Three cheers for Pam Linn’s sensible words pertaining to SUVs (“Power and muscle eclipse economy at auto show”). Few in the media have the backbone to stand up to the perceived SUV juggernaut, so Ms. Linn should be commended.
I’ve long wondered what the attraction is to driving around in a dressed-up truck. How is that “cool”? Leave aside that SUVs are slow, handle ponderously and get gas mileage that only OPEC could love; in what way is it “cool” to tool around in a vehicle with the lines of a tool shed?
Here’s a proposal to more fairly deal with SUVs and their bloated ilk: Since Governor Davis is planning on tinkering with the car tax again, how about rethinking it? A vehicle is said to cause damage to a roadway in geometric proportion to its weight; why not create a registration fee that taxes vehicles by weight, using the same geometric proportion?
This proposal should appeal widely. Environmentalists will love that it strongly rewards resource conservation. But the “personal responsibility” types who often populate the other end of the political spectrum also should support it. What legitimate counter-argument is there to making people pay proportionately for the damage they do to the state’s roadways? To do otherwise-as we do now-means those who drive lightweight cars must subsidize owners of more portly forms of transport. That’s a kind of welfare we can do without.
Ideally, this proportionate car tax would fund transportation only (such is not the case currently), forcing legislators to raise general fund revenues from other sources. But even if the state must continue using car-tax revenues for general outlays, the state could append a fixed amount for its general fund-say $50-to the portion that would go to the DMV to build and repair roads and railways.
Thus, the owner of a 2,400-pound Saturn, about the lightest new car available today, would pay the $50 fixed amount plus maybe another $50 for the DMV portion. On the other hand, the owner of a Suburban would pay the same $50 into the state’s general fund, and perhaps closer to $1,000 for the DMV portion to pay for the damage that the 3-ton vehicle does to the
roadways.
The proportionate car tax would not hurt low-income people, as some might contend. A significant proportion of the working class drives old Toyotas, Hondas, and Nissans. I know this because I drive through working-class and low-income neighborhoods on my daily commute. These older imports are very lightweight, so their owners would pay the lowest car tax of anyone.
I agree with Ms. Linn that in a few years the SUV fad will fade despitethe American auto industry’s desperate attempts to keep peddling these outsized grocery-getters. But as long as people are lining up to buy them, those same people ought to take financial responsibility for their choice.
Chris Ford