TCI Regional Policy Design Stakeholder Submissions

Gas tax is regressive - proportionally punishes those who can least afford it - those who must travel longer distances to jobs because they can’t afford housing in pricey metropolitan area. From CommonWealth Magazine: “ The proposal would mimic a gas tax in that it would raise the price of gasoline.” Please don’t disguise a gas tax with a new name “cap and invest”. Reduce government waste, and fix loopholes to ensure that ultra-rich are not paying a lower effective tax rate than the lower and middle working classes. Use that money to improve mass transit e.g. electric buses on convenient routes. Only then will commuters opt to leave the car at home.

The urgent need for clean transportation continues to grow and I therefore strongly support the Transportation and Climate Initiative's mission. We must as a government and society take every conceivable action to mitigate the effects of climate change and reducing greenhouse gas emissions is vital to the cause. It's time to invest in technology that advances this cause.

I am aretired physical oceanographer who has been following the science of climate change for nearly 40 years. I live on Cape cod and, in addition to concern about what sea level rise will do to the Cape I have an 18 year old grandson who will see the worst of climate change effects. I request that the TCI policy call for putting a high enough price on carbon to effectively reduce emission according to the latest science. I also request that the policy have a strong component of social equity and does not harm rural or low to moderate people. I very much appreciate the bipartisan nature of this project.

This is a very bad deal for Maine! The negligible positive impact that is delusionally believed to occur will NOT be worth the financial burden. This is a deal that other states have already recognized to be lousy and walked away from and Maine needs to do the same. This is worse than the decision to put solar panels on the Blaine House.

TCI is nothing but a money grab and a different name for a tax on motor fuel. In fact the cost would be added on at retail which will increase tax on gas under our current formula. Complicated and costly with general public paying to enrich electricity providers, Electric car manufactures and public transportation they can't use. Those that purchase electric cars and get rebates are in the upper percentile of wage earners and million are paid out for tax credits they should not be receiving. TCI would be a very regressive tax and disproportionately affect the lower income who can't wait for a rebate or tax credit. This is just a plain bad initiative.

Cleaning up our transportation is critical to slowing down and eventually reversing climate change. It is also essential for creating a sustainable environment in which we have clean air to breath. Connecticut has one of the highest rates of asthma in this country. I know what it is like to stay awake nights trying to deal with my son's asthma attacks. I have also seen the growing smog and dirty air that is created by our fossil fuel burning vehicles in the mountains of Vermont. We need good, reliable and abundant public transportation that will reduce our need for individual cars, support people in every economic class, and improve the quality of life in all of our communities including urban, suburban and rural. For instance, my son has benefitted greatly from the bus system between rural Stores and Hartford. Good public transportation is an economic engine and provides access to economic opportunities for all people. Making a transition to electric energy to power that transportation is also essential to reduce carbon emissions and to create a truly green economy. It will help to reduce health care costs as well and improve the quality of life wherever that transportation is found. Owning an electric vehicle I know how much more efficient and safer these vehicles are. We need our government to lead on these issues and to take the steps necessary to combat the climate crisis.

If Vermont actually joins the TCI, we'll get more revenue for needed and worthwhile investments than if Vermonters simply contribute to the program. Let's link arms with our neighbors, Governor Scott!

Thankfully, Governor Baker has shown leadership in bringing officials from many states together to work together to improve regional transportation. I now urge him and the Mass. House and Senate to formally join this effort and push for the strongest policies and regulations
recommended by climate scientists and transportation experts.

Greenhouse gas and particulate pollution from automobiles are major contributors to global warming and respiratory disorders. We must immediately begin to drastically reduce these pollutants and, in the process, make affordable public transportation available to underserved people who must drive to work and other necessary activities.

I am writing with deep concern about the proposal put forward by the Transportation Climate Initiative.

The proposal outlines a program that will cap the sale of gasoline, tax it, and then require the revenue generated to be spent on new government programs and projects that will further reduce the sale of gasoline. Rather than use the existing motor fuel tax structure in the states, the tax has been intentionally proposed at a point of “prime suppliers” so that it will be hidden from consumers. I believe that the TCI planners feel that it must be done this way because if the general public knew the costs of this plan they would soundly reject this and other proposals like it. If the energy provided by petroleum to move people and goods in the economy is removed by reduced gasoline consumption, it either must be replaced by more expensive and less efficient forms of energy or the movement of people and goods must be reduced. Either scenario will have devastating effects on the economy in the northeast and will continue to push people and businesses away from these states.

Although this proposal has been pitched as a consensus document, in fact, it is not. There have been only three work sessions and less than a handful of webinars to solicit public feedback and comment. The framework is not ready for adoption by the states as too many points have not been clarified and fleshed out. No one really knows the full detail of the proposal. More outreach and public input needs to happen to shift this to a consensus. At the present, the framework appears to be a predisposed outcome. The general public in the member states has little or no knowledge of this plan to massively increase the cost of their transportation fuels.

I reject this framework – and I urge that the participating Governors be required personally to attend and hold public hearings throughout their states. This proposal will not achieve its goals. California enacted a similar program recently, and, by most accounts, their gasoline costs have skyrocketed while the environmental impact has had no true measurable benefit.