This U.S. State Could Make Every Mile You Drive Cost More Than Just Gas
The bill is currently under discussion at the Massachusetts State House, where critics of the new law say it is about control and limiting transportation. Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance executive director Paul Craney says that the bill is trying to "put mechanisms in place to limit mobility," but Democrat Senate Majority Leader Cynthia Creem says otherwise: "This bill does not do that. This bill doesn't impose restrictions on how much Massachusetts residents can drive nor where they can drive. It doesn't include fines, penalties, taxes on personal vehicle use and it was never the intent of myself or any of the advocates to put a strain on a person's individual liberties." Instead, she says, the goal of the bill is to give more walking, cycling, or train options for those in areas that don't have them in an effort to get more cars and trucks off the road.
Creem says that "it's not about telling people what to do," and that this "is not big brother watching you," but Craney argues that this is just the beginning. "We can all kind of figure out where this is going," he said. The bill has not yet reached a committee and is likely to undergo several edits, so it will still be years before anything therein is enacted.
Related: New Tennessee Law Hits Bullies Where It Hurts: Their Driver's License
A dollar figure per mile has not yet been floated, but whatever it is, the extra cost to residents needs to be justified. In 2021, Massachusetts passed a law requiring the state to reach zero emissions by 2050, and as Craney concedes, "it's not a goal. It's not wishful thinking. It is actually a law." To meet that zero-emissions target will require radical change, and advocates of the new bill say that this is just one way the state can get there.
But the path will not be straight. Owners of businesses, especially smaller ones, may have to face higher transport costs that they simply cannot avoid, while others are concerned about their data being stored and what that might mean in terms of government overreach. As valid as those points are, the state needs to find a way to meet the requirements of its own law. Furthermore, it's worth pointing out that Massachusetts is home to the city where drivers are most likely to experience a collision, Boston, so perhaps quieter streets could have a positive impact on more than just air quality.
Copyright 2025 The Arena Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
2 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Federal judge rules Trump administration cannot reallocate billions meant for disaster mitigation
BOSTON — A federal judge on Tuesday blocked the Trump administration from reallocating $4 billion meant to help communities protect against natural disasters. U.S. District Judge Richard G. Stearns in Boston granted a preliminary injunction sought by 20 Democrat-led states while their lawsuit over the funding moves ahead. The states argue the Federal Emergency Management Agency lacks the authority to end the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program and redirect more than $4 billion of its funding. The program aims to harden infrastructure around the country against potential storm damage. FEMA initially announced it was ending the program, but later said in a court filing that it was evaluating it. 'Although the Government equivocates about whether it has, in fact, ended the BRIC program, the States' evidence of steps taken by FEMA to implement the announced termination portend the conclusion that a determination has in fact been made and that FEMA is inching towards a fait accompli,' Stearns wrote in his ruling. 'The agency has cancelled new funding opportunities and informed stakeholders that they should no longer expect to obtain any unobligated funds.' Noting money for the program was allocated by Congress, the states' lawsuit says any attempt to redirect it would run afoul of the Constitution. A lawyer for the government, Nicole O'Connor, argued at a hearing in July that the funds can be used both for disaster recovery and disaster prevention and that FEMA should have discretion to use the money how it sees fit. The program has provided grants for a range of disaster management projects, including strengthening electrical grids, constructing levees for flood protection and relocating vulnerable water treatment facilities. Many of the projects are in rural communities. FEMA said in a news release in April that it was 'ending' the program, but the agency's acting chief, David Richardson, later said in a court filing that FEMA was merely evaluating whether to end or revise it. The states, including California, New York and Washington, argue that the threat of losing the funding alone has put numerous projects at risk of being cancelled, delayed or downsized. And they warn ending the program would be highly imprudent. 'By proactively fortifying our communities against disasters before they strike, rather than just responding afterward, we will reduce injuries, save lives, protect property, and, ultimately, save money that would otherwise be spent on post-disaster costs,' they wrote in the suit filed in July. FEMA said in a court filing an injunction on its use of the funds could hamper its ability to respond to major disasters.
21 minutes ago
Purdue University student freed from ICE detention after outcry from faith leaders
A Purdue University student from South Korea has been freed from federal detention, tearfully reuniting with her family and religious community in Manhattan following days of outcry from faith leaders in New York and abroad. Yeonsoo Go, 20, was taken into custody on Thursday during a routine immigration hearing in Manhattan, according to her attorneys and family. She was then transferred to a federal detention facility in Monroe, Louisiana, where she was held for three nights before being released without bail on Monday. Mary Rothwell Davis, an attorney for the Episcopal Diocese of New York, where Go's mother works as a priest, said the family had not received an explanation for the arrest or abrupt reversal. 'We don't know why it happened, but we're very happy that it did,' Davis said. 'We were moving heaven and earth to make it known that we thought this was a mistake.' A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security said Go had been placed in expedited removal proceedings for overstaying an expired visa. The agency did not respond to questions about what prompted Go's release. 'The fact of the matter is those who are in our country illegally have a choice — they can leave the country voluntarily or be arrested and deported," agency spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement. But Davis disputed the contention that Go was here illegally. She said Go has maintained a valid visa since arriving in the U.S. in 2021, along with her mother, Rev. Kyrie Kim, who leads a Korean congregation in the New York area. A graduate of Scarsdale High School in the suburbs of New York City, Go studies at Purdue's College of Pharmacy and remains active in the Episcopalian church, according to Davis. In recent days, clergy members, including Bishop Matthew Heyd, as well as the church leaders in Korea, have called on the Trump administration to release Go, insisting that her arrest was a mistake. 'Whether it was our outcry or some other factor that persuaded DHS to send her home, we don't know, but we're so grateful,' Davis said, adding that Go's experience in detention was 'unbelievably traumatic.' New York State Assemblymember Amy Paulin, a Democrat, said she had spoken by phone with Go, who she described as 'relieved' to be home. 'She is home, she is safe, and she is so grateful for the outpouring of love and support from this incredible community,' Paulin said.
Politico
31 minutes ago
- Politico
Texas AG Paxton will try to expel Texas Democrats if they don't return by Friday
The legal process to remove the lawmakers will likely take time. First, Paxton must file a case against each individual absent Democrat in various district courts, a process that would surely lead to appeals and could drag out long beyond the end of the special session on Aug. 19. Even if Paxton succeeds in getting them removed, Gov. Greg Abbott would need to call for special elections to fill the seats, according to Texas law, which says that 'an unexpired term in office may be filled only by a special election.' Paxton issued a nonbinding legal opinion in 2021 during Democrats' last quorum break, which Republican Gov. Greg Abbott cited on Monday while also accusing the lawmakers 'absconded from their responsibility.' In that opinion, Paxton took no position on whether breaking quorum is constitutional. He also declined to say whether fleeing Democrats could or should be removed from office. Rather, he called it a 'fact question for a court' that he said was beyond the scope of his office to decide. He noted instead that he could file what are known as 'quo warranto actions' in court, asking a judge to determine whether the missing lawmakers had officially vacated their seats. When Abbott made the same argument on Monday, Democrats responded simply: 'Come and take it.' Democrats have fled Texas to blue strongholds like Illinois, New York and Massachusetts in order to prevent the legislature from voting on a recently-drawn congressional map — pushed by President Donald Trump — that would give the GOP five more friendly seats ahead of next year's midterms. 'Democrats are going to fight this tooth and nail and until the will of the voters is respected,' Democratic National Committee chair Ken Martin said during a press conference on Tuesday. 'This is not the Democratic Party of your grandfather, which would bring a pencil to the knife fight. This is a new Democratic Party. We're bringing a knife to a knife fight.' The Texas Constitution allows for quorum-breaking, and lawmakers and legal experts alike were quick to dismiss Paxton's claims that Democrats had abandoned their positions. Kyle Cheney and Shia Kapos contributed to this report.
