Letters: Pay for Highways Through User Fees
Pay for Highways Through User Fees
Editor, Times-Dispatch: Both candidates for governor are failing to deal squarely with the critical issue of transportation funding. The public wants better roads and should be willing to pay for them. There are no more savings to be made in the VDOT budget. Various state laws and other priorities are restricting the use of limited available highway funds.
Highway funding is an obvious subject for direct user charges to provide the desired and needed construction and maintenance. The motor fuel taxes are way behind the increases in highway costs, the increases in vehicle costs, and the increases in fuel costs.
The use of any general fundtype source will further subsidize the big-truck industry because it does not generally pay much in general fund taxes. The big trucks in Virginia have long been found to be grossly underpaying. Increases in size and weight and ton-miles per gallon have increased the shortfall.
Large amounts of general fund taxes are now going into highway funding -- such as the half-cent sales tax from the Baliles administration that is perhaps $400 million per year, and the recordation fees for Route 58, and the costs of state police and various local funds. This diversion of money should be recognized and should be put back into general funds. Highways should be paid for with user charges.
Urchie B. Ellis.
Richmond.
Health Care Reform Can't Be Too Difficult
Editor, Times-Dispatch:
I was one of the few and fortunate who were able to attend the Public Square on health care reform featuring Reps. Bobby Scott and Eric Cantor. I was impressed by the polite tone of the discussion and the ability of the representatives from two different parties to come to an agreement on 80 percent or so of the health care issue. While health care reform is necessary, Republican and Democratic leaders must take time in coming to a beneficial compromise on the final 20 percent.
Scott argued that HR 3200, the Democrat-proposed health care bill, will make health care cheaper and will provide more options to consumers by implementing a public health care option and forcing other health care providers to become part of a health care exchange system. However, whether or not this system decreases health care costs, it is not constitutional for the government to try to set health care standards and force private providers into the exchange. If a bill like this is passed, over time private options and health care systems will collapse. Will the government then bail them out?
I am proud of Cantor for holding firm to conservative health care reform principles. As Cantor asked, what does acceptable health care mean? Can the government really try to define it? Many people right now are satisfied with their health care and do not want the government to take over the system. Cantor stated that successful health care reform will need to follow three specific guidelines:
- The government cannot be the decision-maker;
- Health care cannot be denied to anyone based on age or gender;
- Adopted health care reform must not break the bank.
If lawmakers follow these three guidelines and keep in mind their responsibility to heed constitutional boundaries, then health care reform should not be too difficult to achieve.
Ashley Burton.
Henrico.
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
renhoj,
Oh yeah, I am aware of McDonnell’s position. My absentee ballot is already in the mail and Deeds won my vote. I am not sure that every truck driver will be rushing to vote for Deeds though. I am fairly moderate in my politics and many truck drivers are more conservative in their leanings then I am. Creigh Deeds is moderate enough for me, however he might not be conservative enough for many others.
However I really find it annoying when conservative truck drivers remain silent or even voice claims that McDonnell’s position better matches our industry’s preferences. In reality, even if McDonnell gets a majority of truck drivers’ votes for other reasons, my industry will be opposing him in many of his goals even if we later have to take some of the issues to the feds or even to the courts to have our voices heard.
Even if some truck drivers are willing to sit back and remain silent even pursuing inaction out of party loyalty, there will be enough people like me still remaining to press the issues forward. However I am fairly confident that McDonnell will not receive federal approval for some of his toll road plans even if he is elected anyway. Google Pennsylvania Act 44 to see how Pennsylvania’s plans to make an existing interstate a new toll road was not approved by the feds.
The truth as I see it? Deeds not ruling anything out is actually more realistic then McDonnell’s very specific grandiose plans to place an unconstitutional tax on interstate commerce. I might not get everything my way from Deeds, but at least he is not trying to lead in the wrong direction like McDonnell is trying to do.
Mikeyt wrote “Mr. Ellis… you know what? We have user fees for roads. THEY’RE CALLED TAXES!!!!!! If our government would stop throwing away money in so many places you can’t count them all, we could pay for roads. THE ONE THING WE DON’T NEED IS USER FEES!!!!!“
Hey MikeyT, WHERES THE WASTE????
SHOW US THE WASTE! Put your money where your mouth is Call the waste and fraud hotline because you keep screaming Fraud and Waste like you have personal knowledge of it, TELL THE NEWSPAPERS - POST IT HERE-
But then you can’t because there isn’t any. your screams of fraud and waste is just your smokescreen, You want to ride for free, which is why you push the freeloader party candidate who’s motto could easily be “Vote MICKEY-D, You’ll ride for FREE!“
Freeloaders -the lot of ye!
Thank you, LittleDavid. Keep in mind McDonnell thinks those costly toll booths are a great idea. No surprise coming from someone with a mindset fresh from the 1950s. That’s also when we got sold on this leech called the RMA. When is Powhite going to be finally paid for again?
Also remember Cantor thinks indigent care and charity are viable, reasonable health care options; a.k.a. force someone else to pay for it. How is that not socialism?
Why are these people our only candidate choices? Why do we not demand someone with at least a little common sense?
The letter writer is noble in her opinion but fails to address the root cause of the Democrats desire to confiscate 1/6th of our GDP: POWER.
This issue has nothing to do with affordability or coverage or health or care or “choice and competition”. It is about controlling every aspect of your lives. It is all about seizing control of yet another industry and turning it over to their Big Labor Union political supports (the UAW was handed the auto industry/the SEIU will be handed the health care industry).
It is nothing short of a crime.
I am a self employed truck driver and last year I paid $8853.41 in state and federal fuel taxes alone. I recently bought a new truck and paid $11,400 in federal excise tax which goes towards funding transportation. I pay several thousands of additional dollars every year for licenses and permits as well as taxes specifically targeted at big trucks to fund transportation.
Not all my state fuel taxes went to Virginia since some goes to each state through which I travel. However truckers from other states must pay Virginia fuel taxes for the miles they travel in Virginia even if they do not buy fuel in Virginia due to the IFTA (International Fuel Tax Agreement).
While this might surprise you, most truck drivers favor increasing fuel taxes to provide increased revenue for transportation construction and maintenance needs. Both the ATA (American Trucking Associations) and the OOIDA (Owner Operator Independent Driver Association) agree on this and it is fairly rare for them to agree about anything. (They hold opposing viewpoints on increasing allowable truck weights for example.)
Why do they favor increased fuel taxes over toll roads and public-private options? Because nationwide, on average, nearly a third of the revenue collected from both public toll roads and public-private roadways goes to paying for the costs of collecting the revenue while while the costs of collecting the fuel tax is just pennies on the dollar. In fact, the increased revenue from a fuel tax increase comes at zero expense since the cost of collecting the fuel tax is already borne through collecting existing fuel taxes.
The trucking industry wants to see the funds we pay for transportation construction and maintenance used as efficiently as possible. We want to see as much of the money we pay end up in the asphalt and as little as possible ending up going towards a bloated payroll.
We do have not for profit health insurance companies—like Blue Cross Blue Shield. Check this out for options:
http://www.insurancesalesman.com/affordable-non-profit-health-insurance.htm
My faith in Congress and the Executive branch is very low. The members of congress do not read bills or know what is in them. The Chairman of Ways and Means is a huge tax cheat, and the
Sec. of Treasury is a minor tax cheat. Those are just 2 examples of corruption out of many—more politicians are just inept. I won’t believe in our politicians until they can clean themselves up. We are better off in the hands of free markets then we are in the hands of 1000+ page legislation that no one reads before voting on.
Mr. Ellis… you know what? We have user fees for roads. THEY’RE CALLED TAXES!!!!!! If our government would stop throwing away money in so many places you can’t count them all, we could pay for roads. THE ONE THING WE DON’T NEED IS USER FEES!!!!!
Appears we have another out of touch with reality of today’s for-profit-only health careless business.
Easy to spot um. They never dare address cost of today’s for-profit-only system that kills 45,000 citizens a year, denies 20% of physicians’ recommmended treatments for the sick, and eats 18% of our nation’s gross domestic product.
Useless. 65% of us want the freedom of a non-profit insurance option; those of us who see the financial burden of those under age 65; those who come after us. Still, some old hags cling o “me-only”, not giving a do-do about others, even the 65% who seek lower costs.
Shameful selfesh individuals who care not but their own little warped worlds.
Maybe most of them will still be alive in ten years to witness the increased financial and physical suffering of our young.
Medicare is about to go bankrupt—that’s efficient! As a military brat and once a military wife, I can tell you military health care is rationed! When I broke my arm in the 8th grade, a Navy corpsman (someone with a HS diploma) delivered all care except reading the x-ray and setting the bone. When I delivered my son, I could not have an epidermal—only active duty (that was my husband) could have an epidermal.
If you want military health care, serve your country by joining up! You will get health care, but you will have to wait.
Your hate and bitterness clouds your judgement.
Appears greta does not have any kids nor grandkids who will be paying $30,000+ a year for family health care insurance, plus deductibles and copays, in merely ten years. Either that or does not give a hoot about their financial well-being, only her own insurance insurance company stocks.
Is not that kind of witched?
Oh, greta might say, there employer provides insurance. Eight years ago 68% employers did. Today? 62% and reducing. Eight years from now? More like 56%, and….and, that $30,000 premium costs comes off the top of greta’s kid’s income; then, if lucky, a small merit raise. But screw the grandkids, as long as greta supports the billion $ executives.
Post a Comment(Requires free registration)
- Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
- Respect others.
- Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
- See the Terms and Conditions for details.
Advertisement