It has been well established just how dependant America is on fossil fuels for both personal and economic transportation. While it is easy to say that we need to do something different to reduce our dependence on this non-renewable resource, it is harder to say how. Unlike many I don’t believe that raising taxes and essentially extorting American citizens and businesses into change will be effective. Instead, I believe that Americans need and deserve to be presented with a viable, economical alternative before being punished for our current life styles. As David Roberts of grist.org says;”The solution is not more virtuous behavior or slightly more fuel economy, but new infrastructure.”
American citizens have been conditioned and encouraged to use a disproportionate amount of fuels through decades of poor urban planning and even worse development of transit options in most major cities. It is unfair for our government to turn around and punish the behavior that it has for so long encouraged, especially given the current economic climate of our nation. The government needs to step up and establish a new standard to rise to, and then support it. For example, if Plug-In Hybrid vehicles were decided to be the most effective (they likely would be at this point); the government needs to provide an enhanced power grid, and subsidies to provide Americans charging stations at their homes and businesses.
Simply raising taxes to punish our supposedly “irresponsible” habits is wrong and would hurt the poorest with the fewest options to change. Being a commuting student at the U of M, I can personally attest to the impact more expensive gas would have. While I do not live terribly far from campus, it would take me over an hour, and 3 separate busses to get to the University by public transit, as compared to 10-15 minutes by car. It is not reasonable to expect me to give up 1.5 hours of my day just to save a gallon of gas. I drive a mid-sized SUV, so the volatile gas prices hit me more than many others. While I would like to downsize and drive a more efficient vehicle, it is not possible for me given my finances as a student.
With prices for everything continually going up and wages remaining flat or declining, Americans lucky enough to have a job should not be oppressed with excessive taxation on gasoline just to get there. It is also important to understand that even if money is no object, the number of alternative fuel vehicles on the market is extremely slim and they do not meet the needs of many Americans. It is not fair to penalize people for not adapting to technologies that have not been developed to maturity.
These are just some of the many reasons I oppose the increase of gas taxes as a tool to reduce oil consumption. Once new technology is there and accessible, I will gladly adapt. Until then, I will keep on driving my “gas guzzler” because I have no other choice.
http://www.grist.org/article/against-a-gas-tax1
Cameron, you yourself make the best argument for a higher gas tax, when you quote Roberts in saying, "The solution is not more virtuous behavior or slightly more fuel economy, but new infrastructure."
ReplyDeleteThe current 18.4 cent per gallon tax, which has not been raised since 1993, is not nearly enough to cover the cost of infrastructure maintenance and improvements. For example, in 2008, the Highway Trust Fund needed $8 billion in revenue from the general fund in order to be solvent. Also consider that we already greatly underinvest in transit infrastructure (The National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission recommends that we spend somewhere between $225-340 billion per year on transportation infrastructure, up from the roughly $90 billion we currently spend).
The natural source of revenue to pay for our current obligations, maintain our current system, and to make the substantial upgrades to our infrastructure is our primary transit tax-- the gas tax.