Massachusetts Needs Different Technology
Feb 22nd, 2009 by Sean
I found myself disturbed by Massachusetts Governor Patrick’s proposed 19 cent increase in the gas tax. That’s serious money. Imagine the cost if crude oil prices soar again. Governor Patrick says that the tax is necessary to pay for transportation issues. Maybe, but I don’t think it’s fair for a populace to be expected to pay for decades of cronyism and mismanagement with such a steep tax.
Suddenly, though, that 19 cent tax increase doesn’t look too bad. The reversal came when I learned of a different proposal, a user fee, that would force all Massachusetts drivers to have GPS chips installed in their vehicles. The GPS chips would track the mileage that each vehicle drives and the state would then charge a quarter cent for each mile driven. The politicians and state can’t manage their budgets, so they instead want to track every mile we drive. Big Brother we don’t want you ’round here.
Massachusetts, like many states, needs to run more efficiently. It needs to development revenue sources (new industries) rather than just rely on tax increases.
Meanwhile, chuck the GPS chips. Instead, purchase a bunch of microphones and install them in any location where budgets are debated. Upload the audio to the web where taxpayers can hear who is advocating for more wasteful spending. A far better use of technology.
Voters, we put politicians into power. Think when you vote.
I am in complete agreement. I just emailed my State Representative and State Senator stating my opposition to both the gasoline tax increase or electronic chip. I hope many MA taxpayers will do the same.
It always seems like state government is always looking for ways to increase revenues via increasing taxes rather than looking at ways to offer current services more economically. I have a difficult time believing that there aren’t many ways for them to economize without cutting essential services and without raising taxes. One example where it appears that an attempt to economize was made in the past was with regards to police details. Often I’d drive by a detail, especially in the city of Boston, and noticed that the policeman wasn’t directing anything but rather conversing with the workers or just sitting in his/her car drinking coffee. I think the attempts to replace this expensive option with trained civilians was a smart thing to do. Of course, the police unions fought it because it meant a decreased revenue stream for their workers while claiming it meant decreased safety. We need to see more attempts to economize like this one.
@RabbitLegs, that’s good!
@bythesea, I agree there’s ways the state could economize.