With that I mean to say:
When in doubt or at a loss for better ideas, go stick it to the little guy or at the very least to those who most work for a 'Green' solution.
Take the meanest ugliest guzzling transporter that is hubris driven by its knuckle-dragging Christianist-dominionist conservative and tax that thing exactly the same as the thriftiest, lowest impacting vehicle that is environmentally soundly navigated by goat-socks wearing do-gooders. That way you exact the most punishment on the later and essentially reward the former with the notion that he/she/it is not paying any more for his G0D-given right to despoil the reaches of this earthly realm to the fullest.
<More after the flap.>
There is no differentiation in Lahood's proposal and it only addresses the financial needs to deal with the immediate costs. And Not very practical in my view either.
Let's look at this in a purely Physics logic driven perspective. In most everyone's notion, it makes sense to assume that a bigger, heavier means of individual transportation takes more energy per mile than a smaller and lighter one would.
Relating to my daily urban commute, which I prefer to execute on an (electrified) e-bicycle and while observing the honking, CO2 belching throngs of SUVs and trucks with nothing more to transport than 1 (one whole) overweight (and adversely to my person oriented) individual.
Granted, I have not heard about extending this mile-tax to bicycles, but when climatological conditions force me to forego my preferred means of commute, I use a self-brewed biodiesel driven VW-Bug @ 45 Mpg (I live after all in Minnesota and there ARE limits to wise use of bicycles.) .
In such cases and conditions, I aim to spread the wealth and as much as possible carpool the 3 nearest of my colluagues in- and out- of work those days. I would be charged amount $X for the privilege of transporting of myself and 3 others.
Now the self-indulgent (watch the back of the 12 Mpg truck/SUV and observe the faded Bush-Cheney and Iraq-War support stickers) lard-lumps prefer to transport themselves in Isolation and individual confinement in their God Given total command and control of their Golden-Calf-on-Wheels. He/she/or it would be charged exactly the same amount of $X for the same distance and traveltime in which his/her/its vehicle used about 3 times the amount of fuel, does more than 4 times the amount of wear-and-tear on the infrastructure to transport his single sorry butt to and from his place of employment.
Let's do the math:
I, with 3 others (Grand-Total of about 800 pounds) @ 45Mpg (okay, make that 36Mpg to account for added load) for 20 miles. That makes and efficiency of (20Miles 36Mpg)4persons = .14 Gallon/Person a day for which I get to pay $X in taxes according to Mr. Lahood.
The other guy/gall/being with his 12 Mpg infernal contraption over the same 20 miles: (20Miles/12Mpg)/1 = 1.7 Gallon/Person with the same Lahood usage ticket of $X.
That is 1.7/.014 = More than TWELVE times as cheap when seen in context of Gallon/Person efficiency.
Conclusion: Lahood's proposal actually sponsors and rewards each and every fuel inefficiency you can come up with.
My solution would be: Charge a tax based on producer-specified empty vehicle weight and charged with the normal license fees in addition to a surcharge of equivalent of a gallon of gasoline at fuel purchase, which would be the same for all users.
That way the fat-ass penis-extender single occupancy SUVs and Trucks get to actually pay upfront for their road and environmental impact(s).
By the same token; Suckers like myself get a sense of justice out of knowing that our efforts actually make a difference and find peace with the vehicle-weight surcharge. I mean, my VW-Bug weighs in at less than 35% of a truck or van, so I would be charged according to my use and impact.
Oh and yes, there would be a possibility of exemption for business use with enforceable rules and criteria. A Business could apply for a business-use transport-tariff.Even if they only move a single specially calibrated mini-screwdriver bu truck once a year, which they would have to prove.
Clear?