I believe that this has been suggested before, but wouldn't iot help to get
a list of states that have passed similar measures? Connecticut just did
and, as a short-time resident of this state, I can testify that this state
has never met a fee or source of income that it didn't like. The
legislature would never have passed the bill (if reduced income from smog
tests was a real possibility) without tremendous fanfare and publicity and
both parites taking credit. This was passed without any press coverage, so
it must be revenue neutral. I recall that Massachusettts, another high-tax
state, also exempts older cars. Does New York (David?)?
Maybe you could convice the Calif. legislature that this is the latest
trend trend and they are behind the rest of the nation. That will spur
them into action!
Seriously, however, did any of the other states do financial impact
analyses? Can those data be used? DMV certainly has the records on
numbers of registered vehicles that would be affected annually, proportion
of cars by year that are gross polluters, actual income to the state from
emissions tests at private garages, etc. The real economic impact should
not be too hard to calculate. The figures might even be in the existing
reports to the committee. Get such a law passed and maybe I'll come back
to the state in which I was raised.
>In a message dated 97-07-17 18:15:56 EDT, TUSLER@mp050.mv.unisys.com
>(PHILIPPE TUSLER) writes:
>
><< So what does it mean that the California SB 42 was placed on the
>Appropriations
> committee suspense list? It's waiting their action? It's suspended and
> dead?
> >>
>I'm told by my companies political consultant that this only means that the
>committee has other items to deal with first...such as the States budget!
> Nothing more. I agree the analyst was very negative....some one needs to
>write a rebuttal to that and submit it to the committee....
>Terry
Bill Singleton
'52 TD (hers, in pieces in the garage)
'77 MGB (ours, we needed something fun to drive)
|