California needs to transition away from the gas tax, whether Republicans like it or not

California’s largest transportation funding source, the fuel tax, is living on borrowed time. The growing number of fuel-efficient vehicles, hybrids and electric vehicles on the state’s roads means the gas tax is no longer a sustainable way to build, maintain, and expand highways, roads, and bridges.

The consensus among transportation experts is that states will need to replace fuel taxes with road user charges. But California Republicans are fearmongering against road charges, claiming, “politicians want to track how far you drive and tax you for every mile.”

People who use roads and bridges should pay for the costs of building and maintaining them. Road charges would replace gas taxes and be user fees, which Republicans should support.

As Southern California News Group noted, Assembly Transportation Committee Chair Lori Wilson introduced Assembly Bill 1421, clarifying that the Road Usage Charge Technical Advisory Committee that is already in operation should finish its research and make recommendations to the state legislature by the end of the year. The bill should not be controversial. California has already conducted five small pilot programs to examine the viability of switching from fuel taxes to road charges.

But California Republicans claimed the bill was a big-government tax increase and a means of spying on drivers. It is not. Assemblymember Wilson’s bill merely requests policy recommendations to ensure the state has the funding for the infrastructure it needs in the decades to come. The recommendations would be non-binding. The legislature is not required to follow them.

California Republicans should work with Democrats to find common ground on improving infrastructure and creating an effective road charge system that ensures the mileage-based user fees replace state fuel taxes.

The starting point for the state’s per-mile fee could be set to generate the same level of funding as the current state gas tax rate, maintaining the tax’s inflation index. If the road user charge replaces fuel taxes, which has been what previous pilot programs in the state and Caltrans have all recommended, then road charges would be an improvement over today’s fuel taxes, in part, because it wouldn’t matter what vehicle you drive.

Electric cars use the state’s roads, but don’t pay fuel taxes. Kia Rio drivers pay about half as much in fuel taxes as Ford F-150 drivers pay because the Kia’s fuel economy is twice as good, even though both vehicles cause about the same amount of wear and tear on roads.

Republicans concerned that the committee would recommend adding a road charge on top of existing fuel taxes can leverage the strong bipartisan support that already exists to replace, not add to, gas taxes.

If lawmakers are concerned that future road user fees will increase because some want the funding shifted to things like bailing out transit agencies and expanding trails and sidewalks, they should ensure the law requires mileage fees to be dedicated to the roads that generate them.

Finally, lawmakers should work to protect drivers’ privacy without fearmongering. Every state that tests mileage-based user fees offers a low-tech odometer-reading option that can be performed during a vehicle inspection or routine maintenance. This allows drivers to pay annual road charges based solely on the number of miles driven since the last odometer check. Some states are also looking at prepaid options for drivers.

Oregon, which has a permanent road charge program, has state-of-the-art privacy protections. It uses private vendors to process its mileage data. Oregon also requires that any location data be destroyed within 30 days, legally declares that all mileage data is confidential and exempt from public records requests, and requires law enforcement officers to obtain a court order based on probable cause before accessing any of it.

California’s roads, highways and bridges need repair and modernization. The gas tax won’t fund those projects. The best path forward is to continue studying mileage-based user fees that could replace the fuel tax, be dedicated to roads, and protect privacy.

Baruch Feigenbaum is senior managing director of transportation policy at Reason Foundation and author of the Annual Highway Report examining every state’s highways and bridges.