Three, count ‘em three, stories on the Tatler today about government bureaucracies engaging in massive mission creep. This one is about the MN Dept of Transportation, which is looking for a way to let Big Brother ride shotgun in your car.
The Minnesota Department of Transportation is looking for 500 people to test technology that could someday be used to collect a mileage-based user fee.
Mn/DOT anticipates a fee on road usage might someday be necessary as more fuel efficient and hybrid cars are on the road, decreasing revenue from the gas tax.
Well we just can’t let improvements in efficiency in the private sector have a negative impact on the government’s bottom line, can we? It all makes one wonder if the big “green energy” push is really just a ruse to keep on increasing government power.
Ok, that was rhetorical. It’s obvious that the green energy push is precisely about increasing government power.
Again: Fire the head of the agency that’s proposing this, in this case MN DOT Commissioner Thomas K. Sorel, slash their budget by 20 percent. Rinse. Repeat until they get the message.
Why don’t they just put meters and cameras in our heads at birth?
And let’s all start calling each other ‘citizen’ just for practice.
- Citizen James
1. It starts with a request for simple mileage:
“We just want to know how much you drive, so we can tax you per mile”
2. It then goes to a request for knowing “Where You are Driving?”:
“We need to know where you drive, so we can tax you at the appropriate amount, high speed roads cost more than smaller neighborhood routes”
3. It then goes to a request for knowing “When are you driving?”
“We need to know when you are using these roads, because at peak times of the day, the load on the community is more demanding. Its only fair that we charge you more for commute hours”
4. It then goes to a need to know “What you are doing while you are driving our highways?”:
“If you are driving for commercial purposes for things such as commuting to work, The State should be able to tax you for that activity. No worries, Students and people out of work will not be asked to pay the same amount as those who have jobs”
5. At this point the crush of data gathering for specific vehicles will be so overwhelming that each car will be required to have a “Black Box” that reports back to the state at all times its activity and the current driver( and of course, its whereabouts and current state of repair ). Of course you should already be aware that this information can be used against you in a court of law, but thats a matter for the courts to decide at a later date. And Heck, if you aren’t guilty of any crimes, what have you to fear from anyone knowing this data?
At this point in the not-too-distant-future I would like to ask “Who’s car is it?” Yours? or is it the States? Do you have a right to free mobility? If so, where does it say so? Do you have a right to privacy in your movements? Should everyone be tracked like badgers on Mutual of Omaha’s Wild Kingdom, with the State acting as our benevolent ‘Marlin Perkins’?
Isn’t it interesting and perhaps not at all surprising that the first place you see this very thing proposed and put into place is by an insurance company, with the ironic name of “Progressive”. ( http://www.progressive.com/auto/snapshot-discount.aspx )
Imagine the data that something like this can harvest about you and your life. Imagine this data in the hands of an angry ex-wife? An overzealous prosecutor out to make a political splash? Imagine that all of this data which you consider private becomes not just public but the purvey of the State itself.
Imagine it is no longer your choice to decide these things for yourself.
Re: comment #2: What he said. The paranoia seems over the top, until you think about it for a second. Then it seems if anything a bit understated.
Amazing how fragile and unreliable these things will turn out to be in practice.
Of course politicians would be exempt from this future law
Onstar. We’re here to help.
Roads and highways have to be paid for. The traditional way to pay for them is to tax the fuel used by vehicles which drive on them. This has the advantage of making road users pay in rough proportion to their usage.
If electric or hybrid vehicles come into common use, then the connection between usage and payment is broken.
The proposed system is a way to charge for the use of a public good in proportion to usage.
What are the alternatives? If there is no fuel tax revenue, then either the roads and highways can be left to crumble, or the cost can be shifted to general revenue (and heavy users will no longer pay for their heavier usage – an open invitation to abuse).
Or some system can be put in place to track actual mileage and charge for it.
Got a better idea?
Roads and highways have to be paid for. The traditional way to pay for them is to tax the fuel used by vehicles which drive on them. This has the advantage of making road users pay in rough proportion to their usage.
If electric or hybrid vehicles come into common use, then the connection between usage and payment is broken.
The proposed system is a way to charge for the use of a public good in proportion to usage.
What are the alternatives? If there is no fuel tax revenue, then either the roads and highways can be left to crumble, or the cost can be shifted to general revenue (and heavy users will no longer pay for their heavier usage – an open invitation to abuse).
Or some system can be put in place to track actual mileage and charge for it.
Got a better idea?