Washtenaw County lawmakers want specifics from governor on how to raise funding for roads
Gov. Rick Snyder issued a challenge to state lawmakers in his state of the State of the State address Wednesday night: Set politics aside and solve Michigan's road funding crisis.
"This is a no-brainer," he said. "We can decide how long we want to argue about it, how political we want to make it, or we can just use some common sense and get it done."
Michigan remains the auto capital of the world, Snyder said, but now the state must do its part to make sure its roads and bridges measure up.
He said there's a clear choice: Pay less now, or pay more later.
State Rep. Gretchen Driskell, D-Saline, listens to Gov. Rick Snyder's State of the State address Wednesday. Manchester Village President Pat Valliencourt joined the representative for the event.
Courtesy photo
"The governor is absolutely correct that we have disinvested in our infrastructure," said state Rep. David Rutledge, D-Superior Township. "I thought he made a good case for making the expenditure now, because it saves us later. I subscribe to that argument."
But if the governor's plan for raising more revenue means higher vehicle registration fees, Rutledge said he might have some concerns.
"I'm almost more willing to move to something that could be spread more broadly with less impact at a single time," he said. "I think we haven't explored all the opportunities."
Snyder said the state can either ask users of the state's roads to pay an extra $120 per year per car now, or pay 2.5 times that amount in 10 years.
Investing an extra $1 billion per year now, he said, would reduce the cost of car repairs, create more than 12,000 jobs, and save nearly 100 lives per year from traffic accidents.
"There's no price you can put on that," Snyder said. "If you step back and look at this, it's an opportunity to say let's just do the right thing and invest in our roads, keep our citizens safer, create jobs, and have us save a whole lot of money and not stick our kids with a big bill."
Snyder gave a "shout out" to state Sen. Roger Kahn, R-Saginaw Township, who has taken a lead on the issue, and he encouraged others to join him.
State Rep. Adam Zemke, D-Ann Arbor, said adequate support for the state's road infrastructure is extremely important, so he was pleased to hear the governor make it a top priority for 2013.
Still, Zemke said it wasn't clear from the governor's speech if the $1 billion or more in new "user fees" would come from vehicle registration fees or a gas tax increase or both.
"The number he used tonight was over $1 billion," he said. "It's a large number, and quite frankly we need to do something about the infrastructure. It's been crumbling for a long time and we've never put our money where our mouth is on this. I think all things need to be on the table."
State Rep. Gretchen Driskell, D-Saline, said she's optimistic that positive change is within reach if legislators and the governor are willing to work together.
"The governor's recommendation to raise the level of funding for transportation has great merit," she said, adding the Washtenaw County Road Commission's funding is so low it has caused a significant drop in service. "I have worked locally for many years on our transportation system, and I am very concerned about the lack of revenue supporting our transportation infrastructure."
Snyder made roads a top issue in his State of the State.
AP Photo/Carlos Osorio
State Rep. Jeff Irwin, D-Ann Arbor, said Snyder has identified a problem, but he hasn't demonstrated the leadership necessary to draw a majority of votes from lawmakers. Snyder has been calling for more road funding since 2011, but the idea hasn't gained traction in the Legislature.
Irwin said he isn't prepared to support anything until he sees a specific plan from the governor, though he agrees Michigan has terrible roads.
"He needs to find a way to turn his party around on this issue, because it's really one that Republicans have been standing on the other side of for quite some time," he said.
Irwin said he's not sure what route the governor will go, but he predicts it would be difficult to get a gas tax increase approved given the low level of popularity the idea enjoys — together with the fact that many Republicans in the Legislature have signed no-tax pledges.
Irwin said there are a number of things that would have to fall into place for him personally to support a gas tax increase, and it would have to include a commitment to public transit, nonmotorized transportation and spending state transportation dollars more wisely.
All four Democrats who represent Washtenaw County in the state House said they were disappointed Snyder didn't talk more about education funding Wednesday night.
"I really heard precious little abut how we were going to make Michigan schools and universities better," Irwin said. "There was really nothing there for our K-12 and higher education institutions that have taken such a huge hit in the last two years."
Zemke said it strikes him that the governor's emphasis on up-front investment in transportation infrastructure also applies to funding public education.
Snyder is expected to deliver his budget message on Feb. 7, and Zemke said he's waiting see what the governor actually proposes.
Rutledge said there was an awful lot of rhetoric about working together Wednesday night, but he hasn't yet heard anything that translates to policy.
Irwin gave the governor credit for his calls for election reform, including no-reason absentee voting — something Irwin has been pushing since he took office two years ago.
Snyder also used part of his State of the State to push for no-fault insurance reform, saying the state needs reasonable limits and cost controls to bring down insurance costs for residents.
"In terms of claims coming in, the severity of claims, we far exceed every other state in how expensive our claims are," he said. "The average claim in Michigan is $44,000. The next two states are $17,000 and $10,000, and that leads to high auto insurance costs for people, our citizens."
Ryan J. Stanton covers government and politics for AnnArbor.com. Reach him at ryanstanton@annarbor.com or 734-623-2529. You also can follow him on Twitter or subscribe to AnnArbor.com's email newsletters.
Comments
GP
Fri, Jan 18, 2013 : 3:04 p.m.
I would prefer toll roads.
ruminator
Fri, Jan 18, 2013 : 1:48 p.m.
Why do the politicians talk about increased revenue to solve a problem? More money is the easy way out. Try the approach that some of us use with our household budgets. Are we spending what we have already wisely? (existing revenue) What can be done to increase the life of the asset? (truck weights, materials, etc) The solution to every problem is not increased revenue. We need to define the root causes for the too often premature failure of our roads and bridges before throwing even more money at the problem. If we keep doing what were doing, we will get what we got - and we will pay $120 MORE per year for nothing.
clownfish
Fri, Jan 18, 2013 : 1:35 p.m.
How about charging registration fees by weight of vehicle instead of cost of vehicle? And reduce the amount of weight trucks can carry. When Engler changed this his gas tax increase did not cover the amount of damage done by heavily laden vehicles. If Snyder raises more taxes, will he be called a Dictator and have people threaten to secede from Michigan via violent uprising?
Joe_Citizen
Fri, Jan 18, 2013 : 11:01 a.m.
I gas tax and the fee's we pay already are way too high, so where is that money going? The people of this state are struggling enough already, and now he wants to impose more tax that the rich can afford without sneezing, but takes food off of the tables of low paid working class who need their cars to just barely scrape by. I say there are way too many people in state prison for doing stupid laws they want to keep making, but who is paying to keep those people in prison, we are. It's all stupid, and backwards, and made to just keep us broke. We are willing to pay a minimum of $80,000 a year to keep one person in prison, yeah that's right. But not one red cent to educate our fellow citizens, unless you want to call prison school for better criminal behavior. If that were the case then we should start handing out degrees for criminal experience and know how. Stop putting people in prison for nonviolent crimes, and release everyone who is there for nonviolent crimes, and "bamm" you have your billion dollars. Start putting the real criminals behind bars like rogue bankers to start. This is just one place that our money is just flat out wasted. The war on drugs was lost decades ago, but for some reason we still doing the same things "wasting money and resources" on a unstoppable force. I say give the drugs away for free to people who want them and educate kids of the harms and nonsense of using. Giving drugs away for free will take the criminal behavior out of the equation, and cost us mere pennies on the dollars we spend on keeping addicts in prison, where they get there drugs anyway. That's what they do, they get there drugs no matter the laws, and they never cared about, don't care, and never will. But us psychopaths keep doing the same thing expecting different results and we always get the same result. There's way too much money going into the failed prison system, and we aren't getting our money's worth.
Joe_Citizen
Fri, Jan 18, 2013 : 11:10 a.m.
Go ahead and laugh, then let the idea sink in, if we made drugs legal and gave them away for free to adults 21 and over, it will get the junk drugs off the streets, and out of the hands of our kids.
oldgaffer
Fri, Jan 18, 2013 : 3:02 a.m.
Snyder is Michigan's Sarah Palin. I have seldom heard a poorer public speaker. He has risen to the highest office in the State but knows nothing about people.
Fresh Start
Fri, Jan 18, 2013 : 1:26 a.m.
Quit Whinning!!! And just do something.
Dog Guy
Fri, Jan 18, 2013 : 12:26 a.m.
The working poor cannot afford new vehicles. Accordingly, they need two hunks of junk to alternate repairing and driving. They will pay more to register their two 1985 K-cars than a professional will pay to register his 2013 Lexus. And don't tell ME the lie that registration decreases as the vehicle ages.
jns131
Fri, Jan 18, 2013 : 11:16 p.m.
Did you see on the news what a new car costs these days? I was shocked. A used one in great condition still runs even after someone else takes it over. I love my used car. Can't wait to buy another.
jns131
Fri, Jan 18, 2013 : 12:23 a.m.
Might as well let Snyder turn out the lights. Good night, who has $120 per year lying around the house for registration fees? We are just holding our own as it is. Can we say three jobs? Find another way, insurance keeps going up and up and now this? Snyder? Forget it.
Jim Walker
Fri, Jan 18, 2013 : 12:08 a.m.
The correct way to fund roads is to reset the fuel tax rates to account for the inflation over the last 16 years, and to index it for automatic adjustments in the future so the revenues keep pace with actual costs. Fuel taxes: are proportional to use, encourage more fuel efficient vehicles, charge visitors to the state, tend to reduce fuel demand for imported oil, and are a very fair user fee. Large increases in registration fees where the 20,000+ mile driver pays the same as the low income widow who drives 2,500 miles per year are inherently unfair. Tell your state Representatives and Senators to raise the funds with a much fairer change in fuel taxes. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, Ann Arbor, MI
leaguebus
Fri, Jan 18, 2013 : 7:25 a.m.
You are an optimist.
leaguebus
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 11:57 p.m.
The gas tax in this state is 19.7cents per gallon and 15 cents per gallon for diesel. In Ohio, the gas tax is 28 cents for both fuels. Basically we subsidize diesel truck fuel. We should be charging more tax on diesel as trucks kill our roads faster than any car. The Ricksters easy solution is to sock it to us and continue to subsidize his buddies in the business sector, no doubt this will create more jobs.LOL
Carole
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 11:52 p.m.
Well, they just raised the vehicle registration fee this last year -- my cost went up $30. Sooooo.....Are we raising them again.
jns131
Fri, Jan 18, 2013 : 12:24 a.m.
Insurance is going up as well to pay for Hurricane Sandy. Going to suck big time. First Obama and now Snyder. Might as well go on welfare.
Nicholas Urfe
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 11:11 p.m.
@Boo: "The problem with that idea is that almost all products are shipped by truck. Any increases in truck fuel taxes and registration fees would simply be added to the cost of shipping, and all products and groceries we buy would correspondingly increase in price." That is false. For example, if you get a new swimming pool, you would pay slightly more due to the road wear and tear from the delivery trucks. I would not be paying for the wear and tear of your pool delivery, making it more fair. See the difference? The users who damage the roads should pay for the repairs. If that results in higher costs for some goods, then so be it.
Nicholas Urfe
Fri, Jan 18, 2013 : 1:26 a.m.
What does it matter, Bob? The point stands. Take cars as another example. The people buying new cars can absorb the cost of the part shipping. Why should those not buying new cars subsidize those who are?
Basic Bob
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 11:40 p.m.
How many swimming pools are shipped by truck? How many gallons of milk?
YpsiGirl4Ever
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 10:44 p.m.
$120.00 per motor -- vehicle. So, is this adding $120.00 to your Car, Truck, RV, Snowmobile and Motorcycle? What about your motorized boat? All of these motorized vehicles require gas and the Governor did say that if you can pay for gas, one can pay for his "gas tax". How about this? Take back the billions of dollars in tax breaks given to C & S Corporations to this State by a Corporate Welfare King Extraordinaire Governor, give the $900 Million taken to give C & S Corp's a $1.8 Billion dollar tax break back to our Public Schools, reinstate the entire Homestead Property tax credit and the State's dependent deduction tax credit, eliminate the tax on retiree pensions and then, and only then we can talk about raising a tax based "user fee" to "fix the roads".
Boo Radley
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 10:39 p.m.
There have been several comments encouraging higher fees for trucks, since they do more damage to the roads, make their money on them, etc. The problem with that idea is that almost all products are shipped by truck. Any increases in truck fuel taxes and registration fees would simply be added to the cost of shipping, and all products and groceries we buy would correspondingly increase in price. In the end, the trucking companies would not pay any extra and all of us would pay the bill in higher prices.
KJMClark
Fri, Jan 18, 2013 : 11:56 a.m.
In the end, the trucking companies would face competition from cheaper rail and companies using more efficient trucks. Then the companies that couldn't figure out how to compete would go out of business and we'd all be better off. Besides, the cost of shipping is usually a miniscule part of the cost of the goods. If very heavy goods went up five cents each, I don't think it would break any of us, but it would provide a strong incentive for the companies to reduce their road-destroying weights. It's always funny when companies say they'll pass costs along to customers, but neglect to mention that they'll lose business to more efficient competitors.
leaguebus
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 11:37 p.m.
A lot more people than just Michiganders will end up paying this tax. So, it costs us less per in state resident.
Nicholas Urfe
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 10:20 p.m.
I suggest our next piece of public art depict the working people getting squeezed by the current Michigan government at the behest of the corporations. And if that piece could somehow incorporate the DDA, all the better.
Dog Guy
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 9:58 p.m.
The trucking industry has owned the Michigan legislature since WWII. Michigan has absurdly high weight limits for the trucks which destroy roads in this state which is mostly marshland. The trucking industry is the greatest beneficiary of rebuilding roads. A wonderful scam: build roads; destroy roads; build roads; destroy roads; build . . .
Veracity
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 9:53 p.m.
Road aznd bridge repair and construction should not be paid for by regressive taxes. Progressive taxes on luxury cars, luxury boats, and luxury homes should be considered. Even better is to impose a "pork" tax on all the money in the state's budget targeted for non-essential items in each Representatives' districts.
Basic Bob
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 11:38 p.m.
Maybe they could tax luxury vehicles more than budget vehicles. If you can afford a Bentley, you pay more. What do you think?
barefootdave
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 9:51 p.m.
How much is salting the roads shortening its life. Colorado gets much more snow yet they are able to function without salt. I realize we are sitting on salt mines and that puts people to work, however at what cost to infrastructure and personal property.
gerald Grzesik
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 9:47 p.m.
If most of the road damage is done by trucks should we not look to let them pay there fair share if the are making most of the money from the roads, also time to look at plates on the trucks how many are not on our records but make there money on our roads?
DAN
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 9:42 p.m.
Infrastructure improvement is one issue on which I agree with the governor. This has been a major problem attracting business to Michigan---much more so than his last target [unions]This has been "kicked down the road" for too long and I'm willing to pay a little more per car for it now.
st.julian
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 9:39 p.m.
Given we need to improve the higheay infratstructure. If this is essential for our manufacturing sector including those producing intermmediate and final goods than my propostion is that: 1) Heavy users of the highays determined by weight and frequency ot travle, wight measured by law and use by somthing akin to ez-pass, be assessed usage fees on that basis. This fee would apply also to transport firms moving goods across state lines 2) non manufacuturing commercial vehicles could be assessed an annual fee by weight 3) personal vehicles can be assessed an annual fee by weight 4) Large manufacuteres of intermmediate and final goods could support a bond issue to which they pay part of with an annual fee and a longterm fiancial guarantee
Stephen Landes
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 9:38 p.m.
We will probably need more revenue in order to bring our roads up to "good". All sources should be considered before increasing fees or taxes (are there areas in the budget we can make more efficient or do without). If new revenue is needed then a combination of user fees and fuel taxes is acceptable. Registrations are value-based, so people with newer, more expensive vehicles will pay more, while people who can't afford a new vehicle will pay on the value of the car they own. As for fuel taxes those who use the roads the most will pay the most.
clownfish
Fri, Jan 18, 2013 : 1:29 p.m.
Isn't the registration fee based on original cost of the vehicle, not current market value?
dotdash
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 9:35 p.m.
Gas tax has the beauty of costing more for those who use the roads more. Heavy trucks, which get low gas mileage, cause more damage and require more expensive road beds than light cars. Let those that use the roads pay for them.
Boo Radley
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 10:34 p.m.
"Let those that use the roads pay for them" Great idea .... like bicyclists. We need a registration fee for bicycles on the roadways to raise money for bike lanes and other improvement for bikes.
packman
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 9:32 p.m.
How many vehicle owners/drivers are familiar with MCCA (Michigan Catastrophic Claims Association)? It costs you $175 per vehicle per year. The only state in the union to have such a swindle run not by elected officials. Disbanding the MCCA would raise a lot of money.
BenWoodruff
Fri, Jan 18, 2013 : 2:26 a.m.
No, bob, it pays for long term care for tbi patients, even if they were wearing seat belts...which most of them do. If this "swindle" is eliminated, and the insurance companies don't have to pay, who do you think picks up the tab? Medicaid...do you really think rates will come down? Mo profit for Allstate, baby!
Basic Bob
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 11:36 p.m.
It pays for all the people who break their brains because they don't wear seatbelts or helmets.
Nicholas Urfe
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 9:16 p.m.
"Snyder said the state can either ask users of the state's roads to pay an extra $120 per year per car now" Tell that to the poor family that has a car worth only $500. Or less. Some of them don't even get driven much - just essentials like groceries, doctor visits, etc.
Fordie
Fri, Jan 18, 2013 : 1:38 p.m.
Quit voting down Basic Bob on this comment. Urban planners, and most people with a brain, generally agree that the best way to increase mass transit use (which cuts down on emissions, sprawl, traffic congestion, etc.) is to raise the cost of driving.
Basic Bob
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 11:34 p.m.
Another reason to take the bus.
Stephen Landes
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 9:39 p.m.
The $120 per year is an average, not a fixed fee for each vehicle.
EyeHeartA2
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 9:30 p.m.
Some of them don't even get driven much - just essentials like groceries, doctor visits, etc. Hence, it would be more "fair" to slap on a fuel tax.
gladys
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 9:03 p.m.
How about instead of more "art works", the money gets put into road repairs?
Veracity
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 9:43 p.m.
Fortunately, not that much money is being wasted on public art. On the other hand, it does not offer a reasonable way of offsetting road construction costs by shifting funds.
EyeHeartA2
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 8:36 p.m.
IF we feel the need to do more with respect to the roads THEN it seems most "fair" to slap on a fuel tax. This would be better correlated to miles driven and wear on the roads etc. I'm still trying to get my head around the 100 lives saved.....lesse here 100 lives/state*50 states = 5000 lives. WOW. Seems like a better deal than gun control. I'm just not buying it.
Bones
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 8:17 p.m.
How about this. Stop wasting money on the hotel they all use for conferences. Last time I hear the cost of that was 70k a day. Give back a couple of the last pay raises they voted themselves. And insstead of making perfectly good intersections into round abouts. Use that money saved to repair the roads they are on.
Veracity
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 9:41 p.m.
I understand that our roundabouts are paid for with federal dollars, some of which are our tax dollars coming back to us-- finally.
Ryan J. Stanton
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 8:21 p.m.
Maybe there's some fat to cut there, but that doesn't get us anywhere near $1B or $1.5B in new funding. What else do you propose?.
Think!
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 8:09 p.m.
Simple solution - toll roads.
Ignatz
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 8:06 p.m.
I prefer an increase in the gas tax. It would essentially be an offset to the more fuel efficient vehicles we are now driving. Plus, it would better equate road use. The big increase in registration fees would be too large of a one time hit for those of us who pretty much live check to check. Tracking millage and paying for it is not sound. How would one differentiate driving in state as opposed to driving out of it? We have to pay for it somehow. They're our roads and it's up to us to pony up.
YpsiGirl4Ever
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 7:59 p.m.
Neither. Who says this "revenue" would not be used to build the supposed "free bridge to Canada" the Governor wants? Remember, Governor Snyder has a tenancy to say one thing, then turn around and do another (like Right To Work). With such, he can't be trusted with additional revenue, in the form of tax dollars.
maallen
Fri, Jan 18, 2013 : 1:29 p.m.
YpsiGirl4Ever, Yes, google is a wonderful thing. That is why you could not find a quote from Gov Snyder saying he would not sign a RTW bill, saying one thing and doing another. "Snyder has said that controversy over right-to-work legislation would be a distraction from other priorities." - MLive-January 16, 2012 And he was right....RTW legislation was a distraction. "Michigan's Republican Gov. Rick Snyder, who is up for re-election in 2014, has called right-to-work "too divisive". And Gov Snyder was correct, RTW was "too divisive." Again, provide a quote that Gov Snyder said he would not sign the RTW bill. So far, all the quotes you provided from newspapers does not show Snyder saying one thing and doing another. Snyder was correct, RTW is very divisive, and took away from other priorities.
clownfish
Fri, Jan 18, 2013 : 1:27 p.m.
We did elect new legislators, and the GOP passed the law before they could get into office. Snyder could have vetoed the law or just not put it on his Agenda, like he said. But, he chose to be divisive, now he wants democrats to "stop hitting yourself in the face" while he slaps them around.
Basic Bob
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 11:32 p.m.
@YpsiGirl, The governor did not write the legislation and did not pass it. Our elected representatives did that. What do you expect him to do when it hits his desk? Unless he absolutely disagrees, he should sign it. If you have an issue with that, you need to work to elect different representatives.
YpsiGirl4Ever
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 10:32 p.m.
Mallen, Google does amazing things... "Gov. Rick Snyder, who has tried repeatedly to discourage conservatives in his party from pursuing right-to-work legislation, now wants unions to back off pushing a ballot proposal that would make such a law unconstitutional." Detroit Free Press - March 19, 2012 http://on.freep.com/W9vK16 "Snyder has said that controversy over right-to-work legislation would be a distraction from other priorities." - MLive-January 16, 2012 http://bit.ly/W9vSOd " he has avoided outright union-bashing and has shown no inclination to join legislators in targeting the Michigan Education Association or starting a civil war by pushing "right to work" legislation." -Holland Sentinel -11/28/2011 http://bit.ly/10CBxno "Michigan's Republican Gov. Rick Snyder, who is up for re-election in 2014, has called right-to-work "too divisive" and Michigan's Republican Senate Majority Leader Randy Richardville said last week he doubted right-to-work would bring the economic benefits promised by supporters." - Bloomberg Business Week-2/1/2012 So all four of these newspaper resources are lying or are you Mallen? I would say the latter name in the prior sentence, is telling the falsehoods here, you think?
maallen
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 9:42 p.m.
YpsiGirl4Ever, Please provide a quote from Gov Snyder that backs up your claim that he said one thing and did another on the Right To Work issue. We'll be waiting for that quote.
dave
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 9:24 p.m.
What did he say about right to work that he did another thing instead? All I remember him saying while the legislature was debating it was that if they passed it, he would sign it. Sounds like that was exactly what he did.
Radlib2
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 7:35 p.m.
At the end of the day, it is a regressive tax. Many of our taxes are, that's why, for the sake of fairness, a luxury tax should be imposed on the more expensive cars and trucks.
EyeHeartA2
Fri, Jan 18, 2013 : 2:57 a.m.
Thanks Alan. You prove my point. Nobody is making you buy a hamburger and it cost the same for everyone. The price of the hamburger is not dictated by your income. Why should the cost to drive a car be dictated by your income - as the OP suggests would be "fair".
alan
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 11:38 p.m.
You make no sense. Nobody makes you buy hamburger and that's just as absurd a statement. I merely pointed out that there is a difference between taxation and consumption because you seemed to be trying to make an analogy.
EyeHeartA2
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 9:06 p.m.
^^^Why's that? Nobody is MAKING you drive, right?
alan
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 9:03 p.m.
Consumption of a marketable commodity and taxation for public welfare are two entirely different things.
EyeHeartA2
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 8:45 p.m.
When you go to the store, do they ask you how much money you make before they tell you what a pound of hamburger costs?
Radlib2
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 8:40 p.m.
Someone who makes minimum wage would have to spend a whole paycheck to register a car. Someone who makes six figures would only have to spend a few hours worth. That's why.
EyeHeartA2
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 8:32 p.m.
Why again, is that "fair"?
Mr. Ed
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 7:26 p.m.
Since the Snyder gave the Corporations and businesses hugh tax breaks on the backs of retired, seniors and poor lets have a Corporate infrastructure tax. He can build new roads and pave the way for new businesses to relocate to Michigan. I'm still waiting for all the new jobs he promised with the corporate welfare he handed out.
Veracity
Thu, Jan 17, 2013 : 9:36 p.m.
Right on, Mr. Ed! Mr. Snyder has gifted $1.8 billion in tax reductions to business owners whose products ship in road-damaging trucks over our highways. A business tax would be appropriate for providing revenue to repair our roads. All other options are regressive and likely to harm our Michigan economy while lowering the standard of living for most of our citizens.