https://www.mibuzzboard.com/phpBB3/view ... 11#p569811
The good news?
-Insurance reform has already been signed into law.
-The MCCA statutory rate will be reduced by 55% from $220 to $100 this summer for those who opt to retain full medical coverage in their auto policies and by 100% for those who opt for partial coverage!
-Prices at the pump have generally stayed below $3.00 per gallon and given the U.S.'s ability to now self-support its domestic fuel needs, the wild price hikes we saw in years' past should be less of a risk moving forward.
Conceptually, I still like the components of my proposal of last April.
Would I tweak anything? Perhaps. The personal income tax rate hike of 0.75% could be rolled back, say to 0.50%. Taxes on cigarettes, tobacco and yes, marijuana, can be raised higher than what I proposed. Regulatory fees could be raised in partial substitution of an income tax hike.
What about a "Plan B" ? I'm personally supportive of using bond issuances to fund the roads *if* the purpose of borrowing is limited to (a) an upfront road construction blitz, or (b) a short-term bridge to allow for the transition of road funding responsibilities to local and county jurisdictions. I do not support Governor Whitmer's silly suggestion of issuing billions in new bonds in perpetuity year after year as a recurring road funding source. That's a recipe for financial disaster. (Ask the City of Detroit!)
With regard to (a) above...
Common sense suggests long-term funding requirements (20+ years) to successfully maintain roads at a desired condition will be less if a higher percentage of roads are in good or excellent condition at the point of origin as opposed to fair or poor condition. In 2015, we did a backloaded funding increase. How well did that work out?
Personally, I think we need to do a frontloaded funding increase. Get as many roads in good or excellent condition as soon as possible. This is where a bond issuance could prove useful. Once you do that, they'll be less costly to maintain. Certainly makes more sense that putting a million band-aids on a crappy road for the next five or ten years only to then completely rebuild it. Do the rebuild sooner rather than later.
With regard to (b) above...
A major problem with road funding in Michigan is that Lansing has too much control over the purse strings. In most states, cities and counties have income taxes or sales taxes devoted specifically to road repair. We don't have that framework in place in Michigan. (Indiana and Ohio are two states that do have such a framework in place.) I would support any effort to Lansing to empower local communities to have a much greater say over road maintenance budgeting and funding mechanisms.
Acceptable registrations in the queue through June 3 at 5:00p ET have now been activated. Enjoy! -M.W.
Terms of Use have been amended effective October 6, 2019. Make sure you are aware of the new rules! Please visit this thread for details: https://www.mibuzzboard.com/phpBB3/view ... 16&t=48619
Terms of Use have been amended effective October 6, 2019. Make sure you are aware of the new rules! Please visit this thread for details: https://www.mibuzzboard.com/phpBB3/view ... 16&t=48619
My road funding proposal (flashback to April 2019)...
- MWmetalhead
- Site Admin
- Posts: 12294
- Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 11:23 am
Re: My road funding proposal (flashback to April 2019)...
I am really disappointed with the Whitmer Administration on their inability to fix the damn roads. She ran on this and has NOT delivered. I was under the impression she was gonna work with both sides of the isle to get it done. While there were positive changes as auto insurance reform, lack of road funding still hasn't been solved.
MWmetalhead, you have some good ideas there. I propose the state's 6% sales tax be removed from fuel sales and instead have that 6% tax be added to the current state gas tax. We'd essentially be paying the same thing at the pump. It is my opinion that any and all taxes paid at the pump should go to road funding exclusively. But the solution will indeed have to comprise of a combination of things. I think lowering the truck weight limits is a must to keep inline with neighboring states. This should be part of the conversation.
MWmetalhead, you have some good ideas there. I propose the state's 6% sales tax be removed from fuel sales and instead have that 6% tax be added to the current state gas tax. We'd essentially be paying the same thing at the pump. It is my opinion that any and all taxes paid at the pump should go to road funding exclusively. But the solution will indeed have to comprise of a combination of things. I think lowering the truck weight limits is a must to keep inline with neighboring states. This should be part of the conversation.
- MWmetalhead
- Site Admin
- Posts: 12294
- Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 11:23 am
Re: My road funding proposal (flashback to April 2019)...
Geographic allocation needs to be revamped, too.
By no means am I saying funding by county should be 100 percent proportional by population, but when one looks at car-miles driven, the most populous counties are getting hosed (Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, Kent) and counties in the middle of nowhere (Lake, for example) are getting more than their fair share.
The manner the State of Michigan has chosen to finance the I-75 rebuild from Troy to the Detroit / Hazel Park border is an excellent idea and should be considered for other projects.
Also, installing combo toll booths / weigh stations at all points of entry into Michigan along interstate and major state highways would be a great idea. Any & all commercial trucks would be required to pay a significant toll upon entering the state. The larger the payload, the greater the toll. This way, if trucks zip from Indiana or Ohio into Canada by way of Michigan...without refueling in Michigan...they'd still have to "pay up"!
By no means am I saying funding by county should be 100 percent proportional by population, but when one looks at car-miles driven, the most populous counties are getting hosed (Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, Kent) and counties in the middle of nowhere (Lake, for example) are getting more than their fair share.
The manner the State of Michigan has chosen to finance the I-75 rebuild from Troy to the Detroit / Hazel Park border is an excellent idea and should be considered for other projects.
Also, installing combo toll booths / weigh stations at all points of entry into Michigan along interstate and major state highways would be a great idea. Any & all commercial trucks would be required to pay a significant toll upon entering the state. The larger the payload, the greater the toll. This way, if trucks zip from Indiana or Ohio into Canada by way of Michigan...without refueling in Michigan...they'd still have to "pay up"!
Morgan Wallen is a piece of garbage.
Re: My road funding proposal (flashback to April 2019)...
I’ll second having tolls to enter the state, with our high weight limits if those won’t come down then we can get the revenue to fix the damn roads by charging for the weight.MWmetalhead wrote: ↑Mon Jan 13, 2020 9:13 pmGeographic allocation needs to be revamped, too.
By no means am I saying funding by county should be 100 percent proportional by population, but when one looks at car-miles driven, the most populous counties are getting hosed (Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, Kent) and counties in the middle of nowhere (Lake, for example) are getting more than their fair share.
The manner the State of Michigan has chosen to finance the I-75 rebuild from Troy to the Detroit / Hazel Park border is an excellent idea and should be considered for other projects.
Also, installing combo toll booths / weigh stations at all points of entry into Michigan along interstate and major state highways would be a great idea. Any & all commercial trucks would be required to pay a significant toll upon entering the state. The larger the payload, the greater the toll. This way, if trucks zip from Indiana or Ohio into Canada by way of Michigan...without refueling in Michigan...they'd still have to "pay up"!
- craig11152
- Posts: 2069
- Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 8:15 am
- Location: Ann Arbor
Re: My road funding proposal (flashback to April 2019)...
Many many years ago my brother worked for a local waste hauling firm in middle management. He said they routinely overloaded trucks because the chances of getting caught and the fines if they did were minimal.
I no longer directly engage trolls
Re: My road funding proposal (flashback to April 2019)...
As you know, road funding proposals have been sidelined and rightfully so due to the current situation. However when we're back in the clear roads need to be addressed.
-
- Posts: 1461
- Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2018 10:43 am
Re: My road funding proposal (flashback to April 2019)...
She's auditioning for the #2 and if it goes thru, it will be Garlin's problem to see that election promise make good.TheForce wrote: ↑Sun Jan 12, 2020 1:14 pmI am really disappointed with the Whitmer Administration on their inability to fix the damn roads. She ran on this and has NOT delivered. I was under the impression she was gonna work with both sides of the isle to get it done. While there were positive changes as auto insurance reform, lack of road funding still hasn't been solved.
MWmetalhead, you have some good ideas there. I propose the state's 6% sales tax be removed from fuel sales and instead have that 6% tax be added to the current state gas tax. We'd essentially be paying the same thing at the pump. It is my opinion that any and all taxes paid at the pump should go to road funding exclusively. But the solution will indeed have to comprise of a combination of things. I think lowering the truck weight limits is a must to keep inline with neighboring states. This should be part of the conversation.
Re: My road funding proposal (flashback to April 2019)...
I was actually thinking about that the other day. Biden could pick her as running mate. I hope Garlin can get it done.
She's auditioning for the #2 and if it goes thru, it will be Garlin's problem to see that election promise make good.