A tax on bikes? Hit the road, some cyclists say

[cpzilliacus]

L.A. Times: A tax on bikes? Hit the road, some cyclists say

On the road to a new bicycle tax in Washington state -- more on that in a second -- a legislator, by his own admission, said a rather silly thing to a Tacoma bike shop owner last week.

"If I am not mistaken, a cyclists [sic] has an increased heart rate and respiration," state Rep. Ed Orcutt wrote in a Feb. 25 email to that owner, Dale Carlson, who  shared it with the Los Angeles Times. "That means the act of riding a bike results in greater emissions of carbon dioxide from the rider. Since CO2 is deemed to be a greenhouse gas and a pollutant, bicyclists are actually polluting when they ride."

[Brandon]

Why not?  I'm in favor of licensing them.

[agentsteel53]

license should be in stick form, applied vigorously through front spokes of any bicyclist who runs a four-way stop.

[jeffandnicole]

Why not?  Bicyclists are increasingly wanting bike lanes.  Shouldn't they have to pay for what they want?

[US 41]

No offense but I think that would be stupid to have to have a license for a bicycle. Just another way the government is tryng to control you. Maybe Michell Obama is wrong. We should stop exercising because we are pollutinng the air when we do. Let's ban basketball, football, baseball and any other sport. Maybe we should have an oxygen task, a penny for every time we breathe because every time we exhale were polluting the air. GIVE ME A BREAK!

[NE2]

We've already discussed this ad nauseam and there's no point in going through the motions again.

[SP Cook]

Why not?  Bicyclists are increasingly wanting bike lanes.  Shouldn't they have to pay for what they want?

Exactly.  Bike owners not only freeload on the existing infastructure, but demand special infastructure that other's cannot use. 

[NE2]

special infastructure that other's cannot use. 

[SP Cook]

Umm, and????

Any roadway is paid for by roadway users, via the gas tax.

A bike lane, which no one but a bike user can use, is currently paid for, also, by the gas tax. 

Which is, of course, bad public policy.  Tax bikes and free up more money for more roadways.  Its all about fairness.

[Scott5114]

special infastructure that other's cannot use. 

But then those freeways were paid for by motor fuel taxes, which pedestrians and bicycles do not pay. Not much different from not allowing someone on a toll road if they didn't pay a toll. (Of course, this ignores that the reason that sign was posted was more likely not about taxes, but because of the safety issue that having bikes and peds around 70+ MPH traffic causes.)

I would be okay with a bike sales tax if the funds raised by it went to a dedicated fund for building biking facilities. Not if it went to a general fund or even just a transportation fund though. It's not like it would even be all that onerous, since honestly, how often do you need to purchase a new bike?

[NE2]

Ah, the old lie about roads paying for themselves. Call me when you're done.

[djsinco]

As a homeowner, I am required by my municipality to pay directly for sidewalk repair or replacement adjacent to my property, as well as snow removal. Yet, pedestrians are allowed to use my "foot highway" for free. I am considering setting up a toll system (open tolling, of course.) I now need to work out the method of putting transponders on my primary user group, which would be elementary school students on their way to and from classes. I am considering using a pricing structure similar to the OH and PA turnpikes, where they will pay by weight class. This whole childhood obesity thing might really pay handsome dividends for me!

[Brandon]

Ah, the old lie about roads paying for themselves. Call me when you're done.

Ah yes, the old lie about roads not being paid for by road users.  We're talking freeways and tollways, not the street in front of your goat's house.

[kkt]

Any roadway is paid for by roadway users, via the gas tax.

A bike lane, which no one but a bike user can use, is currently paid for, also, by the gas tax. 

In most states, property taxes pay for the local streets.  Bike owners pay property taxes too.  Freeways are mostly payed for with gas taxes, and oddly enough most of the time bikes can't use them.

[mapman1071]

The Head of the NYC Transportation Dept a few years back had a proposal to have bicycle riders 18+ get a Bicyclist License and Plates for there bicycle(S). for a yearly renewal fee for both the license and the plates. The cost was not stated and both bicyclists and Transportation Alternatives vetoed the plan in front of Mayor Bloomberg and the city council.     

[NE2]

I don't know what a veto is.

[mapman1071]

I don't know what a veto is.

Vote Against

[Billy F 1988]

Hold it right there. You see how stupid this is?! Hell, Alanland does and doesn't seem to mind taxing cyclists. Give me a break. A pedal-power cycle does not emit CO2. Cars and motorized bikes do.

Vote against this. Don't bring any of that shit to Montana!

[djsinco]

Tax-hungry states like NY and CA will look for any source of revenue they can devise. What would be next, in-line skate registration?

[Scott5114]

I don't know what a veto is.

Vote Against

That is not a veto.

[J N Winkler]

In most states, property taxes pay for the local streets.

This is not generally the only source of revenue, though--in most states, a fraction of the state gas tax is diverted to cities and counties for road purposes.  I am actually not sure there is any part of the street network in the typical city for which all construction and maintenance services are paid for solely by property taxes.  Roads inside subdivisions, for example, typically don't get snow removal, but they typically get sand seals or concrete repair at least once a decade, and I think at least part of the funding for that ultimately comes from the state gas tax.

Bike owners pay property taxes too.  Freeways are mostly paid for with gas taxes, and oddly enough most of the time bikes can't use them.

This is true, but they are also not directly exposed to the fuel tax since they don't burn fuel on the freeways (though they do pay indirectly since the fuel tax others pay is an included cost in goods and services they buy).  This is one of the reasons a fuel tax for freeway construction is less problematic than, say, a sales tax increment.



About the original story:  what is a legislator from Kalama, Washington (I-5 corridor, east of the Cascades, in a state where left-wing orientation supposedly matches rainfall intensity) doing pushing the idea that bicycling is carbon-intense transportation?

The ultimate expression of this tendency of thought was a calculation, done years ago by someone posting to alt.planning.urban or misc.transport.urban-transit, that bicyclists have an "effective fuel economy" of about 50 MPG once the indirect effects of fuel consumption in the food distribution system are taken into account.  (The basic idea was this:  each bicycle trip corresponds to an added increment of fuel consumption for trucks to bring food from the farm to the distribution center, and then from the distribution center to the supermarket.  The focus on increments was an attempt to evade the problem of joint costs, which makes this calculation nonsensical.)

[cpzilliacus]

This is not generally the only source of revenue, though--in most states, a fraction of the state gas tax is diverted to cities and counties for road purposes.

Though then there are states like Virginia, where nearly all public streets and roads are maintained by the Virginia Department of Transportation.  As others and I have mentioned before (so pardon the redundancy), two Virginia counties maintain their own secondary road networks (Arlington and Henrico), and most Virginia cities (independent of any county) and towns (part of a surrounding county) maintain their streets and roads, though they get funding from VDOT to maintain their "urban system."

[NE2]

About the original story:  what is a legislator from Kalama, Washington (I-5 corridor, east of the Cascades, in a state where left-wing orientation supposedly matches rainfall intensity) doing pushing the idea that bicycling is carbon-intense transportation?

He's a Repub troll.

[corco]

About the original story:  what is a legislator from Kalama, Washington (I-5 corridor, east of the Cascades, in a state where left-wing orientation supposedly matches rainfall intensity) doing pushing the idea that bicycling is carbon-intense transportation?

Parts of western Washington, particularly around Longview/Kelso and Chehalis/Centralia are pretty Republican

[kkt]

About the original story:  what is a legislator from Kalama, Washington (I-5 corridor, east of the Cascades, in a state where left-wing orientation supposedly matches rainfall intensity) doing pushing the idea that bicycling is carbon-intense transportation?

The liberal/conservative divide is not strictly along the Cascades.  Plenty of conservatives in the rural parts of western Washington.  And of course plenty of wackos everywhere.  And you mean "west of the Cascades".