Carbon Tax on Driving Is Stupid [OPINION]
A couple of think tanks are suggesting that Boston implement a fee for motorists who drive in congested zones. The Boston Green Ribbon Commission and Boston University say the congestion fee would promote walking, bikes and public transportation.
Average Boston residents could face fees totaling $10 to $15 per day under the plan. They wouldn't get a nickel out of me because of my days of visiting Beanville would be over.
Fortunately, this brain fart of a recommendation is too radical even for progressive Mayor Marty Walsh whose goal it is to make Boston carbon-free by 2050.
“Mayor Walsh appreciates the recommendations made in the report. However, the City of Boston is not implementing congestion pricing at this time,” according to a statement from Walsh' office to The Boston Herald. Emphasis on "at this time."
The Herald says driving is not all that would be taxed under the proposal, "A $5 parking fee placed on every trip made that ends at a location other than a personal residence. Ride-hailing companies and their riders would also be affected if the city does choose to implement the report’s guidelines of a $1 per mile fee that would be imposed on ride-alone trips."
Congestion fees are not a new concept. Some of our pals in socialist Europe are already being hit up. Londoners, for example, pay a $14.50 daily fee to travel in congestion zones. But we're not Londoners. Remember a little shindig they called the "tea party?"
Next, the loons in the Massachusetts legislature will want to raise taxes in order to address climate change and lower ocean levels. Oh, wait.
When are the politicians going to do what we elected them to do? Fix the potholes. Build us new bridges. Make sure the damn trains are running on time. And leave the climate to a higher power. Do your jobs!
Barry Richard is the host of The Barry Richard Show on 1420 WBSM New Bedford. He can be heard weekdays from noon to 3 p.m. Contact him at firstname.lastname@example.org and follow him on Twitter @BarryJRichard58. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.