I was casually enjoying a post-Thanksgiving cup of eggnog when CNN announced that the U.S.
Chamber of Commerce was suggesting a new tax on those who drive hybrid and other alternative energy vehicles. Of course, I assumed there must have been some mistake. But when I looked online, I was shocked to find the story confirmed by both NBC and an ABC news affiliate.
Apparently, the federal Highway Trust Fund is running out of money for repairing the nation’s road system. In order to correct the problem, several proposals have been set forth: First, that the federal gas tax (about 18 cents to the gallon) be adjusted for inflation; second, that drivers be billed for miles driven. And, as aforementioned, that a tax be imposed on hybrid vehicle drivers.
The reasoning here is simple: All drivers “should have to pay their fair share” to fix potholes, bridges, etc., “regardless of how much or what kind of fuel they use.” But before charging progressive-minded drivers extra, shouldn’t the government take a more progressive stance itself? Shouldn’t some attention be focused on creating a broader system of public transportation? That would do far more to minimize road wear than would punishing drivers.
I understand that because the United States is vastly larger than most European nations, it has proved difficult for the government to develop a universal system of public transportation. This does not mean, however, that it should abandon the attempt. With oil-rich countries now producing to their capacity, it will not be long before the price of oil makes fossil-fuel dependent transportation obsolete.
The time of the personal automobile is drawing to a close, regardless of whether the government or anyone else wants to admit it. The government should not, therefore, punish those people who are doing their bit to reduce our dependency on foreign oil. By even suggesting it, government is sending a clear message to the environmentally conscious of America – that the efforts they are taking to secure a cleaner, better future are for naught.
If the folks at the Chamber of Commerce are really that concerned about a nearly-obsolete road network and are devoid of the vision necessary to create public transportation for the masses, then perhaps they should consider instead a tax based on vehicle emissions. By doing so, they would be taxing the real culprits, those who make living and breathing in our cities a challenge, and who help make the United States one of the biggest air polluters in the world. And perhaps upon greater reflection, they will realize that those who spent the extra money to get a hybrid car in the first place shouldn’t be begrudged the few dollars a year that they save from investing in our future.
Willow Baumann, University student