[Ummagumma]

Originally Posted by magellan

A simple gas tax increase will never pass. It's been tried I believe half a dozen times just in the last 2 years and it dies before it ever gets to Snyder's desk. As long as there is a Republican majority in the legislature it won't pass, and that's not predicted to change for a while.

Plus it puts us in the position of having the #1 highest gas tax rate in the country. Overwhelmingly. That leaves a bad taste in the business community's mouth.

I'd be for that idea too, but I just have a problem with taxes being collected on gasoline that can't be used on roads because of our (lame) state constitution.

Highest gas tax rate and the worst roads (for a long while, even if they do get the funding).

[michigan83]

Originally Posted by JimmyInGreatLakes

In fairness, most campaigns, for real people or proposals, are built on deception. This one is no exception. I saw a fact sheet from the League of Women Voters that seemed pretty fair and just stated the raw impacts. I don't think there ARE any opposition ads. This will be the cheapest "victory" ever. The proposal (and it's complexity/diverse interest beneficiaries) simply kills itself.

I wish they could have come up with a better strategy than using fear-mongering about "unsafe" roads and bridges. While I find our roads annoying, I do not fear for my life due to driving over rough pavement or driving over bridges that are regularly inspected. It is a silly campaign and it is demeaning to the intelligence of the voters. And that is coming from a potential yes voter.

I think it might have been better to focus on the economy. Show clips of businessmen and women who say that good infrastructure is vital to a good economy. Show images of nice roads in Ohio and Indiana. Stuff like that. Shame us or inspire us into investing in our roads, rather than trying to scare us. But politicians aren't exactly known for running intelligent ads or using intellectual arguments in a campaign, so I guess it's par for the course. They aim for the lowest common denominator, and I'm sure there's a focus group somewhere that decided that fear-mongering works best.

[mjlo]

I just want better roads. Michigan spends some of the lowest $ amounts per capita among all states on roads. I want to know how much each region of the state contributes to road construction and how much they get back. Outside of metro Detroit (and Flint ironically) almost all of Michigan's metro areas have freeway systems that would be in cities half their size would they be in other states. Grand Rapids still has prototype freeways and interchanges that seem to just get repaved and never modernized. There's just no money to do it. Also projects like finishing the connection of US-31/I-196 in Berrien county. However I know the freeways and trunk line roads in the Detroit area need the most work even still, so there doesn't seem to be a way to win.

How does Michigan bring itself in line with other states without doing something like this?

[michigan83]

Originally Posted by mjlo

I just want better roads. Michigan spends some of the lowest $ amounts per capita among all states on roads. I want to know how much each region of the state contributes to road construction and how much they get back. Outside of metro Detroit (and Flint ironically) almost all of Michigan's metro areas have freeway systems that would be in cities half their size would they be in other states. Grand Rapids still has prototype freeways and interchanges that seem to just get repaved and never modernized. There's just no money to do it. Also projects like finishing the connection of US-31/I-196 in Berrien county. However I know the freeways and trunk line roads in the Detroit area need the most work even still, so there doesn't seem to be a way to win.

How does Michigan bring itself in line with other states without doing something like this?

Holy potholes, batman. The gap between MI and other states is actually stunning.

[mjlo]

So then is it a revenue issue? Or an allocation issue? If it's an allocation issue where the heck is all of the money going now?

[michigan83]

So then is it a revenue issue? Or an allocation issue? If it's an allocation issue where the heck is all of the money going now?

I think it might be an allocation issue? MI gets sales tax revenue from gasoline sales, and that money does not go to roads. So it is a pretty screwed up system.

[momof11]

We pay one of the highest gas taxes in the nation now and our roads are rotten. Gas taxes should ONLY be used for road repair (that's the idea of a gas tax) I would not mind paying a penny more (which is how they are selling it) if ALL of the money was used to repair the roads, but its not a penny more - it's much much more.

When I lived in California after the earthquake in 89 we raised the sales tax 3/4 of a cent to fix all of the damage that was done to the roads (and the damage in some cases was horrific) it was for a pre-determined time and once the time ran out the sales tax went back down. There were some who wanted to continue it but the governor at that time was adamant that the money was for the roads, the roads were fixed, and the tax went away.

If the sales tax were raised a penny and all of that money went to the roads- the roads would be fixed (as for the road builder guarantees... what the heck- that should be a given) but because everyone wants their own piece of the pie we will pay more and the roads will still be crappy. Voting NO NO NO!

[actinic]

Originally Posted by magellan

No, that's OK actinic.

So much for the 'offered the moderator role' card.

[actinic]

Debate all you want, this proposition is going down hard. Simply put, the voters know road improvements are needed but their mistrust is even greater. It doesn't help that the 'TRIP" report released yesterday comes from a lobbying firm for the road construction industry

[JimmyInGreatLakes]

Originally Posted by momof11

We pay one of the highest gas taxes in the nation now and our roads are rotten. Gas taxes should ONLY be used for road repair (that's the idea of a gas tax) I would not mind paying a penny more (which is how they are selling it) if ALL of the money was used to repair the roads, but its not a penny more - it's much much more.

When I lived in California after the earthquake in 89 we raised the sales tax 3/4 of a cent to fix all of the damage that was done to the roads (and the damage in some cases was horrific) it was for a pre-determined time and once the time ran out the sales tax went back down. There were some who wanted to continue it but the governor at that time was adamant that the money was for the roads, the roads were fixed, and the tax went away.

If the sales tax were raised a penny and all of that money went to the roads- the roads would be fixed (as for the road builder guarantees... what the heck- that should be a given) but because everyone wants their own piece of the pie we will pay more and the roads will still be crappy. Voting NO NO NO!

If it was 1/2% more and all to roads, I might vote yes. That would equate to about $150/year out of my pocket annually I am guessing. But all the twisting and turning that this proposal does gouges me for about $400-500/year and too little to roads.

I don't believe when this fails that nothing will be done. They will go back to their failed attempts at the gas tax increase and somehow, someway, will pass it. A nice combination of gas tax hike and rearranging budget priorities would be a nice compromise (to keep the hike palatable and able to squeeze through). That's just my guess though.