Oregon Public Broadcasting

1st congressional district 2012 election 2012 session agriculture art arts author beer births books budget business central oregon college congress crime culture death penalty eastern oregon economy education employment energy environment eugene fishing food gangs gay rights health health care high school history homeless housing jobs law legislature literature living media mental health military movies music native americans obama occupy portland occupy wall street onthejob oregon our town outdoors parenting police politics portland portland business journal portland mayor pregnancy prison public health race rebroadcast recess recession religion republicans rural schools science shooting sports supreme court talking business technology teen theater unemployment union university of oregon washington water weekend women youth

PLEASE ELIMINATE EXCLUSIONS DUE TO PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS!

My wife and I have both avoided medical checkups or treatment at times because we do not yet have stable jobs and don't want to find a pre-existing condition before having health insurance.

Also... I have heard from multiple sources folks avoiding getting tested for STIs for this reason as well as the fact that even getting tested for STIs out of simple courtesy for a new partner has caused some to be denied coverage.

Many of us are avoiding maintenance and preventatice care, which ultimately can result in greater costs.

posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context

Sean's point (a) is one of my biggest concerns.

Heavier vehicles (which generally get lower mileage) put greater wear and tear on the roads, so paying per gallon of gas keeps the field level. This is why we have weigh stations for large commercial rigs.

If maintaining roads is the true reason for this proposal, then studded tires should be massively taxed. I see cars in the Willamette Valley commuting daily on studded tires just for that occasional weekend jaunt to the mountains.

The mileage-based tax is also completely ignoring the environmental cost of using petrol. For instance... one can use gasoline for (2-stroke) lawn mowers, to run generators, use in motor-boats, etc. These are forms of gasoline consumption that impact the environment, yet not the roads. How will this be taken into account? And are people filling up tanks for such uses "penalized" by what vehicle they carry their tanks in (since it doesn't impact the roads)?

I also have questions about how the fee is implemented. Is it paid at the pump or just added to one's credit card, or mailed to people's homes? A good deterrent to driving too much is feeling the financial impact at the pump. If it is just a line in a monthly credit statement, the personal financial penalty becomes invisible and no longer puts pressure on drivers to reduce their auto-addiction.

posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context