[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Proposed Government Driving Restrictions!
-
Subject: Re: Proposed Government Driving Restrictions!
-
From: "Terry J. Harris" <terry.harris@jhuapl.edu>
-
Date: 19 Jul 1995 15:07:54 GMT
-
Newsgroups: dc.driving
-
Organization: JHU/APL
-
References: <3uj0uh$9lb@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
cvc411@aol.com (CVC411) wrote:
>Attention Motorists!
>
>Big Brother is about to tell you what you can drive, how far, and most
>important, how much more you’ll have to pay for it!
>
>Did you know that your taxes are paying for a Presidential advisory
>committee that is trying to force Americans into smaller cars and to drive
>them less. Even though fewer than two percent of the public buys
>high-mileage sub-compacts and most people rely on a motor vehicle for a
>variety of reasons, your government wants to change that.
And for a variety of reasons, my government is right. Contrary to the
strong language posted in those introductory paragraphs, the remainder of
the posting shows what is being discused are mostly mild incentives and
disincentives to encourage more efficient and less environmentally
destructive automobile transportation. Many are already in place in one
form or another. For international business competitiveness, for the public
health, for local traffic relief, and for the global environment it makes
sense to be efficient about our use of fossil fuels.
For example:
>• Road Use Pricing: New taxes on motorists and businesses based on
>how much they use public streets and highways.
Seems like a great free-market idea. Pay for what you use rather than have
the taxpayer pick up the tab uniformly.
>• Congestion Pricing: additional taxes for use of highways during
>peak rush-hours.
Another free-market idea -- supply and demand pricing. Utilities have been
doing this for years.
>• VMT-Based Registration Fees: registration fees based on Vehicle
>Miles Traveled -- how much a particular vehicle is driven. (The more you
>drive, the higher the fee.)
Kind of like the first proposal -- pay for what you use.
[other good ideas already being implemented deleted]
>One of the most devastating policies in this group is the least understood
>by the general public: Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards.
>CAFE standards were originally enacted to reduce reliance on foreign oil
>and save consumers money.
But in reality the CAFE standards have been a great success. Although over
the same old objections reiterated here -- the increasing standards have
pushed technological changes to make cars safer and more efficient. Car
manufacturers will haul out their lobbyists, lawyers, and ad agencies to
tell you it can't be done (as they always do -- remember air bags?), but in
reality, the technology exists and ought to be encouraged to be put to use.
terry.harris@jhuapl.edu
my opinions only, not necessarily those of my employer.
Follow-Ups: