Contribute for Conservatism!

Share this post

About the author

JR Hoeft

Conservative to the core; liberal with his opinion! J.R. has been involved in politics for over a decade and has worked on several campaigns in Hampton Roads. He has served on the Executive Committee of the Republican Party of Chesapeake and the Central Committee of the Republican Party of Virginia. He is also the director of “Blogs United” in Virginia. E-mail J.R.. Follow J.R. on Twitter.

Comments

17 Responses to "Legislation Bearing Drift supports/opposes"

1. 

   Tweets that mention Legislation Bearing Drift supports/opposes : Bearing Drift: Virginia Politics On Demand -- Topsy.com January 17, 2011 16:12 pm

   [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Bearing Drift, Eva Miranda. Eva Miranda said: Legislation Bearing Drift supports/opposes : Bearing Drift …: Bearing Drift supports this bill as predatory le… http://bit.ly/f4w1ex [...]

2. 

   HisRoc January 17, 2011 17:22 pm

   I am disappointed by your opposition to Del. Jim Scott’s bill to make the gasoline tax a percentage of the fuel price. Most people in the Commonwealth are blissfully unaware that when the current gasoline tax rate was set, the average price of regular unleaded gasoline was about $1.00 per gallon and Reagan was President. As a percentage of the cost per gallon, the tax has fallen from over 17% to less than 6%.

   The amount of tax will not increase with each price rise, the rate will be determined by the average price per gallon over a six-month period. Also, when the gasoline prices fall over a six-month base period, the tax amount will also decrease.

   Gasoline taxes are the fairest way of paying for transportation infrastructure. They put the tax burden on those who use the road network, both residents and non-residents, and taxes each user according to the amount of their use.

3. 

   JerryZ January 17, 2011 17:50 pm

   I have a fondness for health care workers, but I do not really get how Stolle’s bill would provide them more protection. I don’t see it as having any deterent affect. Also, why not just increase the penalty for assualt and battery on everyone. It doesn’t seem very “equal” to punish people differently based on whom the crime was comitted.

4. 

   JerryZ January 17, 2011 17:52 pm

   Oops, made some English errors. Sorry.

5. 

   HisRoc January 17, 2011 17:54 pm

   JerryZ,

   Thank you. You have very articulately expressed my opposition to so-called “hate crimes.”

6. 

   rtwingtroll January 17, 2011 18:02 pm

   RE: Stolle bill

   Question: “or a clinic rendering emergency medical care” COULD that be construed to include abortion centers? COULD assault be broadly construed to subject non-violent protesters to a 1st class Misdemeanor charge?

7. 

   JR Hoeft January 17, 2011 19:18 pm

   rtwingtroll –
   I suppose it could if another bill we support – Bell’s HB1428 – passes.

   Might have to rethink this one.

   Thanks, guys, for the free advice. That’s what this is here for.

8. 

   Steve Vaughan January 18, 2011 09:54 am

   HR-You’re exactly right about the gas tax. It’s value has dwindled as the gas prices have increased. Probably should have been set as a percentage to start with. 17 cents per gallon was a big deal when gas cost $1 a gallon, not so much now. Gas prices go up and down by 17 cents per gallon in any given week these days.

9. 

   Jay D January 18, 2011 11:02 am

   HisRoc: Since I’m beating the gas tax drum on another thread, I’ll weigh in by agreeing with BD’s opposition to HB 1413 – for different reasons.
   #1: There is no causal relationship between transportation funding and gas prices; why link them up?
   #2: Execution requires staff and additional cost to implement.
   #3: Delegate Howell’s bill (HB1531) is a better bill – outcome is one set rate (27.5¢) that produces a much more predictable revenue stream. (http://www.richmondsunlight.com/bill/2011/hb1531/)

10. 

    HisRoc January 18, 2011 12:10 pm

    Jay D,

    1. There is a causal relationship between the price of gasoline and the cost of transportation funding. Asphalt, for example, is a petroleum product and road working equipment use fuel.

    2. One clerk with a laptop computer can calculate the gasoline tax in 15 minutes once every six months.

    3. 27.5 cents per gallon brings the gas tax back up to half of what it was in 1985, as a percentage of the price per gallon. Do we have half the cars using Virginia roads now that we had in 1985?

    Republicans are just as irrational as Democrats when it comes to taxation. Reasonable taxation to provide necessary public services is not inherently bad. We need to get the gasoline tax back up to where it was a quarter of a century ago.

11. 

    Jay D January 18, 2011 14:37 pm

    HisRoc:
    1. It is not causal – gas price fluctuations don’t cause automatically cause correlating, equal, and observable rise/fall in the road construction costs. Price swings for petroleum and gasoline can be offset by many factors (price of labor, cost of money, profit target, more efficient machines, market competition, source contracts, etc.).
    2. Ha! When has government ever worked that efficiently – one clerk calculating and it’s all done? Not!
    3. Do the math (according to HB 1413) …
    Step 1
    - Calculate average price of gas (in all counties of VA) between Oct 1, 2010 through March 31, 2011.
    - To save time … let’s agree to use $3 per gallon as that ‘average price’.
    - Deduct the fed tax (18.4 ¢) = $2.816 avg. price
    - Calculate what % of $2.86 equals 17.5¢ (current tax rate) ~ It’s roughly 6%.
    - According HB1413, future gas taxes will now = 6% of avg. price of unleaded LESS fed/state taxes.
    Step 2
    -Gas prices rise to $3.50 (less 18.4¢ fed tax) = $3.32 // Gas tax now = .199¢ per gal
    -Gas prices rise to $3.86 (less 18.4¢ fed tax) = $3.68 // Gas tax now = .220¢ per gal
    -Gas prices rise to $4.00 AND Fed gas tax increases by 4¢ per gallon = $3.77 // Gas tax now = .226¢ per gal

    If 10¢ per gallon increase is insufficient (in your view), note your bill (HB 1413) requires retail gas prices to shoot to $4.70/gal (with no change in the Fed’s tax) before it begins to generate equal the revenue stream of HB1531 (which I do support).

12. 

    Steve Vaughan January 18, 2011 14:59 pm

    Jay D: Don’t question your math. BUT, it seems to me one is more politically doable than the other.
    Raising the tax 10 cents per gallon is just a TAX INCREASE…which can’t get through the House because too many people have sworn to never, ever, ever raise tax no matter what.
    Changing from a set amount per gallon to a percentage can, plausibly, be presented as tax REFORM.

13. 

    Jay D January 18, 2011 17:41 pm

    Good point SV ~ am probably showing naivety regarding the legislative process. However, if I (legislator JD-R) were willing to stick my neck out, spend precious political capital, and rally around ‘tax reform’ … it better be a good plan.

    At best, over the next three years, Scott’s HB1413 adjusts the actual tax by less than 1¢ (in 2011) – 4¢ (in 2013). Chump change; w/ potential revenues wiped out when the fed gas tax (unchanged since ’93) is adjusted. As a legislator, the potential rewards (if I vote FOR this bill) come no where close to offsetting my political risks. Regardless of what it’s called (tax reform/ tax increase), HB1413 is a convoluted, complicated, and just plain crappy bill ~ that doesn’t get the job done (restore transportation funding to ’87/88 levels).

    McDonnell wants to spend an additional 4 billion in the next 3 years on transportation – 3 billion from borrowing. Yes, I seriously believe Republicans (in this climate of deficit reduction) could sell a dime per gallon increase in leu of a billion more bucks in borrowing …“In 2007, approx. 4 mil cars and 2.5 mil trucks & buses were registered in VA; 10¢ increase could produce an added $338 million per year. Matched by fed funds (80/20), my extra $1.76 /week could fund more than $1.3 billion PER YEAR of new construction and road maintenance.” http://bearingdrift.com/2011/01/15/senate-democrats-raise-our-taxes-or-else/

14. 

    Steve Vaughan January 20, 2011 11:56 am

    JD- I agree with you that they could sell it, but they don’t agree with you that they should.

15. 

    jeff t February 4, 2011 06:36 am

    Expressing opposition to HB 1855, which proposes to exempt the “Harvell” dam on the Appomattox River from the Game and Inland Fisheries program to restore fish passageways.

    With all that’s out there, waterways (and this bill) don’t get much notice. We all enjoy them though, and here’s a chance to make a correction in their favor. Remnant of a failed hydro project from another era, this dam has backers who think it’s “pretty”. Really, it just needs to go.

16. 

    Joey Williams June 8, 2011 11:01 am

    I hope everyone will support Virginia Fraud Against Taxpayers Act; waiver of sovereign immunity. (HB1399) by Del. Bill Janis (R-56)a dui dwi attorney richmond virginia. Call your local delegate.

17. 

    LittleDavid June 8, 2011 12:14 pm

    HisRoc,

    I must have missed this when it was posted, (I guess I was on the road when this one was originally posted) and I guess all of the issues have been decided on. I wish to rebut why HB-1413 is a terrible idea and point to the experience of our neighbor down in North Carolina with a similar measure. I understand it failed, but it might come up again.

    Also, HisRoc, I want you to understand that I certainly support increasing the fuel tax, only disagreeing on whether or not this is a good way to do it.

    North Carolina enacted such a measure back in 2006. Fuel taxes would be based on a percentage of the total cost (adjusted semiannually) of fuel based on wholesale fuel prices and not per gallon. They also included a ceiling of 29.9 cents per gallon which fuel taxes would not rise above no matter how expensive fuel got to be.

    Well what happened? Fuel prices were up and the ceiling was hit. North Carolina embarked on an ambitious construction schedule based on their new revenue stream. But then what happened? Fuel prices dropped and fuel tax revenue plummeted, (back in 2006, who would have forecasted that would ever happen?) and North Carolina no longer had enough money to service the newly incurred debt and fund maintenance. So, in 2009 they flipped how they would collect the revenue. Instead of 29.9 cents per gallon being the ceiling, it would be the floor. Imagine that.

    I have been out of the loop recently, and it is my understanding that the new measure which set to automatically expire this month (June 2011) and was being reviewed.

    Anyway, my argument is why have such a quirky method of collecting transportation revenue? We only need to look at what is possible proven by North Carolina’s experiences to see that this is a bad idea.

    Perhaps it might not be a bad idea to increase the fuel taxes and then automatically tie future increases to the rate of inflation or something so we do not constantly run into a major war every time it becomes necessary to increase the fuel tax – however there are strong arguments for why this might be good as well as for why this really is unnecessary that we could explore if anyone is interested.