Policymakers in Arizona have for a few years been trying to figure out the best way to make sure there’s enough money to pay for road repairs here.
Those costs have traditionally been covered by the gas tax, but as cars become more efficient and electric vehicles become more popular, that tax isn’t bringing in as much money as it used to. A number of previous ideas have failed at the state Capitol, but lawmakers will be taking up a new one later today.
Howie Fischer of Capitol Media Services joined The Show to talk about what to expect this week at the state Capitol.
Full conversation
MARK BRODIE: Good morning, Howie.
HOWARD FISCHER: Good morning. Hey there.
BRODIE: So what is this new plan to try to deal with or sort of as some would say, sort of equalize what internal combustion engine drivers and EV drivers are paying?
FISCHER: Well, let me back up half a step. You talk about the failed efforts in the past. The idea is to find a way, as you say, to make folks who drive electric cars pay for their share of the roads that they're all driving on.
One of the most popular ideas, and this goes back a decade, is what they would call a mileage tax. You know, if you drive a certain number of miles, you figure out what the gas equivalent would be, and you say, OK, we'll charge that. This has raised all sorts of alarms among some conservative members of the Legislature. They say the government is tracking you. They're spying on you, they're surveilling you. That isn't necessarily the case, but it's basically killed the whole idea.
So this new proposal would say, look, let's figure out what a typical car of this model would cost if you were using gasoline. So let's say you, you have a Toyota Corolla, and it would normally, you drive X number 1,000 miles a year, you know, with let's say 15,000, and it would cost so much at gas at 19, 18 cents a gallon, which has been at since 1991, and we'll come up with an equivalent of what that would be in electric miles.
Now this gets really convoluted in terms of setting the vehicle's kilowatt hour usage and the rest of it, but it is the best effort so far to figure out, OK, why should folks get a free ride for electric vehicles, particularly since electric vehicles actually are heavier than their standard models and probably do more road damage.
This is always going to get a fight, but I think lawmakers are realizing, look, that 18 cents a gallon in 1991. The gasoline would have to be 42 cents a gallon now to just stay even with inflation, or put it another way, that 18 cents is now worth 8 cents and everything else has gone up. So something has to give here.
I don't know if this is the formula. I don't know if this is the year, but as more and more electric cars go on the road, as you point out, you've got to find a way of making everyone pay their fair share.
BRODIE: Right. Well, and how we, I mean, to your point of, you know, something has to give, maybe not this, like what, what sort of the, the chatter at the Capitol? I mean, I would imagine that there would be some critics who are saying this is a new tax. We are not supportive of new taxes.
FISCHER: Well, they're not supportive of new taxes, and you'll love this because as you know, there's a constitutional amendment to say if the Legislature sets a new tax or raise an existing tax, you need a two-third vote. Well, you know how they're getting around that and trying to do a simple majority vote they would let the director of ADOT set the levy and therefore, we're not raising the tax, we're just telling ADOT come up with a number and impose it when you do each year's vehicle registration fee.
BRODIE: Right.
FISCHER: Still not popular, but I think there's a sense of fairness that even folks who say like Sen. David Farnsworth, who is proposing this, say it's only fair, and he's certainly no fan of tax increases. We say why put the burden on everyone else.
BRODIE: All right, so that bill coming up later [Monday] afternoon in the Senate Finance Committee in the House Health Committee this week. Howie, let's talk about a new food stamp verification requirement. What would lawmakers be looking to do here?
FISCHER: Well, they've already got a whole bunch of things that they expect applicants to do. Then there's some bills going through as far as work requirements or education requirements. This sets up, maybe a little bureaucracy for the folks who are working at the Department of Economic Security to run other checks.
For example, they'd have to go ahead and check lottery winnings, so they'd have to check with the lottery, they'd have to check with the tribal casinos or whatever reporting they're doing to making sure that the folks who are getting food stamps don't have income they're not reporting. Workers' compensation benefits, so they'd be checking with the industrial commission, you know, check with the Department of Corrections to find out, are these people now incarcerated.
And one of the more interesting ones, and I didn't know whether this was a problem, is the folks who get what we used to call food stamps, which used to actually consist of coupons, are now getting a debit card, which means they can be checked electronically where they use, and it would say that if folks are using them exclusively out of state for over 90 days, that suggests these are not Arizonans and we would be able to cut those off.
So again, they're trying to find ways of saying is there fraud in the in the system, which is really interesting, of course, because remember this is all paid for with federal dollars, but the Legislature’s decided no, we need to get on top of that.
BRODIE: All right, Howie, lastly, before I let you go, I want to ask you about a bill that would put basically put up a list of flags that would be allowed on public property. Presumably one that has your smiling face on it would still be allowed.
FISCHER: Well, I'd love to say that that's the case, but I'm not sure that you fact is you probably could not even put a KJZZ flag on the side of a public building. This is, you know, the, the proponent, Nick Kupper says, well, this is just to make sure that if you're putting a flag on public property, it's not just public buildings, but anywhere on public property, it should be a "neutral flag," a U.S. flag, a tribal flag, the flag of, you know, the fact is that Maricopa community colleges has a flag, you could put it on a public building. He says, we don't want divisive flags up.
Now, he says this could be about anything. Now, if you've been following the news, you've noticed that a certain governor has hung some gay pride and and and similar flags on the side of the Capitol, and there's not much they can do about it because she basically controls the executive tower, which is just west of the old Capitol. And I think the feeling is, well, if we can make a law. She will go ahead and say, well, of course I don't want to put a gay pride flag there, or, or transgender rights flag or something else. But the curious thing about it is because of the way it's limited, it's a list of what is permitted.
If you want to put up a flag, let's say the Suns are making a run for the championship, you couldn't hang a Suns banner on the side of the thing, and I think that's getting the attention of a few people of how restrictive do we want to be about this. It's one of those culture war things that comes up over and over. The fact is that because of the fact it's a bill, guess who gets to sign or veto it?
BRODIE: Right, the governor.
