Why does Ohio need so many special license plates?

I noticed a recent piece of legislation, H.B. 339, that creates seven new license plate designs for Ohio. It was passed unanimously by the Ohio House and is currently in committee in the Senate.

The bill creates the following plates:

* Ohio Legislative Black Caucus license plates include a logo and words selected by the Ohio Legislative Black Caucus Foundation. Money will be used to fund scholarships to students who attend Central State University or Wilberforce University.

* Massillon Tiger Football Booster Club license plates are inscribed with words selected by the club and will support the football team of Washington High School of the Massillon City School District.

* Power Squadron license plates are designed by the Mansfield Power Squadron and will help fund educational boating programs.

* Military Sacrifice license plates are inscribed with a distinctive emblem and the words “Military Sacrifice.” It is available only to immediate family members of a person who died in combat and no contribution is required.

* Birthplace of Superman license plates are inscribed with a phrase and logo. Only the BMV fee applies.

* Nationwide Children’s Hospital license plates are designed by the hospital and contributions will help fund the Nationwide Children’s Hospital Foundation.

* Combat Action Ribbon license plates are inscribed with the words “combat action ribbon” and bear a reproduction of the ribbon. They may only be obtained by those who have been awarded the combat action ribbon.

It got me thinking - how many special designs do we actually have and how much does it cost us?

Turns out, we've got a lot of them.

According to the Bureau of Motor Vehicles website, we have:

* 27 college plates
* 9 gratis plates (which include public plates, turnpike plates and certain military plates like Congressional Medal of Honor, Disabled Veteran and Former Prisoner of War)
* 35 Military plates
* 6 professional sports plates
* 82 special interest plates ranging from sororities and fraternities to wildlife

The Legislative Service Commission reports that the cost of producing each plate is $6.37 and the BMV fee for the plate is usually $10, covering the cost of production. But some plates, like the military and public ones, do not have an additional fee.

Others, like the new Congressional Black Caucus, the college plates or wildlife plates, have an additional charge that is transmitted to a sponsoring organization for scholarships or other financial support.

Unlike the standard Ohio license plate, the additional fee is charged every year upon renewal, not just when first receiving the plate.

So there is no additional cost to the taxpayer, other than the recording-keeping and oversight of the specialty plate program, but do we really need 159 different license plates in our state?

And why is the government in the role of collecting funds for everything from Ducks to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame? If you wanted to make a donation to those organizations, wouldn't sending them a check be much easier that the state legislature creating a law?

Inquiring minds....

What the government doesn't want you to know: airlines now required to hide taxes

I'm on a list serve with a number of conservative bloggers and yesterday there was an email from Seton Motley, President of Less Government that contained a surprising notice from Spirit Airlines.

WARNING:
New government regulations require us to HIDE taxes in your fares.

This is not consumer-friendly or in your best interest. It's wrong and you shouldn't stand for it.

Starting January 24, 2012, fares are distorted.

Why?
Thanks to the U.S. Department of Transportation's latest fare rules, Spirit must now HIDE the government's taxes and fees in your fares.

If the government can hide taxes in your airfares, then they can carry out their hidden agenda and quietly increase their taxes. (Yes, such talks are already underway.)

And if they can do it to the airline industry, what's next?
As the transparency leader and most consumer-friendly airline, Spirit DOES NOT support this new USDOT mandate. We believe the better form of transparency is to break out costs so customers know exactly what they're buying.

What can you do to help stop this injustice?
Join us in keeping government taxes and fees low and transparent by contacting your elected officials.

It then had links to contact your congressional representatives.

Additionally, when you go to the Spirit Airlines website, there is a pop-up screen that gives you the same warning.

At first I thought this was one of the most outrageous things I'd heard of. But then I realized that it's just another in the long list of abuses the government is inflicting upon us. And this from the administration that promised to be the most transparent in history.

If the Transportation Department can force companies to hide the taxation, how will you hold your government accountable for their collections and expenditures? But that's the point. They don't want you to know. Instead, when the cost of airline travel rises, you'll get mad at the 'eeeee-villlll' airline company - and politicians can then step in to save you by tyrannically imposing price controls. Voila - we're no longer the land of the free.

Kudos to Spirit Airlines for having the courage to say what needs to be said and urging their customers to be active in opposing government tyranny.

Where are the other airlines? And what action are you going to take now that you know about this?

Sanity from the City of Toledo: no authority to regulate private parking fees

It doesn't happen often, but when it does, we should definitely note it and appreciate it.

As part of the Toledo City Council discussion of the licensing of private business's parking lots because they will open and charge for parking during special events, council President Wilma Brown asked if the city could regulate the amount that these private companies charge.

In downtown Toledo, some local companies have parking for their employees and customers only. They have the temerity to open up those spaces during downtown special events and charge people to park there. It's profitable for them and gives the attending public more choices and options for parking. Seemed like a win-win, until the government got involved.

You see, the Toledo politicians, in their infinite wisdom, long ago created a licensing requirement for privately-owned public lots. In order to operate one, you have to get 'permission' - by way of a license - to do so. According to the city, this allows them to ensure that you've got proper pavement, adequate size and 'safety' (the ultimate arrogance of government). What it really ensures is that the city gets revenue from the requirement.

But these private companies who open up their private lots only for special events have never gotten a license. The vast majority of the time, their lots are reserved for their employees and customers - not the general public. So the city decided to require all those businesses to obtain a license or not allow public parking in their lots. Of course, protecting their lots from intrusion during special events would also cost money, so many of them paid the licensing fee.

Certainly a 'not-business-friendly' action.

But not content with the intrusion into the private sector, the woman who was elected by her fellow members of council to lead them as their president wanted to go even further and dictate how much all the lots could charge. She was 'outraged' that, as she claimed, some of those lots could charge as much as $20. Of course, if no one was willing to pay that much, they'd lower their rates, but apparently the concept of a free market and supply and demand are completely lost on Wilma Brown.

So she asked, by way of a referral to the administration, if council could regulate the fees so that council - not the property owners and the consumers - could set the amount for parking.

Thankfully, Adam Loukx, Law Director for the City of Toledo, imparted some sanity when he issued his legal opinion, included in last Friday's Council Packet:

It is my understanding that this referral seeks an opinion as to the limits of the City’s authority to regulate parking rates on private lots and does not seek an opinion as to the City’s authority over rates for public parking facilities (i.e. meters, public garages, etc).

Neither the Code nor the Charter specifically grants the City authority to set rates charged by private parking facilities. The Code does require licensing of these facilities1and there are many zoning and use regulations that are applicable to private lots.

Perusal of the Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati codes suggests that those cities likewise do not set rates for private lots.

In conclusion, under current law the City does not have the authority or duty to regulate parking rates on privately owned and operated parking lots. In contrast, under current law the City does have the authority and duty to regulate through the licensing found in T.M.C. Chapter 743 privately owned and operated parking lots.

Arguably, the City could, through appropriate legislation, regulate the fees charged by private lots in furtherance of the City’s general police powers. However, it is likely that such an action would lead to litigation.

Unfortunately, he does leave the door open for shenanigans from council, but does warn them that such actions would lead to litigation that, in light of his opinion, they'd seem destined to lose.

Kudos to the law department for telling council what they NEED - not what they WANT - to hear.

Rear-end collisions rise at red-light camera intersections

The Palm Beach Post has taken a look at the accidents in West Palm Beach following the installation of red-light cameras and found:

"Rear-end collisions more than doubled and accidents increased overall in the first 70 days of red-light cameras in West Palm Beach compared to the same period of 2009..."

This is consistent with what other communities found - that while side-impact crashes may show declines, other types of accidents increase. Strangely, Toledo Police have never provided such analysis for the public to review.

I can only wonder why it is that all these other newspapers can find the time and staff to examine the 'safety' claims, but our local daily can't be bothered?

But then, we know it's all about the money, now that Toledo is actually confiscating vehicles without an order from a court if the vehicle (not necessarily the owner) has a red-light or speed camera ticket that hasn't been paid.

Toledo politicians will raise taxes - that's all they know how to do

I do not envy Mayor Mike Bell and the limited options he has to address this year's nearly $50 million budget deficit.

Part of the problem is that he had only three months in which to find solutions. While cutting spending and reducing the size of government is clearly the best choice in both the short and long term, last year's decision by council and then mayor Carty Finkbeiner put Bell in a tough spot with union contracts, leaving a rock and a hard place as choices.

The bigger problem we have is that Toledo City Council, as a body, did nothing.

Well, that's not exactly correct. They continued 'business as usual' when it came to union contracts, wages, benefits and pensions, hoping that a six-month moratorium on some of those items would buy them time.

And it bought the time: six months.

Now the situation is even worse because they've failed, over a period of years, to make the decisions necessary to address the declining revenue and skyrocketing costs.

Throughout the last several years, I've paid particularly close attention to the revenue projections and have made numerous posts here about how they cannot possibly be obtained. It comes as no surprise to me, those of you who read this blog and most ordinary citizens, that the practice of inflating revenue to justify spending is a significant problem - that Toledo politicians have known about, and embraced.

Even this year, we have some who are saying that Bell's revenue projections are too low. Can you say 'stuck on stupid'????

Better that they be too low than too high, resulting in further deficits!

Members of city council are now faced with having to produce a balanced budget by tomorrow, or the city faces dire circumstances, including the inability to expend money. Temporary spending authorizations cannot continue to be made like they are in January, February and March.

So what will council do? The cowardly thing - though they'll try to spin it as courageous.

They are going to increase taxes.

They will not make the hard choices of cutting non-mandated services. They will not repeal ordinances they've previously passed in order to eliminate boards and commissions that suck up tax dollars. They will not examine the operations of government and eliminate duplicate functions/tasks (not that they could in the two days left). They will not prioritize safety and basic services and eliminate lower priorities. They will not challenge the unions.

They will tell us they did the only they could do continue that elusive 'quality of life' they're constantly telling about. Of course, that assumes that they can define each of our 'quality of life' criteria - or that they know what adds to our quality of life better than we do. How typical of elitist statists on our council.

My 'quality of life' is certainly enhanced when I have more money in my pocket. In fact, that's the best thing I could ever hope for to enhance my quality of life. That point is too often missed or ignored by city council.

They will tell us they've made a difficult choice in raising taxes. And they might see it that way because they will (hopefully!) suffer the consequences of that decision and that could mean loss of office. (Though this is Toledo, so while that should be a given in most communities, it's not here.)

Just remember this: Whenever government raises taxes, fees, or increases its income (in whatever form), the politicians are telling you that they need your money more than you do. They are telling you that their special projects and priorities are more important that yours - including your mortgage or rent, your utilities, your food, your retirement, your children's college funds, your home improvements - everything!

And as a result of their actions, you will go with less while they brag about 'saving' city services.

Every one of them who votes for any increase in taxation - in any form - deserves to be thrown from office.

Does Toledo have the political will to do so remains an unanswered question. But I can hope. Because only by changing the philosophy of those on council will Toledo ever get out of the mess we're in.

And that goes for all of council, regardless of the political affiliation they claim.

Fees are taxes

Governor Ted Strickland gave his state of the state address last week and pledged not to raise taxes to help balance the budget, even in these difficult economic times.

However, when his budget was made public, it included increases in 120 different fees - from drivers licenses and car registrations to new business filings.

It should come as no surprise that I believe fees are, indeed, taxes. But you might be surprised to know that the Governor agrees with me.

Shortly after taking office in 2007, Strickland made it perfectly clear that he opposed both higher taxes and higher fees as a way to raise more money, saying, "I think higher fees are higher taxes." Columbus Dispatch, 2-3-09

So, if higher fees are higher taxes and he's promised not to raise taxes, how can he raise fees?

Oh, well, you see, "not every fee is like every other fee."

Translation: now that I want to raise fees to balance the budget, they're not really a tax.