WASHINGTON, D.C. — Take the little black box that’s about the size of a fist. Plug it into the data port that in most cars sits under the dashboard. It’ll record how far your car is traveling.
Using that information as a potential tool for raising taxes to fund infrastructure is an idea that Democrats and Republicans are seriously discussing.
In Oregon, reading the box is how the state calculates a driver’s road usage, which in turn is used to figure a tax on miles traveled. This sort of tax, if expanded nationwide, could be a big way governments pay for all those infrastructure improvements that the White House and Congress are striving to fund.
“That’s where we’re headed in the future,” Rep. Peter DeFazio, an Oregon Democrat who chairs the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, said of the idea.
States all over the country are experimenting with different plans, searching for a way of replacing or at least reducing reliance on the gasoline tax. DeFazio supports a nationwide pilot program, and Rep. Sam Graves of Missouri, top Republican on the committee, likes the idea of a vehicle mileage fee.
The gasoline tax is widely seen by economic and transportation experts as a 20th-century anachronism. Vehicles are becoming more fuel efficient, if they’re using gasoline at all.
“Everyone understands the gas tax is unsustainable,” said Rep. Pramila Jayapal, a Washington Democrat who testified at the committee’s infrastructure hearing to urge consideration of a road user fee.
The federal gas tax has been 18.4 cents a gallon and the diesel fuel tax has been 24.4 cents a gallon since 1993. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that revenue from the taxes will drop at a rate of about 1 percent a year over the next decade because of better vehicle fuel efficiency and slower growth in miles traveled.
There is support at the White House and in Congress to raise the gas tax. But even nearly doubling the tax would bring in $515 billion over the next 10 years, far short of the $2 trillion President Donald Trump and Democratic congressional leaders are seeking for an infrastructure package.
So lawmakers are looking for new, out-of-the-box ideas.
Big hurdles remain. To some Republicans, the usage fee is another tax the public does not want.
“Uniformly, they’re opposed to it,” said Rep. Paul Mitchell, a Michigan Republican and committee member said of his constituents.
Rep. Ben Cline, a Virginia Republican, called the usage fee: “intrusive.” Mitchell agreed, saying “It has a Big Brother quality to it.,”
Supporters counter that argument by saying today’s electronic devices already can pinpoint where someone is and what they’re doing.
“Your car today probably has all of the sensing systems that know exactly where you are at any time,” said Rep. John Garamendi, a California Democrat and committee member. “Your cell phone is doing the same thing.”
The more vexing questions involve whether such a program can work on a large scale, whether it would be unfair to people in rural areas who travel long distances, and how much revenue it could generate. DeFazio wants such concerns addressed in a nationwide pilot program.
