What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Michigan`s Governor Whitmer proposing a new 46 cent a gallon tax hike (1 Viewer)

A quick google search shows that the Michigan Constitution requires money to be used for Transportation purposes

Act 51 - then dictates how that money is spent:

Article IX, Section 9, of the Michigan Constitution of 1963, as amended, states that "All specific taxes . . . imposed directly or indirectly on fuels sold or used to propel motor vehicles upon highways. . . or on registered motor vehicles . . . shall, after payment of necessary collection expenses, be used exclusively for transportation purposes. . ." Public Act 51 of 1951, as amended ("Act 51") governs the distribution of this revenue. The following pages summarize this distribution. Act 51 creates a fund into which specific transportation taxes are deposited, and prescribes how these revenues are to be distributed and the purposes for which they can be spent. Act 51 establishes jurisdictional road networks, sets priorities for the use of transportation revenues, and allows bonded indebtedness for transportation improvements and guarantees repayment of debt.

https://www.michigan.gov/documents/act51simple_28749_7.pdf

How does Michigan get away with violating the constitution and state code?
I misspoke.  (Mistyped) I meant to say the sales tax on gas isn’t going towards transportation funding.  It’s just like any other sales tax

 
I misspoke.  (Mistyped) I meant to say the sales tax on gas isn’t going towards transportation funding.  It’s just like any other sales tax
I think I saw sales tax is $0.06 v. Gas tax of $0.18

Sales tax going to general funds makes sense - all sales tax goes there.  But, as I understand the new proposal, the entire tax is a gas tax - and would be used to fund transportation issues.

If you have roads that need repair - you have to raise the funds somewhere.  :shrug:

 
Good.  We should at least double the federal gas tax too.
If you drive a car, car, I'll tax the street
If you try to sit, sit, I'll tax your seat
If you get too cold, cold, I'll tax the heat
If you take a walk, I'll tax your feet

 
Last edited by a moderator:
CATO article, but they don't source their numbers.

Highways and Gas Tax Diversions

...

In total, states raised $82 billion from fuel taxes and vehicle fees. They spent $59 billion (72 percent) on highways and $23 billion (28 percent) on other activities. If the highways in your state have congestion and potholes, it may because your government is taking money raised from highway users and diverting it to other activities.

The chart below shows the shares of state fuel taxes and vehicle fees diverted to nonhighway uses. South Carolina, for example, diverts 31 percent.

... 

 
I don't have kids but pay into the school system.  All for the greater good, no?  If I buy that logic, then I would prefer that the non-drivers also pitch in on the roads.
I agree, I was just playing devil's advocate with people who are usually against socialism yet seem to advocate for a socialist program to pay for their roads.  Education is obviously another example of socialism ingrained in our system. 

 
Those taxes arent evenly distributed. There should be no off road breaks and diesel should be taxed much heavier than it is if we were going to actually do it proportionately. 

At least in terms of "fixing our roads" funding. 
Should a farmer pay road taxes on the diesel he runs through his combine?

 
Should a farmer pay road taxes on the diesel he runs through his combine?
Thats not taxed..They die it pink specifically to ensure that diesel fuel for that purpose is not taxed.

If they pull over an on the road vehicle and they dip the tank and it comes out pink, that mofo is in a whole lot of trouble with the state.

 
Thats not taxed..They die it pink specifically to ensure that diesel fuel for that purpose is not taxed.

If they pull over an on the road vehicle and they dip the tank and it comes out pink, that mofo is in a whole lot of trouble with the state.
I am aware of all of that.  The construction equipment he is talking about runs the same dyed diesel and falls under the same off-road rules.   He said there should be "no off road breaks".  I assume that would include farmers.  

 
I am aware of all of that.  The construction equipment he is talking about runs the same dyed diesel and falls under the same off-road rules.   He said there should be "no off road breaks".  I assume that would include farmers.  
Yep...sorry..>i answered too fast!

 
That is interesting - do you have a link for that?

I have always assumed the gas tax had a high correlation to road/highway repair budgets.  I don't know that I thought the funds were specifically earmarked - but like toll roads, I assumed the revenue was used to justify the highway budgets.

ETA - sort of like lottery funds are used for Education budgets.
Depends on the state constitution.  In Ohio gas tax has to go to roads and transportation.   

 
Should a farmer pay road taxes on the diesel he runs through his combine?
I was referring to construction equipment. Large construction projects are absolute road destroyers. 

Hadn't thought about farm equipment. After giving it some thought and some reading it seems farmers still file for refunds for gasoline purchased for farming use as well as diesel that was taxed. Might as well eliminate dyed diesel fuel and the enforcement involved with it, tax it all right away, and then farmers can just file quarterly for the difference. Or the government can just give them a slightly different subsidy. Seems dyed diesel has created its own black market and has billions in fraud. 

At least one way we address the construction side, eliminate wasteful spending, and we dont create any sort of new paperwork. Just expand a bit the framework of what already exists, remove the $750 cap, and we should come out way ahead. 

 
Gas taxes, in almost every state, go into a general fund, not earmarks. It's so disheartening to read the PSF and see otherwise smart policy people not grasp the very basics of general funds and whether the tax collected from a gas tax will actually go to fix the roads. 

I'm stunned that anybody would call this place politically "right" when this is the response to a whopping seven or eight buck increase for each tankful.  
I was just coming in to address this- I believe this particular gas tax would have to be spent on roads. Also a MI citizen, also would be for paying an extra $20-$30 a month if it means I don’t have to swerve to the left and right- I have a mental map of the routes I take often and will be surprised when a pothole gets filled. I actually hope it passes but I doubt it will. 

 
If there was an absolute guarantee that the money would be spent to fix all of the roads in my state, and it would go away after 12 months, I would be all for this.  I would support something similar to upgrade the electrical grid too.

 
Our roads sucks

i don’t trust that this money would actually go towards fixing them

I don’t want toll roads in Michigan.  We don’t get a lot of through traffic like Ohio, Pennsylvania, etc do or tourism like Florida so I feel like we’d just be taxing ourselves and wouldn’t be worth the hassle

im not opposed to paying more for better roads, but I’d like to see a more detailed plan for what “fixing” them means, as well as what other wasteful projects are sucking up money

hell have a Fix The Damm Roads scratch off lottery ticket and divert that money from the schools 

 
Our roads sucks

i don’t trust that this money would actually go towards fixing them

I don’t want toll roads in Michigan.  We don’t get a lot of through traffic like Ohio, Pennsylvania, etc do or tourism like Florida so I feel like we’d just be taxing ourselves and wouldn’t be worth the hassle

im not opposed to paying more for better roads, but I’d like to see a more detailed plan for what “fixing” them means, as well as what other wasteful projects are sucking up money

hell have a Fix The Damm Roads scratch off lottery ticket and divert that money from the schools 
:lmao:   Just like scratch off for teachers.  No shame from these shysters.

 
Our roads sucks

i don’t trust that this money would actually go towards fixing them

I don’t want toll roads in Michigan.  We don’t get a lot of through traffic like Ohio, Pennsylvania, etc do or tourism like Florida so I feel like we’d just be taxing ourselves and wouldn’t be worth the hassle

im not opposed to paying more for better roads, but I’d like to see a more detailed plan for what “fixing” them means, as well as what other wasteful projects are sucking up money

hell have a Fix The Damm Roads scratch off lottery ticket and divert that money from the schools 
Then thing with the lotto money for schools is that they just subtract that amount from the normal school funding. It’s a trick. After adjusting for inflation,Michigan per student funding has gone down by 18% per student over the last 20 years. At risk student funding is down 60%. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Then ting with the lotto money for schools is that they just subtract that amount from the normal school funding. It’s a trick. After adjusting for inflation,Michigan per student funding has gone down by 18% per student over the last 20 years. At risk student funding is down 60%. 
Exactly.

 
Also coincidentally Michigan school performance has been falling over the last 20 years. The previous administration’s plan to fix it was to get tough on schools and teachers. Now with wages stagnant, benefits disappearing and teacher demands growing, Michigan is facing a massive teacher shortage on the horizon. I literally can do whatever I want short of criminal activity or endangering. safety of students. They know they can’t replsce me. Good luck getting special ed teachers or science or math teachers. Lots of high schools around here just don’t have science teachers or have totally unqualified people teaching English. It’s ridiculous.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Are roads in the constitution? Why do we even have them?
Absolutely, quite right.  Road construction should be turned over to private entities so those communities and localities which can afford to pay for them can have them.

 
That is interesting - do you have a link for that?

I have always assumed the gas tax had a high correlation to road/highway repair budgets.  I don't know that I thought the funds were specifically earmarked - but like toll roads, I assumed the revenue was used to justify the highway budgets.

ETA - sort of like lottery funds are used for Education budgets.
No link but here in CT which dedfin can backup, the gas tax typically gets swept into general fund to pay for others things.  Our politicans have promised this was under lock box but that hasn’t stop them time and time again.  Now they want tolls here..

 
how about cutting spending on other things if the roads are needing repair ?

continually raising taxes is a doom to working class 

Gov. Gretchen Whitmer - DEMOCRAT

 
It is obviously not so simple, but off road construction vehicles are exempt from paying taxes on the diesel they use. Yet they they cause far more damage to a road when they get transported to a site than 7000 cars making the same trek. It is also not uncommon to have to drop the equipment and then drive it on the road. This causes tons of damage. 

That isnt exactly fair. 
I'm ok with taxing the diesel higher than gasoline. Be prepared to pay more for your prime membership, though

 
how about cutting spending on other things if the roads are needing repair ?

continually raising taxes is a doom to working class 

Gov. Gretchen Whitmer - DEMOCRAT
How'd you feel when Chris Christie raised NJ's after the previous 5 democratic governors didn't?  And last NJ gov to raise the gas tax before CC?  Republican Tom Kean.

Oh, and you know why the NJ TTF was so broke that it HAD to be raised?  Because republican Christie Whitman couldn't keep her hands out of it to cover for budget shortages.  Maybe she should have cut spending instead of taking transportation funds, huh?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am aware of all of that.  The construction equipment he is talking about runs the same dyed diesel and falls under the same off-road rules.   He said there should be "no off road breaks".  I assume that would include farmers.  
Drop the off road breaks for stuff that goes on the road

 
unless they're running at 0% waste then there are places

the solutions cannot always be tax tax tax tax tax tax tax
The issue always is that nobody can agree what is or isn't waste. It's not like they are setting $1B on fire every year. 

 
how about cutting spending on other things if the roads are needing repair ?

continually raising taxes is a doom to working class 

Gov. Gretchen Whitmer - DEMOCRAT
This talking point would have had more resonance years ago when Republicans actually stood for principles such as balancing budgets and cutting spending.

But those types of Republicans are few and far between these days. It's all about "spend now and hope we can pay for it later".

Michigan has been largely run by Republicans since 1993. In that time, they have failed to address many crucial infrastructure issues. (Ranked dead last in road conditions by this survey)

Since Republicans have failed to use their philosophy to fix the roads, it is time for a different approach.

 
This talking point would have had more resonance years ago when Republicans actually stood for principles such as balancing budgets and cutting spending.

But those types of Republicans are few and far between these days. It's all about "spend now and hope we can pay for it later".

Michigan has been largely run by Republicans since 1993. In that time, they have failed to address many crucial infrastructure issues. (Ranked dead last in road conditions by this survey)

Since Republicans have failed to use their philosophy to fix the roads, it is time for a different approach.


And also, Flint is in MI.

 
unless they're running at 0% waste then there are places

the solutions cannot always be tax tax tax tax tax tax tax


That's a fairly unsatisfactory answer. 

The cost to fix MI's infrastructure has been estimated at $4bn per year for 20 years. Another report estimates the cost to fix just Metro Detroit's roads at $1.6bn per year for 25 years.

The State's revenue for 2017 was $53bn (see page 23). I'm not exactly sure where infrastructure would go, but they spent $2.7bn on public safety and $3.5bn on transportation that year. 

So...what should they do? You do not think they should increase revenue (I think), so should they improve infrastructure? If so, at the expense of what?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The issue always is that nobody can agree what is or isn't waste. It's not like they are setting $1B on fire every year. 
here is what I can tell you

raise taxes to 50% ...... and the State Govt will spend 100% of that and then spend more - that's what Govt's do

cut 5% across the board - everyone suffers to solve the road funding issue. Done

 
and NESTLE raises the cost of everything they produce and consumers all pay - the money STILL comes from working people 

not a tax, but by cost of raising prices of things
Nestle is taking 250-400 gallons of Michigan water a minute and selling it across the country for the cost a $200 annual permit. We are just giving away water to a foregin company for free. Why would anyone in Michigan give 2 ####s if Nestle raises the price of their bottled water? 

 
Nestle is taking 250-400 gallons of Michigan water a minute and selling it across the country for the cost a $200 annual permit. We are just giving away water to a foregin company for free. Why would anyone in Michigan give 2 ####s if Nestle raises the price of their bottled water? 
Is water a scarce resource where they are sourcing it?

 
Is water a scarce resource where they are sourcing it?
The town it is happening in wants it to stop and has claimed it has messed up the river. The water table is down, the water has warmed and the trout aren’t coming in the numbers they used to.

I know they bring jobs and pay taxes for their factory but at what point do natural resources have value and belong to the community and at what point can companies just use those resources for profit without paying for them? I know Michigan set up a comment site for residents to express their thoughts when Nestle asking to nearly double the amount of water they wanted to take out. 80,000 comments against and 75 in favor were received. Michigan still allowed the increase to happen. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The town it is happening in wants it to stop and has claimed it has messed up the river. The water table is down, the water has warmed and the trout aren’t coming in the numbers they used to.

I know they bring jobs and pay taxes for their factory but at what point do natural resources have value and belong to the community and at what point can companies just use those resources for profit without paying for them? I know Michigan set up a comment site for residents to express their thoughts when Nestle asking to nearly double the amount of water they wanted to take out. 80,000 comments against and 75 in favor were received. Michigan still allowed the increase to happen. 
That makes sense.  I wasn't aware of the issues there.  

 
The town it is happening in wants it to stop and has claimed it has messed up the river. The water table is down, the water has warmed and the trout aren’t coming in the numbers they used to.

I know they bring jobs and pay taxes for their factory but at what point do natural resources have value and belong to the community and at what point can companies just use those resources for profit without paying for them? I know Michigan set up a comment site for residents to express their thoughts when Nestle asking to nearly double the amount of water they wanted to take out. 80,000 comments against and 75 in favor were received. Michigan still allowed the increase to happen. 
Tax them?!! Charge them more?!! They deserve another tax cut!!! 

 
Tax them?!! Charge them more?!! They deserve another tax cut!!! 
I think water is a challenge because it moves so who is to say exactly who the water belongs to but ultimately Michigan’s most valuable resource is it’s access to an abundance of fresh water but we have done a lot in the name of profit to potentially jeopardize that. There’s concerns about oil pipelines leaking into the Great Lakes. Even my former House Rep who was a form conservative expressed his concern over the lack of oversight that the oil companies were providing for the old pipelines. It seems to me that if companies want to profit by selling water they pull out of our rivers or running oil piles through our Lakes, they should be sharing more of that profit. 

Also this obviously got a lot of attention given the contrast of what was and still is happening in Flint. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top