TCI Regional Policy Design Stakeholder Submissions

I oppose taxing gasoline for any other purpose but to build and repair roads and bridges and to maintain highway police coverage. Taxing gas to provide charging facilities for electric vehicles, often operated free of charge, is particularly agregious and a misappropriation of private property. In my opinion, electric vehicles and their batteries do more environmental damage in rural areas like Maine because the batteries require more energy to produce and are more difficult to recycle without hurting the environment. In low density areas like ours, the slight air pollution of modern gas and diesel vehicles is less an issue than recycling electric vehicle batteries.

This well-intentioned plan benefits only urban areas. Those of us living in rural portions of the country will pay a heavy economic price in order to force city dwellers to take taxpayer-subsidized transportation. Instead, find a plan that only the actual users of this 'grand plan' will be forced to pay for.

Of course, our state is far too large and our people are too spread out for electric vehicles and statewide public transportation to be feasible. Private transportation is not a luxury in Maine, it is a necessity, and Mainers should not be penalized for driving to work, bringing their kids to school or running errands.

While improved public transportation is a good idea, most of Maine is very rural and depend on private transportation. Except for 3 or 4 of the largest cities, electric cars, charging stations, etc. would not help most Mainers. A better use of any incoming funds from such a tax would be to improve our deteriorating roads and infrastructure.

This new tax will only put more hard-working Mainers' money in the hands of bureaucrats. Why can't Augusta find a way to fix things that does not require fleecing tax payers? We're always in the top ten (maybe top five) of the most heavily taxed states. Are we shooting for number one?

We need politicians to do everything possible to get us off ALL FOSSIL FUELS. Promoting solar and wind energy systems needs to be added as pillars to TCI, in order to have a multi-tiered approach to immediately addressing climate change. The current TCI format os not enough.

I feel if the government funded the scientists that disagree with the "carbon caused climate change" we would have a true explanation of what is going on with the climate, but that will not be done, as it is the government elected and bureaucracy who is pushing this for additional tax revenue, and that is what it really is. This would not change anything, just cost citizens more money. I reviewed some of the responses and this is the best explanation of reality:

First, the economic side: A "carbon tax" or "gas tax" is extremely regressive and hurts low-income individual, small business, and rural communities disproportionately. The relatively MINOR emission reductions gained by this approach will do nothing to curve "climate change" and only place an unnecessary burden on low income, rural Mainers. We do not have the ability in this state not to drive. Taxes without representation is a socialist concept, not one of a free society.

Second, the scientific side. To argue that ANY reductions in emissions from the transportation sector will "reverse" climate change is silly and unscientific. To think that if the world were to stop emitting carbon tomorrow (every living organism on the planet would need to stop breathing) and then believing the climate would return to 1800's levels, is farcical. Think about it. Can humans really control the climate? Ridiculous. The biggest fraud on the American public is when the courts ruled that CO2 was an air pollutant! How can that be, when CO2 is merely part of an organism's life cycle. CO2 is not and never should be considered a pollutant. This is a manufactured crisis. If the climate changes, for whatever reason, we adapt. Has happened over the millennium. Humans adapt to their environment, they cannot control it.

SAY NO to this ill-conceived plan. NO TAXES without representation, and CO2 is NOT a pollutant.

That the Federal Government pollution standards from vehicles is too high for proper pollution reduction, that gasoline engines will antiquate within a couple of decades due to projected shortages and that the science now understands the effects of this type pollution on the most vulnerable, it is time to remove ourselves from inefficient and poorly designed transportation systems.

I applaud this initiative, especially if it encourages the development and expansion of public transportation, bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, and non-carbon electricity production. I am a bit concerned that the "affected fuels" are limited to diesel and gasoline, while the topic of what fuels might be used to generate electricity to power cars and buses has been left unaddressed. I'm by no means an expert, however, and I applaud this as a good first step. We need to move away from the car culture that was carefully cultivated beginning in the 1950s, and anything that helps with that is welcome progress indeed. If this is seen as a first step, I'm all in; however, more needs to be done.