It’s been 20 years. Time to raise Delaware’s gas tax

Filed in Delaware by on February 9, 2015

gas tax Delaware Markell

Even with the recent spike in prices, the cost of gasoline is dramatically lower than it was this time last year. Are you driving more? Taking longer trips? Just idling for hours letting that cheap gasoline melt away?

You’re not? Well that’s the exact reason why Delaware’s gas tax should be increased.

Continue reading on Newsworks

 

Tags: , ,

About the Author ()

Rob Tornoe is a local cartoonist and columnist, and can be seen in The Philadelphia Inquirer, The Press of Atlantic City, The News Journal, and the Dover Post chain of newspapers. He's also a contributor to Media Matters and WHYY. Web site: RobTornoe.com Twitter: @RobTornoe

Comments (62)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

Sites That Link to this Post

  1. 2015 DELAWARE TAX RATE Tips | February 14, 2015
  2. 2015 DELAWARE GROSS RECEIPTS TAX | February 14, 2015
  1. Dave says:

    ““Even though gas prices are very low I still don’t sense the support for a gas tax,” President Pro Tempore Sen. Patricia Blevins (D-Elsmere) “”

    Yup. And as long as the headline reads (which is all most people will read) “It’s been 20 years…” as the reason for doing it, there will continue to be no support. How about some empirical data like deferred maintenance, danger from poor roads, safety, commute time, where specifically would it be spent. You know like real reasons and real data instead of well it’s been 20 years…

  2. Rob Tornoe says:

    So I guess our $780 million backlog in put-off infrastructure projects, which grows every year, plus our continued reliance on borrowing money and toll hikes isn’t enough to sway you that serious new funding is needed?

  3. Geezer says:

    There’s never support for raising taxes.

    All the relevant data has been pointed out for years now: As gas mileage per gallon increases, the tax collects less per mile of travel every year. As gas prices have increase, the tax as a percentage of the purchase price decreases. As alternative fuels get used more, gas sales decline. All are reasons that gas taxes not only don’t keep pace with inflation, they don’t even keep pace with the previous year’s collections.

    If none of those reasons will convince anyone they should pay more — and they haven’t so far — what’s so off-putting about pointing out that it’s been 20 years?

  4. ben says:

    we all know a 5 (for example) cent increase in the tax will result in a 20cent increase at the pump. The emotional shock of a higher tax on the poo widdle oil companies ALONE is worth 15 cents per gallon.
    We don’t need a higher gas tax. we need to be investing all of our energy into not having to use gasoline at all. The price of gas doesn’t seem tied to anything other than the whims of market speculators. Even the Saudis couldnt keep it under $50/barrel.

  5. ben says:

    Not that we dont desperately need to fix our roads…. we should just be collecting revenue other ways. Maybe it’s time Delaware had a sales tax. 2% so we dont die in a bridge collapse. sounds good to me.

  6. pandora says:

    This is me being selfish: As a city resident I don’t have to drive much (things are close enough to walk (restaurants, grocery store, bank, pharmacy, liquor store, hair salon, etc.) and if the weather’s bad almost everything I need is less than a five minute drive – most are less than 5 minutes.) so a gas tax – otherwise known as a user tax – is fine with me. If you drive a lot then why shouldn’t you pay more for the wear and tear on the infrastructure? One of the main reasons we live in the city is due to less driving – and the fact that I only fill up my car once every 3 weeks.

    But there’s a bigger point… why even have sin taxes if use doesn’t matter? Why not just roll them into a sales tax? (Just grabbed that example, Ben!) If the price of gas is an issue for you, perhaps moving where you drive less is the answer.

  7. Dave says:

    “So I guess our $780 million backlog in put-off infrastructure projects…”

    Yep, you got me sold with that. But then I read more than the headlines. If only you had said “$780 million of infrastructure needed in Delaware and we can’t get a dime” instead of ‘because 20 years’

  8. ben says:

    The state of Colorado might have to send checks out because revenues from the Pot Tax are so … um … high. just sayin.

  9. MikeM2784 says:

    I would support it only as part of a compromise that creates a new bracket at the top. Gas taxes are inherently regressive, as are all sales taxes (poorer people spend a greater proportion of their income), so why not add in a progressive tax increase to balance it out?

    I’m a proud liberal, but I question DelDot decision making sometimes…I’ve seen decent road paved, then repaved, then paved again while other roads disintegrate. We all remember the bridge fiasco at Indian River. Infrastructure is good, but management must prove itself capable of managing the funds correctly as well.

    And Pandora, please remember those of us in the rest of the state, where public transportation only comes ever 2-4 hours if you are lucky and not at all on most weekends. We have no other choice than to drive to work, often 15+ miles, on a daily basis and through traffic jams caused by tourist.

    Pity we can’t charge in “in state” and “out of state” rate! 🙂

  10. ben says:

    There is nothing “liberal” about Deldot’s decision making…. unless you want to used the right wing liberal stereotype of being poorly managed and never punished for doing a bad job.

  11. pandora says:

    I get that, Mike. The gas tax should also go for increased public transportation. Right now I’m supporting having SEPTA run more frequently from the Wilmington Train Station. Lower Delaware needs to advocate for more public transit.

  12. Andy says:

    They raised Bus fares.

  13. pandora says:

    You’re right, Andy. They did raise fares. Yep, it’s time to raise the gas tax – as well as taxes on the wealthy, but I won’t hold my breath on that one. Still, raise the gas tax. Maybe if people are really upset (doubtful) we can improve public transportation.

  14. Dave says:

    Of course if there were any real visionaries, they would be thinking about where the revenue stream will come from as less and less gas is sold because of greater efficiency, less miles being driven, and electric vehicles. The existing deficit will increase significantly. I suspect before that future arises, vehicles will no longer need tires on the ground roads will be merely markers for airborne traffic.

    ” Lower Delaware needs to advocate for more public transit.”
    More public transportation for lower Delaware is only cost effective when it becomes more urbanized and the density supports it. The most significant issue facing lower Delaware are the location of transportation hubs where there is adequate parking for folks from outlying areas to access such hubs. First and foremost though there needs to be a solid transportation structure in the more central cores, which can hardly handle pedestrian traffic as it is (google pedestrian deaths crossing Route 1).

  15. Tom Kline says:

    I have one child not five so why shouldn’t someone with multiple children pay more for school taxes, etc?

  16. radef16 says:

    Has anyone ever considered a graduated gas tax that goes down when the price of fuel goes up? An extra .10/gal now is palatable. However, when gas hits a certain threshold, eg. $4.00/gal IMO both the federal & state governments need to mitigate the impact of the higher price. Conversely the gas tax could be raised to .25/gal when prices drop below $2.00/gal.

    Also, more kids really should equal more school taxes.

  17. MikeM2784 says:

    Graduated gas tax is an intriguing idea, but makes not real economic sense. As price goes up, demand goes down, fewer people buy as much, so tax revenues will decrease already. Add to that a lower tax rate, and the budget collapses. Once raised, it won’t go away.

    As far as the school tax….you don’t pay taxes for public schools just to educate YOUR child…you pay those taxes so that society as a whole is more educated, because people with no education are a drain on society. The notion of people with more kids paying more taxes towards school flies in the face of what pubic schooling is all about.

  18. Steve Newton says:

    A couple clarifications

    1. A gas tax is not inherently regressive, at least not at all levels. Research has shown since the early 1990s that gas taxes do NOT hit the affluent, the low-income, or the poor in any significantly regressive manner, especially because the poor are less likely to own vehicles, and if they do they already drive them less. Further the research shows gas taxes are only mildly regressive toward the middle class. This research has been duplicated many times since its original publication in 1991. (link below). I’m not a big tax guy, but let’s be accurate.

    http://www.nber.org/papers/w3578

    2. In order for me to buy the argument about $780 million in deferred and undone maintenance and etc. as being justification for a gas tax increase, you’d have to show me a mechanism that actually kept the revenues raised in the Transportation Trust Fund. Governor Markell, who last year proposed a multi-million-dollar increase to the gas tax, when he didn’t get it, then proposes this year to take another $40 million or so out of an inadequate TTF to fund other things. If we’d actually had some real budget discipline over the past 20 years a lot more work would have gotten done; likewise, if we’d spent on real priorities instead of corporate giveaways, we’d also have better roads and bridges (building the new interchange around 141/202, for example, almost purely for the benefit of AstraZeneca, cost about $110 million, which by itself would have filled the holes made by Markell’s looting over the past three years).

    3. We really do need to be clear what a gas tax is for. Any consumption tax, be it gas, cigarettes, food, etc. has the tendency to drive down the behavior in question, and thereby reduce in future the revenues from that tax. I’m actually more OK with gas taxes as a carbon use tax whose purpose it is to reduce consumption of fossil fuels than I am with considering a gasoline tax to be a dependable source of road maintenance revenues, because it’s not every going to be–as Geezer points out tax increases are difficult and expecting a flexible response from our General Assembly is … unrealistic.

  19. John Manifold says:

    1. No increase over 20 years means the tax has effectively dropped, so an increase restores an earlier level.

    2. Gas tax operates as an efficient user fee, and discourages high gasoline use.

    3. Not increasing the tax has collateral effects: other programs pinched, tolls bumped, etc.

    4. And yes, it should fund public transit too.

  20. Joanne Christian says:

    I really HATE the whole gas tax angle. It’s one of those psychological commodities to me of well-being. Did the whole 70s thing of rationing—the even days, odd days, etc..the pump wars, lines, full serve, gas jockeys, green stamps, 2 bucks in the tank…..

    I don’t think I’m alone in feeling when gas prices go up, I’m going to go broke. When they go down, it’s like I hit a close-out sale. Seriously, even 20 cents a gallon in my car is probably not even 3 bucks difference up or down—but it’s this GIANT NUMBERS displayed of 2.27 to 2.11 or 2.03 to 2.09 that for some reason signals something to me much greater than it should.

    Postage goes up, trash collection goes up, groceries (esp. meat and dairy around here), phone packages, professional licenses, tuition, and my darn TAB–and I’m rather accepting of that scenario, but touch the gas and I am undone. Maybe it’s because when the gas is touched, I know oh here we go…..the trucking for food…the shipping of my office supplies…..all the airline tickets I have to buy transporting college kids, the water delivery guy….and on and on and on. It’s a big index mover for me away from serenity :). Tying any of this at all to income levels is just ridiculous. We all know every teen wants to drive whether it’s an old Galaxy getting 11 miles to the gallon, and beginning to savor that freedom on the road, cruising Kirkwood Highway or Brandywine Valley—or the metro set, secure in income–yet forego personal car ownership because of parking, and insurance hassles, choosing mass trans, walking, taxis, and rentals as needed. It’s just not a comfortable tax for me….yet. And do keep in mind…..I already live in that Rt. 1 corridor that has increased the toll each way to 3 bucks on weekends. I’m back and forth all the time, oftentimes needing 2 cars out because one is north donating blood, and another south doing whatever people do at Killens’ Pond……or weekend work. It’s high those tolls when you are domiciled here as an artery. Just can’t get behind a tax on this. Increase the (heck it’s not an increase—START to tax the income of some of the youngest, senior citizens I ever heard about getting baseline, unconditional pass of front end release of retirement money 12.5k each–at AGE 60!! Life must be so good–I bet they’re taking to the road! You know, to get free or reduced entry to our state parks, pick up that surf-fishing permit, grab a bite at the Senior Center, before taking that LifeLong Learner course on campus. Delaware has a crazy spread in age group of what a “senior” is. Sorry folks, more life years means more contributive years. That’s how we get things paid for, and level better the term “usage”.

  21. puck says:

    The wealthy would LOVE to see funding for transportation switched away from gas tax to general revenues, where it will compete with the so-called entitlements each year. Need road improvements? Squeeze seniors and schools a bit more to make your budget numbers. Hell Markell is already trying it. The point of dedicating gas tax to transporatation is to insulate transportation funding from those kinds of pressures.

    As far as city living goes, remember that cities depend on automobile traffic. Even NYC merchants push back when street parking is tightened near their stores. Some of us will remember wnen Market Street was malled up and closed off to autos; guess who demanded the cars be allowed back?

    I say put the toll booths back on I-95 exits in Delaware. We need to stop using the Interstate as a local commuter road, forcing expensive outlays to fix congestion that only exists at rush hour.

    Better yet, tear down I-95 through Wilmington.

    And speaking of use tax, let’s figure out how to build a transportation fee into “free shipping.” And let’s take a look at what the Walmarts and Amazons of Delaware are paying for running their heavy trucks.

  22. Bane says:

    Anti-tax liberals blow.

    Love,

    Black Kobane

  23. cassandra_m says:

    It’s one of those psychological commodities to me of well-being.

    Not to just pick on you Joanne, but this is the All The Government You Can Eat for Free mindset in a nutshell. There was nothing here about how to pay for road repair, bridge repair/replacement, add road capacity where needed and just generally make sure that the vital bit of well-being — that you can get to your house to where you need to safety, with minimal destruction to your own vehicle and in a reasonable amount of time — is well taken care of. Those potholes do not repave themselves. Those bridges are not designed to last a lifetime with no maintenance. Your houses do not keep standing without regular maintenance, why would a road that gets even more use and abuse?

  24. ben says:

    No one has said roads should be repaired for free.

  25. Rob Keesler says:

    Legalize and tax marijuana. I’m sure the head start would bring in revenue from surrounding states for a time.

  26. cassandra_m says:

    And as long as we’re trying to pass the financial buck to someone else, you sure are. This is a user fee. The people who drive and fill up gas tanks pay for the repair and expansion of the roads they use. And anyone who has lived through the recent .10/gallon increase in taxes in PA knows that the suppliers have a great deal of discretion in setting their prices. At the PA/DE border, I’m still not sure they’ve priced in all .10. But what *is* true, is that DE stations get to charge just abit more because the close stations in PA have to.

  27. Bill Dunn says:

    Let me lead everyone back to a Resolution that the Civic League for New Castle County approved back in 2007:

    CIVIC LEAGUE FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY RESOLUTION
    WHEREAS: Governor Minner has proposed a 5 cent per gallon additional tax on gasoline sold in Delaware, starting on September 1, 2007; and

    WHEREAS: The Controller General’s Office has projected estimated revenues from such a tax at $23.4 million in FY 2008 and $28.6 million in FY 2009; and

    WHEREAS: The Great Stone Anchorage in the Delaware Bay is reputedly the only sheltered east coast port between Maine and Texas capable of accommodating oil tankers with drafts as large as 55 feet; and

    WHEREAS: Lightering of such tankers – – transfer of bulk product to barges or tankers of lesser draft to deliver product to refineries on the Delaware River and elsewhere on the eastern seaboard – – has been ongoing at the Great Stone Anchorage since before the June 28, 1971 effective date of Delaware’s Coastal Zone Act (CZA); and

    WHEREAS: Corporate entities involved in such lightering have never been granted CZA permits, and only one such entity (Maritrans) has been granted an Air Quality permit covering the activity; and

    WHEREAS: In 2005, Maritrans requested an increase in the maximum amount of lightering permissible under its Air Quality permit(1) beyond the 100 million barrel ceiling (12 month rolling average basis) then permissible; and

    WHEREAS: Imposing a $1 per barrel tax on oil lightered at Great Stone Anchorage would produce revenues in the neighborhood of $100 million per year; and

    WHEREAS: Since a barrel of crude oil produces about 26 gallons of gasoline (along with other hydrocarbons), a $1 per barrel tax on lightered oil would have an impact on the price of gasoline no larger than 4 cents per gallon; and

    WHEREAS: Because the revenues from such a tax would be spread over more than just Delaware, a tax of $1 per barrel of oil (less than 4 cents/gallon on gasoline) would produce more than three times as much Delaware revenue as the 5 cent per gallon additional tax proposed by Governor Minner.

    NOW THEREFORE IT IS RESOLVED BY CIVIC LEAGUE FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY THAT

    A tax no smaller than $1 per barrel of oil lightered at Great Stone Anchorage in the Delaware Bay be imposed with an effective date no later than September 1, 2007 and that the first $1 per barrel of such revenue be earmarked for Delaware’s Transportation Trust Fund.

    ADOPTED (in concept) without dissent
    General Membership Meeting of May 15, 2007

    Attest: _________________

    When discussions regarding Gov. Markell’s proposed Gas tax hit last year, the idea, for a second time began to gain traction. In its first attempt to get a Bill through the General Assembly in 2007, a deal was cut that Maritrans would pay a flat rate fee to the State of a $100,000 for two years to allow their Lobbyists time to get the idea shoved into a closet somewhere.
    Last year, myself and others at a Civic League meeting, had discussions with Secretary Bhatt about moving the idea forward again and he said that he thought it deserved further consideration. Around the same time, Sen. Peterson was discussing it with others in Dover and I was told it was gaining traction because nobody wanted to raise taxes in an Election year. Nonetheless, it died before anything got to the Floor and word has it, Maritrans key Lobbyist’s son, is a member of the Governors staff.
    I still think its a good idea and the only things I would change in the Resolution is the name of the Governor and change “lightered” to “lightered or loaded” barrels “at Great Stone Anchorage…..”

  28. ben says:

    no. Im not suggesting we don’t fix the roads… i’m saying we should get the revenue from somewhere else. (ive said this already and i’ll say it again)
    I understand the reasoning behind taxing gas, but it raises the price of EVERYTHING. It isn’t fair, it isn’t logical… but. it. happens. Gas goes up 4 cents and for some reason, air fair has to go up 4%… food prices go up disproportionately, because… PROFIT! It isnt a simple movement of money. It’s something large businesses use as an excuse to raise prices, it is a tax that effects people with less money because it is a larger chunk of what they have to spend. The difference between 2.25 and 2.50 to someone who makes less than 40k a year is quite a bit…. trust me, I KNOW.

  29. pandora says:

    And yet there wasn’t this outcry over Dart raising bus fares (as Andy pointed out). Bus fares that should be considered a tax on mostly poor people. If people aren’t concerned about increased bus fares then why should we be concerned about increased gasoline prices? Because gas prices impact mostly middle class, and above, car drivers who made the choice to live in an area that relies on driving a car?

    If people want to make this an economic issue then they need to be consistent. Bus fares went up 25 cents for adults for one way. If a person uses public transit to get to work 5 days a week that equates to a 2.50 increase per week – 350.00 a year. If a gas tax is unfair then so is the increase in bus fare – but most people don’t consider that because they don’t take – or need to take – the bus.

  30. ben says:

    I agree about bus fares. but if gas prices go up, so will they.

  31. pandora says:

    Bus fares went up without a gas tax.

  32. ben says:

    Any rise in gas prices is used to raise the prices of everything else. Gas prices dont exist in a vacuum. Consumers ultimately pay the price.. why not just add an infrastructure tax and fund it directly, rather than giving gas companies an excuse to gouge is more? I’d pay that tax.

  33. cassandra_m says:

    Any rise in many taxes raises the price of everything else. Consumers ultimately pay the price of sales taxes PLUS the overhead to collect and pay them. Your point is? I don’t get how a sales tax (which is truly regressive) is somehow better than a gas tax which is functionally a user fee. It is also easier to ask the GA to focus the spending of those funds on infrastructure, while they’d never do that for a sales tax.

  34. John Manifold says:

    Indeed, the bus fare hadn’t been raised in over 20 years. It was due to be addressed, as is the gas tax.

  35. kavips says:

    To deflate some argument above, answer why gas is sold at equal prices on both sides of the the DE/MD border when Delaware’s gas tax is 7.3 cents less per gallon than Maryland’s.. Again, on the border of PA and Delaware, there is some increase crossing the PA line, but not the full 17.5 cents per gallon they pay in taxes… Keep in mind, all these three states get their gas from the same refinery. ..

    Obviously by having less tax on your gas, you are giving corporations more for your gas, and other states are at the very least, getting a return investment off what they pay for their gas, because a larger part of it goes to fixing their roads, employing their neighbors, and ultimately increasing their productivity….

    The more one looks at taxes the more one sees them as being very beneficial to society, serving an overall greater purpose of providing goods and services at a much cheaper price than could ever be found in the private markets.

    Example: Someone above said put tolls on 95 for commuters… At $1 dollar each way, that goes to $10 each week.. To match that at 10 cents a gallon, obviously one must use 100 gallons of gas… At 20 mpg that would entail driving up to 2000 miles a week… or putting 104,000 miles on your odometer each and every year (when most cars do 20,000 and car dealer leases estimate 15,000).

    I don’t want to pay a motherfucking $10 a week in tolls. I want to pay 10 cents a gallon in gas. If I have to punch some puckered-up asshole in his/her face to make that point clear, steer me to the douchbag who insists on costing me $10 a week and I will do the honor for the benefit of all Delaware’s citizens who are capable of understanding that 10 cents a gallon is way, way cheaper than any other motherfucking alternative. Even the alternative of doing nothing… ( as Rob’s well times cartoon adequately portrays)…

    This General Assembly needs to understand that the paid sycophants they see patrolling the halls of General Assembly do not speak for most of us… WE want our roads fixed and we want to pay 10 cent a gallon now instead of beaucoup dollars later… If it takes a fucking punch to someones head to make that clear… then lets get the fucking deed done…

    (disclaimer: it is a metaphor: no one ha,ha, lol is getting their head punched.) But oh, if we could, how much nicer our world would be… No republicans… EVER!!!!!!!!! No Caesar Rodney Institute… EVER…. No Cato Institute…. EVER… No Heritage Institute EVER… (Btw, did all of you know that all the above entities received over 75% of their funding from the Koch Brothers. ) I guess our elected officials should be grateful we are all nice and well mannered. it’s the only thing that allows the lobbyist lies to perpetually keep going forward.

  36. Joanne Christian says:

    Thank you cass, for ALWAYS handling me “civilly”. LOVE serious discussion. I don’t think I was executing the “all the government I can get for free mindset” of objecting to this tax. Quite the opposite. I’m a baby-boomer. But, I always refer to myself as “the corrective end of the baby boomers”. With that, I usually mean those of us who fall into the last 8-10 years of baby boomers……..when the change-up seems to hit of “the country can’ afford this…” Unlike, those who want to “get theirs, and the heck with what’s behind…”–I VALUE what baby-boomers have benefitted from the prior generation. Roads are ubiquitous to everyone’s needs, and the lifeline of this country. And yes, they need to be repaired. My thoughts are more at looking at income that ISN’T taxed (except early social security because of obvious reasons), beginning with some at age 55, and greater amounts going forward to about 65-70. My basis being, quality of life has extended far into the original mindset of 55-70 is old. MANY are still working full, speed ahead, career changers etc. The small index moved on full receipt of SS benefits in aging pales to the other benefits, that 55-65 year olds are receiving in our state benefits. I just don’t see why the state can’t just remove that first 12.5k exclusion from state income tax, that collectively is going to go a lot further with roads and schools in a budget, than all the screaming going on about the 1% or whatever. Sure, 10 cents gas tax out of pocket weekly may make great sense on paper–but again (and my issue), I do think it’s a psychological litmus test for me, and others. Also, it DOES seem to ALWAYS be the match that starts everone raising their prices, “blaming fuel costs”. Even, when the big rise hit a few years ago, the doggone water delivery guy added a “Fuel Surchage” line on the bill. Sure, it was only a buck……..but it’s not like it has gone away with gas prices declining this past 6 months. Nobody gets a pass on this whether people think they walk everywhere, or take mass trans. Nobody has replaced the trucks bringing in pomegranates at Christmas. The “lost income” from acknowledging we aren’t our parents’ sixty in activity, health, and lifespan–needs to be supported further, by those of us living longer. If you’re staying longer, you gotta pay it longer is my sentiment. The toll thing is very maddening for me. Sure it is clever to catch the vacationing crowd. But as a resident, and weekend worker–that was a FIFTY PERCENT increase of my toll bill. In closing, I’m just saying the recapture of lost income tax of a rather propped up later baby boomer income tax forgiveness, is much more palatable to me (who will be paying it too, remember), than the ubiquitous hit at the gas pump from teen to truck, on what is our nation’s second blood supply. You may not drive, but you will still pay UNFAIRLY on where that “gas” tax leads. At least, collecting forgiven revenues you can justify those Cellular One RV commercials having able-bodied, hearty, couples driving those roadways, still having a good time, and still contributing to the freight they carry–but yet, get a pass on chipping in for funds needed in our brighter, better educated, and healthier demographic they enjoy? Sure, leave their income alone after 62, 65, or whatever……but the roads need repair, they still greatly use the roads, in one form or another—and because of that can pony up for a few more years as reciprocity for the greater lifespan, and ultimate wear they contribute to our highways. I’ll pay my continuing share if done this way…..

  37. ben says:

    hey.. if cassandra says you’re thinking/communicating something or some mindset, YOU ARE.

  38. Tom Kline says:

    “As far as the school tax….you don’t pay taxes for public schools just to educate YOUR child…you pay those taxes so that society as a whole is more educated, because people with no education are a drain on society. The notion of people with more kids paying more taxes towards school flies in the face of what pubic schooling is all about.”

    Hows that working out for Delaware. Almost all you beloved Dem’s send their kids to private school. Good luck this state is dying…

  39. MikeM2784 says:

    Tom, not to sound too much like a teacher, but….evidence? Such blanket statements are useless and counterproductive. I know a lot of dems who work in and send their kids to public schools, which continue to send students to various colleges and universities around the country. Are there problems? Sure. But the sky is not falling.

  40. Joanne Christian says:

    And if they send them there, they are still paying the taxes. It’s the Tuition Plus program I call it, and can’t really say I’ve heard any of those beloved Dems complaining about underwriting the cost of that choice.

    It’s a misnomer anyway to call it school taxes. It’s property taxes. Yes, it’s predominantly for schools–but it’s taxed by your property. Buy or rent a less valuable or taxed property and you can prevent “all that money going to pay for those 5 unknown kids”
    But using your thinking of the audacity of your “school taxes” helping to pay for more than your one child—here’s a thought—for 2k a year in property taxes (and oh, believe me I went higher than the state average)–where else are you going to educate your child? Did you think you had a rebate coming, because your taxes so adequately cover the education for a year your one child gets, and are expecting some change? It’s a bargain. Your contribution on one child for a year, runs out by around Nov. 1st. Your overall (using fixed contribution numbers),expense of the minimally 13 years the state educates
    your child hangs at about 150k. Your contribution, about 26k. So, if you REALLY think you only want to pay your fair share of a one and only child–any district would be pleased to take a check. Oh, and those other kids? Best bargain going. That family chews thru their allocation by about September 15th. Then this miraculous, gracious, incredible, splendid, transformational, section of humanity takes over to pool their resources, whether childless, empty-nested, retired, senior, disabled, opted out, home-schooled, or no schooled, and render the designated sum needed to cover YOUR childs expenses from Nov. 1st, and those 5 kids from September 15th. Why? Scratch the humanity. It’s cheaper than building prisons. Oh, and maybe, just maybe–one of those five kids, that didn’t pay pro rata like you suggest–teams up with your only child, TO TAKE CARE OF YOU, in your old age. Or by invention or discovery improves your life. And lastly, that Social Security check coming your way? Let’s see–it’s about 5-6 workers needed to sustain right now at the amount these checks are pulling…..and scheduled to pull. Sure hope those 5 kids are educated, high wage earners, contributing–because your one child can’t underwrite that alone. And our greater country and selves have agreed.

  41. cassandra_m says:

    I just don’t see why the state can’t just remove that first 12.5k exclusion from state income tax, that collectively is going to go a lot further with roads and schools in a budget, than all the screaming going on about the 1% or whatever. Sure, 10 cents gas tax out of pocket weekly may make great sense on paper–but again (and my issue), I do think it’s a psychological litmus test for me, and others.

    But you are still saying that you want these government services but someone else has to pay for them. And in this instance, the current gas tax is 20 years old, which means that it hasn’t been keeping up with the demand for road services for a long time. And one of the reasons DelDOT was in so much financial trouble in the first place. It may be a psychological litmus test — but it does not get a single pothole fixed or a single bridge moved to the safe list. A gas tax can be locked down to pay just for transportation projects — no so with other revenues. And again, a gas tax is paid by the people who use the resource.

    And I don’t get the “prices will rise” thing. They do *anyway*. Prices went up to accommodate $3+ gasoline and not one of them has gone down since gas got cheaper. You can’t control the price of anything by avoiding the tax on it. Lots of other things influence pricing — and if you are serious about a tax increasing the price of goods, then I want to know what you are doing to get prices reduced since gas is cheaper.

  42. cassandra_m says:

    Almost all you beloved Dem’s send their kids to private school.

    This moron needs to get his stereotypes straight — either we send our kids to private school or we are all on welfare. It can’t be both. Sheesh.

  43. Republican David says:

    Simple solution, I have a simple solution, make a donation and do a fundraiser. If you want to pay more, go ahead and find those like minded. Leave the rest of us alone.

  44. liberalgeek says:

    How would that work for defense, David? And if our infrastructure crumbles, will the military be able to use our bridges to cross rivers? Our airports to land planes?

  45. Joanne Christian says:

    @cass–OK. I think I’m understanding where we cross wires. You want a dedicated funding stream directly to infrastructure repair, updates, new, demolished, etc..

    I was wanting to fund from overall increased revenues of a few early gifts returned from those “older people/consumers/citizens”, being permitted tax free at 60 (some even earlier, if set-up right), the 12.5K protected from state tax generation. How come it’s so sacrosanct? I’m willing to pay it, if it maintains, builds, and repairs our roads and schools. Collectively, that’s huge. I’m not shirking or running from an expensive reality. But to your point, the stand alone, assigned gas tax avoids being infiltrated and bastardized by other “good intentions” who start hanging at the pump for their fill-up. Got it. Did I?

    And again, I am still very intrigued by the 12.5K exemption from state tax starting at age 60. We have a lot of life left in us and are using services—sure I should be paying still into it. But, if I understood you correctly—other items will be made priority in lieu of the roads. Well, FWIW recapturing ANY revenue and deciding the terms, leaves me either without the complete front end tax pass–because the state needs it for projects, roads, schools, syringes, whatever–or–no doubt, I would have just filled the tank, and by darn St. Peter sends word, and 70 cents for state services, was just pre-paid! 🙂

    Well, they gotta do something.

    OH and BTW–it’s you send your kids to private school, after you are approved for needs based financial forgiveness. And only wear J. Crew. 🙂

  46. MikeM2784 says:

    I’ll happily donate to the “road foundation” as long as I can be assured that no Republican morons can use them.

  47. Dave says:

    The exemption for Social Security should consist only of that portion that is attributable to the taxes paid at the rate it was paid. Since those drawing Social Security paid federal and state taxes on that income already, we cannot tax it again now that they are receiving it back. There are a number of federal retirees in Delaware who are not under SS and do not receive that generous exemption. Additionally, many of those folks worked after federal service and earned enough credits to draw SS but are unable to do so because of the Government Pension Offset and Windfall Provision Act. Essentially they contributed to SS but are receiving nothing in return.

  48. Jason330 says:

    That fucking idiot with the simple plan, Republican David, is (was?) and elected official in a municipal government. Let that sink in.

  49. Dave says:

    Roads benefit all of society, regardless of whether you have a vehicle. Consequently, infrastructure such as roads needs to have a funding source that is consistent and sustainable. A tax on wheels on the road is the only method that captures every vehicle, whether it is UPS, electric vehicles, private autos, farm equipment, trailers, etc. The cost of shipping is built into the products, because the company that offers free shipping still has to pay UPS and UPS is still taxed for the fuel it uses. Even so, wheels on the road would go a long way towards sustainability. However, that may not be enough. A gas tax remains the only method that correlates miles on the road with taxes, but it does not capture electric vehicles, but they also use the roads. Additionally, greater efficiency equals more miles per gallon, thus lowering the revenue. So, a mix of wheels on the road and gallons used should be explored.

  50. puck says:

    The conservative religion of no-tax-increase-ever is what got us into this mess.

  51. puck says:

    “And again, a gas tax is paid by the people who use the resource.”

    Hardly. The driver behind the wheel is not the only beneficiary of well-maintained roads, and is not necessarily even the greatest beneficiary.

    The rich got that way because we have an orderly transportation network. Their benefit far exceeds their share of gas tax.

    Corporations who locate in exurban sites and insist on all their employees working onsite each day – what percentage of their revenue goes toward maintining the roads their workers and suppliers drive on?

    Retailers who build malls fed by a maze of ever-expanding cloverleafs at taxpayer expense – how much of their revenue goes to support the roads that bring them customers?

    And did you ever order anything with “free” shipping? how much gas tax did you pay?

  52. cassandra_m says:

    That fucking idiot with the simple plan, Republican David, is (was?) and elected official in a municipal government. Let that sink in.

    It is the multiple fucking idiots like Republican David (and this is a bipartisan thing) who got us into this predicament in the first place.

  53. cassandra_m says:

    The driver behind the wheel is not the only beneficiary of well-maintained roads, and is not necessarily even the greatest beneficiary.

    More idiocy. I don’t benefit from the payroll service that Amazon uses to pay its staff, but I sure as hell pay for it. I don’t benefit from showy perks that Apple employees in Cupertino enjoy, but I sure as hell pay for it when I buy whatever Apple doo-dad there is. That’s the way it works — you pay the cost of that widget plus some profit number and the cost always includes stuff that don’t mean anything to you.

    Roads, unlike a payroll service, ARE beneficial to everyone. Or at least those of us who have to get up and drive to work every day. And while you keep encouraging dithering on this thing, plenty of people who drive every day who are making repairs to cars that are being damaged by the poorly maintained roads. So there’s your regressive right there.

    Seriously, if you don’t want to pay to fix the roads, you should just say that instead of spinning up these stupid rationalizations.

  54. Mitch Crane says:

    A reasonable gas tax increase and the dedication of those funds to highways and infrastructure benefits us all. The value of our homes and the desirability of our communities are dependent on many factors-public safety, quality schools, medical services, and the ability to get from place to place. People allow the price of gasoline at the pump to increase when the industry want to keep its profit without benefit to the public, but oppose paying more knowing that they will benefit. This may not be a popular position for elected officials to take in the era of lowering taxes and lowering services, but sometime elected officials have to do what is right, no matter the consequences. They are not elected for their resumes, but do so some good.

  55. Dave says:

    “A reasonable gas tax increase and the dedication of those funds to highways and infrastructure benefits us all.”

    Aside from the obvious benefits of infrastructure to every person and every corporation (they are people too, so maybe they should be taxed like people). There is a perception (whether unfounded or not) that the funds would not be dedicated to highways and infrastructure. That there are ways to divert the revenue for other uses and statements that they are dedicated are met with rolling eyes.

    Now that may be perception, because beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. As an example, DELDOT was once funded from the General Fund but at some point was transferred to the Transportation Trust Fund.

    It should also be noted that along with the gas tax not being raised in 20 years, Federal law requires that paratransit services only be offered within 3/4 mile of a fixed transit route, while Delaware provides pick-up and delivery to all eligible passengers anywhere in the State. Fixed route and paratransit fares have not been adjusted since 1988 (26 years!). Since the senior population in Delaware is increasing, the demand for these services is also increasing. Additionally, because of my age, I am eligible for 1/2 price taxi service (DART Senior Citizens Affordable Taxi – SCAT) regardless of my ability to drive.

    The simple fact is, that the mantra of existing on a fixed income (such as Social Security) may be true of some number of seniors, but we all know that many seniors have income other than Social Security, whether from employment or from investments.

    Bottom line, while I agree that a gas tax is necessary, I also believe that in conjunction with that Delaware needs to take measures to ensure that revenue raised is indeed allocates for its intended purpose and institute means testing for services that now allocated based simply on age.

    Also, I do think we need to look at less reliance on gas taxes because vehicles are become more efficient, less miles are being traveled, and because electric vehicle use will increase. Consequently, less gas is being sold and used. Wheels on the road is a logical addition.

  56. Republican David says:

    If the trust fund were managed properly, the need for funds would be less and the roads better. The problem is that you guys don’t know when to stop. Instead of asking for a couple cents to cover the gap, you demand 10 cents. Questioning the need for a close to 50% increase is reasonable and necessary. Currently Delaware is right in the middle in gas taxes. 23 states have lower about 3 states and the District the same and around 23 higher. The 10 cent proposal would make us 6th highest in the nation. Does that sound reasonable to you? If it does, just right a check and leave the rest of us alone.

  57. Jason330 says:

    …is what an idiot would say.

  58. SussexAnon says:

    You do realize the 10 cent gas tax proposal was to be spread out over years, right?

    You know, like Maryland did. (and didn’t implode the economy).

  59. Tom Kline says:

    Those that use up the most resources contribute the least. That sums up greater than 50% of Delaware inhabitants.

  60. pandora says:

    You obviously have deep, and disturbing, issues with Delaware. What happened? Did it spank you when you were little? Cheat on you? Not give you a cookie? Whatever it was obviously devastated you. I suggest therapy.