Gas taxes redirected

[The Mouth]

https://www.yourcentralvalley.com/news/cbs47-investigates/cbs47-investigation-gov-newsom-redirects-gas-tax-money-it-wont-fun-highways-railway-system/

Those taxes are supposed to pay for INFRASTRUCTURE. Roads and rail.

This is bullshit.

[lapfog_1]

1. he is using it to reduce greenhouse gas emissions

Why do you have a problem with that?

[SoCalNative]

2. Because when we voted for these taxes and to keep them in place

we did so with the understanding that they absolutely could NOT be used for anything else other than infrastructure and road repairs.

[The Mouth]

3. These taxes were, and are very specifically

for fixing our horrible roads.
If he, we, or anyone wants to impose taxes to deal with climate change, that's fine, bring it up to a vote, but don't say the taxes are for one thing and then change that.

[sdfernando]

4. Damn straight!

I didn't vote for these taxes so they could be used for something else! We have some really bad roads where I leave, pot holes, uneven surfaces, crumbling roads and bridges....We also have some damned high gas prices of which this tax is one of. I don't mind paying taxes but use the $$ for what THE PEOPLE voted for.

[CountAllVotes]

5. that is the truth!

The roads are so bad that just driving over them where I am located (around town) that the spark plugs in the car loosened up.

Luckily I caught this before they fell off!

That is how bad the roads are and yes, use this money as intended I agree!

Enough of the "redirected" crap!

[Midnightwalk]

6. 61 million goes to rail?

The report also states some $61-million in uncommitted funds will be held in reserve for priority rail projects and other priorities aligned with Executive Order N-19-19.

Can’t find what else is being proposed but you say rail is infrastructure and ok. Is there something else?

I don’t know one way or the other how effective the rail projects will be in reducing road traffic. If they are effective that makes them a good infrastructure investment if for no other reason they would make road projects less urgent. If they aren’t it’s a waste of money. I don’t know.

I get that they are using climate change as a justification and that makes it seem like bait and switch, but if rail projects are ok I don’t see the issue.

Personally if the projects really do decrease emissions and they showed how I’d be ok with using infrastructure money. I’d wonder if there was a wiser way of using the money though. How about you?

Did I miss something in the article?

[The Mouth]

7. If it was just for rail

they wouldn't have needed to do this.

BUT

these taxes are paid for by drivers. I want the godamned roads fixed, period. Build all the rail and bike paths you want, *AFTER* you fix the potholes and add the carpool lanes.