Proposal 1 … win or lose is still a win …

So Proposal 1 is due to fail. At least that is the take I have on it. There is no other plan so expect a few years to come up with one. In the meantime New York has a 42 cent tax on gas, we have 19 cents. With Proposal 1 we would go down to about 13 cents and increase the wholesale tax on gas.
This is a complicated proposal that seems to take in some of the concerns that modern transit is taking. Cars are getting a lot more fuel efficient and some are even skipping gas altogether. For reasons like this another form of paying for roads is necessary. Taking a major portion of a 1% sales tax makes sense.
I might not understand all of the features in this proposal but it seems to give us more money for roads. Yes it might mean $500 plus for 60% of the families and it might increase the number from 20% to 40% that will not be paying, but money is going to come from somewhere. For the population making 30 to 56K the cost would be $180 to $275. I do have friends that would be paying $13,000 but they are not in the normal range of people that make a living.
There is something about change that scares people. This is a change that is coming but how we deal with it might have some unexpected consequences. I would expect some corporation will come in in 5 to 10 years and purchase rights to roadways. Toll roads will be common. Other providers will provide taxi, bus and other services to get around roads. Travel will cost more to get were you want to go. Roads will be repaired but brides will close.
It is the idea that there there is no money, but we must keep our roads.
If we do not do something that will change the means of road construction that relates to the modern world others will (and have) take(n) over. Michigan is one of the first states to propose something of the nature of Proposal 1 and I think that is why it is so scary.
Why do I hope that this Proposal fails? Because I think it might be the opportunity to put in a system of transportation that will make money and get people where they need to go. Lets go back in time and all we needed were our legs to get anywhere. Most likely that was limited but it could also be far (2000 to ? miles). The tale goes on until we can travel massive distances in our lifetime. We like going places and we will continue to do so. If we walk or ride a bike we might go three miles. If we drive a car we might go 30 miles. If we hop on a train or plane we might go 500 miles. Mostly we go 30 miles or less.
The places we go in 30 miles or less is confined by location. If there are mountains the 30 mile route might be limited to 3 locations if there are no mountains it might be 5 plus locations. There are many possibilities for an enterprise to provide such a service. Other than military applications there is little incentive for government  to provide transportation services. In fact the main objective of the highway system was movement of large cargo related to military.
Lets see if the 43% of federal taxes can support the highway system and allow private ventures, see if they can run a transportation system that works. Suppose that truckers paid a fee to the Highway system and cars that ran on it also paid a hefty fee. State roads were also fee rated. Local roads were fee rated and some of them not. These that were not were locally taxed.
If there was no Proposal 1 vote in the approval I suspect that within 2 to 10 years something like this might be a reality.
I would welcome something of this nature. I would welcome firms that took on getting people around. I would welcome the government sustaining roads that moved goods and welcomed people paying to drive them.
Do we want to support some of the prospects with public dollars?…vote for Proposal 1…it will be a start…you will have the opportunity to fund or not to fund…it might be interesting. Yes a certain amount will go to public transit (that might be rail, bus or pod car), yes a certain amount will go to education and a certain amount will go to locals to support a variety of efforts.
Heck I think it makes sense. It makes  a lot more sense than paying 23 to 42%, we might pay about 20% to 25% and we will have the option of control This is better than the 42% that New York pays…it is about what Ohio pays, just a new form of the roadway taxes, making them more equal.
Proposal 1 means more money for roads, yes it means less money from poorer people but they are not getting anything near what the 1% is. They are not getting thing near what the 10% does, and they are getting a lot less than the middle 30 to 65K dose.
I don’t care if you vote for or against Proposal 1. I will still make money on your vote. If you vote to approve Proposal 1 I think I’ll see funding for rail studies as well as road improvements. I think I’ll see private investors involved in rail as well as bus ventures. If you vote it down I think I’ll see a lot of private investors interested in roads. And I think I’ll see a few investors  interested in other means of transit. It might be a little more or a little less to travel!
Vote to keep a public means of traveling. This seems to be a way of doing it (Proposal 1).

http://www.mcrc-mi.org/images/Funding_fo__Road_improvement2.pdf
“… you have paid $4.00 to the state, but not even half
is going to get better roads for your
traveling pleasure.”