OPINION: Road usage charge is a good, fair method of transportation taxation

Hold on to your hats, ladies and gentlemen. I am going on record stating I agree with a Democrat legislator on House Bill 1921.

According to Rep. Jake Fey, one-third of the state transportation budget comes from the gas tax. That means nearly $450 million are generated by gas taxes, but that number will keep going down.

Five years ago, the Washington Transportation Commission made news when it advocated for a road usage charge (RUC) in place of a gas tax. They said the revenue from a gas tax would decrease as more vehicles have a better fuel economy and more people purchase electric vehicles.

I wrote about the concept of a road usage charge at the time. I was not against the RUC back in 2019. My concern is the proposals those kooky leftists wanted to include. There was the social engineering aspect. In addition to paying for every mile of driving on the road, they wanted to have a surcharge if you had an evil V8 or another large vehicle.

The other thing they desired was to have your mileage tracked by GPS. While there were a handful of anonymous ways of collecting the money, the government's busybodies wanted to know where the citizens traveled at any time with a GPS that would report to the state. Step two of this plan would include a surcharge if you used a popular roadway during peak times. For example, if you drive on I-405 through Bellevue around 8 a.m., you'd pay a premium.

While the RUC itself wasn't a bad idea, the leftists' ideas about implementation were terrible.

We have not heard much about the RUC for a handful of years, but it is making a comeback. To my pleasant surprise, social engineering was left out. Yes, a Democrat had a chance to push all sorts of crazy left-wing ideas, but he left them out of the bill.

Frankly, the best way to pay for roads is to have the users pony up the funds. People in electric vehicles and hybrids use little to no fuel, so they pay little to no gas tax.

Math time! In Washington, our gas tax is 49.4 cents per gallon. Let's say you drive 1,000 miles. Let's also say you have a vehicle that gets 17 miles per gallon. That means you'll use approximately 59 gallons of fuel. Fifty-nine gallons at 49.4 cents means you will have paid $29.06 in taxes per 1,000 miles.

The new RUC is 2.6 cents per mile. The same driver would pay $26 for the same 1,000 miles, so the driver will save slightly. What a bargain!

This RUC proposal includes a road assessment charge. While the RUC is 2.6 cents per mile, there would be an additional 10% tax on what you owe for the RUC. Here's why: How RUC money is used is limited by the 18th Amendment. To ensure funding for comprehensive transportation needs, the bill includes this assessment tax, which will be used for rail, transit, bikes and pedestrians.

The bottom-line cost in this proposal is 2.86 cents per mile. While we can argue about reasonable rates per mile, this number alone isn’t a reason to abandon the concept completely.

Ultimately, it is reasonably fair to charge all road users a fee for using the road. Whether paying with the fuel used or the miles driven, we all must pay if we want nice roads. What's fairer than moving away from a fuel tax that only affects those with an internal combustion engine? EVs are hefty vehicles that cause wear and tear, and they should help pay an equal amount.

An essential part of this bill states:

"The legislature further finds and declares that the road usage charge system must protect individuals' privacy and civil liberties. … The legislature intends that the road usage charge system authorized in this act be designed and implemented in a manner that places privacy of the motor vehicle owner as a first principle, especially with regard to location data."

If passed, the RUC would be phased in over the next decade or so. Certain vehicles could voluntarily start using it early, but it would be mandatory at some point. Another important aspect written into this bill is that you either pay a gas tax or a RUC, but not both. For EVs, you either pay the extra registration fee or the RUC, but not both. This is another thing I think Rep. Fey got right.

Many people have been against the idea of an RUC because of a knee-jerk reaction, but a reasonable, open-minded investigation of the RUC, and I think most sensible people, would find that it is fair to all drivers.

Anderson was the co-host and producer of the award-winning conservative talk radio show before hanging up the headphones. Earning a degree in philosophy helped further sharpen his renowned logic. He has a superb sense of right and wrong and advocates educating people instead of controlling them. He enjoys photography, woodworking and sports. He may be seen helping and volunteering in the community when he is not performing computer programming. He loves feedback at crier@cityofpullman.com.