it's free miles when solar flares drown out the GPS signals? Come to think of it, I like the idea of GPS much better than an odometer.. "I'm not sure who keeps stealing my antenna, officer. Damn kids."
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
Why not just let police pull people over randomly, club them half to death, and take any money that happens to be in their wallet for the state coffers?
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
I thought the point of the high gas tax was to encourage people to drive more efficient cars. So now that it's worked, the government's decided that it worked too well?
This reminds me of the New Jersey cigarette tax. They jacked up the price per pack to such a high point that most of the smokers quit. The result: the state had a budget shortfall because they didn't make as much as they estimated off of the tax increase--and actually took in less than the previous year.
It's good to use your head, but not as a battering ram.
Such a tax would do nothing to discourage ownership of large vehicles, since paying $5 mileage tax on top of $50 fuel is almost nothing (10%). For a small car, it might well be $20 tax on top of $20 fuel (100%)!
Wouldn't it be simpler/fairer to raise the tax on each gallon of fuel, and really hit the SUV owner where it hurts. Or is it un-American to tax fuel?
The tax here (outside US) is something like 50% of the final price of fuel, with tax concessions for primary producers, etc.
With each breath in, a flower somewhere opens; with each breath out, a flower withers away. In between lies beauty.
CA (think): "Need to get more gas tax". CA (says): " We're going to track your asses with GPS". People (yell):"WAAH WAAH WAAH priivacy! Why not just raise the gas tax"
CA:"The people have spoken they want us to raise the gas tax."
Engineering is the art of compromise.
This idea came from Oregon, and is entirely wacky. Yes, people will need tinfoil, but not for their hats, for their GPS antennas. A tiny bit of tinfoil will render the GPS completely inoperative.
Those who want corruption attack the weak states first. Oregon state government has become, in my opinion, very corrupt, so that's where the corrupters try their stupid ideas.
Apparently, this has very little to do with "a team at Oregon State University". That's just to give the idea a little credibility. If I remember correctly, the people behind it want to sell the electronics.
Suppose there is a system like this and it records that a teenager drove 10,000 miles in the mountains of Peru last month? What could the government do about that? There would be no taxes in California or Oregon for driving in Peru, would there?
A system like this would make war drivers very, very happy. They could make a very simple electronic device that would send GPS signals to every car as they drove looking for wireless connections. Can you imagine the court cases:
Accused: But judge, the records show that I was calmly driving north on I-5, and then one hour later I was driving more than 100 miles per hour through the streets of Moscow.
Judge: Will you certify for the court that you are not an alien with extraterrestrial means of transport?
Accused: Yes.
Judge: Case dismissed.
Anyhow, this story is a dupe of a dupe, by a Slashdot editor, Michael, who was duped:
Oregon Considers GPS-based Road Taxes
More on Oregon and GPS-tracked Gas Taxes
If you would like to read more about my part-time, unfinished investigation of state government corruption, see The idea cannot work. So why do they propose it?
This story should scare you, even if you don't live in the United States. Two men, whose family and business associates and friends have extensive investments in global oil businesses, are president and vice-president of the entire U.S. government. The president is a not-too-smart partier and heavy drinker who has been arrested three times. The vice-president also has been a heavy drinker and has been arrested twice for drunken driving.
Knowing all this, think how corrupt the lower governments must be.
Some of the Bush and Cheney arrest records.
Isn't THAT the "elephant in the room?"
Please mod parent as immigrant-bashing TROLL.since this article started out with the usual, "due to lack of revenue" excuse, i have a seriously better idea that
will kill two birds with one stone:
more frequent driving tests(not the written)
bird #1: you must take the driving test every three years, it'll cost 15$ - presto! instant revenue.
bird #2: we weed out the truly inept, suck-@ss drivers.
as a commuter that drives 64 miles a day through the san fernando valley(on the 101, ech) improving the driving
conditions by removing the morons would make me so much happier due to the increased safety. i'd gladly pay
$15 every three years to retake my driving test; i'm a good driver, so i don't have anything to worry about.
"...that's as white as it gets; all the bits are on..."
Here in The Netherlands you get government subsidies when buying a hybrid, electric or hydrogen car.(Although the last two are not widely available yet)
This is because when you buy such a car, you as a citizen contribute to the reduction of CO2 and pollution in the air and therefor help the government in reaching Kyoto Protocol milestones.
So you actually get rewarded, because the government here wants to stimulate cleaner means of transportation and if i'm not mistaking a government that does not reach the Kyoto Protocol milestones will get fined, but i'm not sure about this.
So in a way you as a citizen here help the government in preventing itself from getting fined by Kyoto.
The subsidy is most often given in the way of a rebate when you purchase your car, which can vary from 800 to 4000 Euros(The Prius saves you about 4000($5200 US) last time a saw a tv-commercial about it), but can also be given in the form of tax-refunds.
So in short, when buying a prius here, they'll cut 4000 Euros($5200 US) from the price for you, because of the government subsidies
The same is true for household equipment, like washing machines, dryers, dishwashers etc etc. If they are energy efficient passing a certain threshold of efficiency(electricity and/or water), then you'll also get a rebate or tax refund...usually rangng from 100-200 Euros.
This seemed to work quite well, because in 2004 for the first time in the history of The Netherlands, less water was used in family homes on average...entirely because of more efficient household equipment.
And if i'm not mistaking more EU member governments work this way, because ussually the cleanest equipment(and maybe cars also) come with a certain sticker which is a seal of EU approvement.
I guess this is so, because Kyoto is not just an issue of one country, but countries working together.
Vehicle A: A hummer. it weighs 6 tons, it gets 5 miles to the gallon, and it costs half a million dollars to purchase. (yes, those numbers are all made up)
Vehicle B: An 80cc Honda elite (scooter). it weighs like, 100 pounds. it gets 60+ miles to the gallon, costs well under a grand.
Who's damaging the roads? Vehicle A. Who's paying more for gas? Vehicle A. Who can afford to pay more for gas? Owner of vehicle A. Who gets screwed by a bill like this? Owner of vehicle B.
To me it's very simple. INCREASE THE PRICE OF GASOLINE. Those who are responsible with the roads, who drive smaller, more fuel efficient vehicles (gas/electric hybrid, for instance) are being penalized because daddy's little princess (or prince) wants to drive a big road-tearing military grade vehicle 10 miles to work every day. Make gas cost 10 bucks a gallon, people will take the goddamn bus to work, or drive a vehicle that is less damaging to the roads, or pay out the ass, and provide enough money for road repair.
To me that makes a lot more sense than keeping track of every (free?????) citizen's wherabouts.
If something I said can be interpreted two ways, and one of the ways makes you sad or angry, I meant the other one.
There's a perfectly good way for taxing road use -- taxing gasoline. In general, this has a number of positive effects:
1) It taxes miles driven.
2) It's simple and robust.
3) It doesn't invade privacy.
4) It encourages fuel economical vehicles.
It is somewhat unfair on people who buy small, fuel inefficient vehicles -- such as porsches and BMWs. I think they can afford it.
It's ironic that the alleged reason for Oregon exploring this system is that they fear improved fuel economy will reduce gasoline tax revenue. If so, good -- raise gasoline taxes more: it will create a virtuous cycle of improved fuel efficiency and reduced road use.
The main benefit of a GPS-based tax system is that you can implement congestion tax (tax people for using popular roads at peak times). The big question is just how big a congestion tax you'll need to levy to have any useful effect (the difference between a car registration that only allows off-peak downtown driving and one that allows peak downtown driving in Singapore is tens of thousands of dollars...)
...such as:
1. this won't be a replacement tax, but rather an additional tax.
2. there will have to be some supporting laws such as "tampering with the GPS tracker on a vehicle punishable by $1B and two consecutive life imprisonment terms.
3. we'll need a complex DB to find people who travel virtually no distance between fuel-ups.
4. development of this database seems to have slipped some milestones... and GPS-Tax revenues are not quite what was expected, please raise the per-gallon gas tax to fund further development of the database and enforcement software.
5. compliance is up! but people have moved closer in and are now travelling much less. as a result, the few remaining in the outskirts are insufficient to fund the major highways... which are rapidly becoming unusable.
6. Our cities are cesspools of crime due to overpopulation and crowding! Gah! Home values are skyrocketing, no one can afford to buy a home of their own now and multi-family, 100-year leases are starting to become common. We need to find some more rich people to subsidize this housing market...
7. Interstate commerce is complaining because the roads are unusable and this is affecting delivery of goods and foodstuffs! Obviously we can tax the truckers to repair the Interstates... Everybody pays!
As usual, the government seems to be living up to my expectations of "a problem in search of revenue."
These opinions guaranteed or your money back.
"And then when there's a huge discrepancy when you get your annual inspections, you'll explain how?"
I've been an electronics design engineer, so maybe it is obvious to me, but wouldn't be to others. A hundred screwy things could happen to disturb the readings. It could not be proven that the person who owned the car did anything to change the readings.
They are talking about each person having an on board computer linked to a sensitive receiver getting signals from thousands of miles away. What about computer crashes? What about reboots? What about car electrical problems? What about people deliberately jamming the GPS signals with a battery operated transmitter left on the side of a road? What about newly installed equipment that is defective and is emitting radio noise? Even car alternators sometimes become very noisy. What about a woman changing a baby's diapers and putting a wet diaper wrapped in plastic over the GPS antenna?
This sounds to me like corrupt people taking advantage of the technical ignorance of politicians.
GPS only works if the people who have the receivers want it to work, and are willing to maintain it when it fails.
So, what if you take a 2 month road trip across the United States? Is it fair to get charged for the miles you didn't drive on California roads?
Your idea doesn't include an easy way to subtract miles that "don't count", where the GPS would.
"That's some catch, that Catch 22." "It's the best there is."
I live and drive long distances in California frequently. The vehicles that do more damage to these freeways are not even registered here. San Pedro/Long Beach is one of the two busiest ports in the country. So everything that comes from china, etc. to be stocked at Wal-Mart or wherever comes through by means of a)train and b) SEMI-TRUCK. Trucks hurt the freeways more than anything because they are almost always loaded just below the maximum allowed for a vehicle traveling on the road (reason for weigh stations) and in the case of trucks with an open bed or hopper, debris loss is frequent. I have seen many a windsheild broken because of this. And no trucking company would be insane as to register their trucks in California. Why? Because the government has painted themselves into a corner charging confiscatory rates for commercial vehicles plus the fact that these trucks rarely stay in the state for the majority of their life. Will California require them to place these transponders in their trucks to pay when they fill up at the truck stops throughout the state? I can't see how this would work. Even if they tried, the trucking companies (especially the independents) would revolt. Ideas like this make me think that this state needs to split. I'm not trolling, just reacting to the sentiment amongst my colleagues.