| Just when you were convinced that your bike is a free alternative to driving, a bill is proposed in Oregon that would require cyclists to pay a $54 registration every two years. Wayne Kriger, the bill’s chief architect (and, natch, a non-cyclist), says bike riders should help pay for the roads they use. Just be glad he didn’t propose a Pay As You Drive fee. (HT: Greg Hum) [%comments]
Enjoy the Free Ride While It Lasts
TAGS: bicycling
and 
. You can also watch it on 
I’m conflicted about this one– on one hand, there’s no reason cyclists should be exempt from paying for roads if drivers are paying for them (especially since bad quality roads are probably more dangerous to cyclists than anyone else). On the other hand, there are so few bikers that will this even make a difference? And it seems to be a good way of disincentivizing something we should be promoting more of.
On another note, I’m curious about where this figure came from… are car drivers paying the equivalent of $27 a year for roads? Via tolls, or is this the cost of a car registration over several more years?
I do not know anything about cycling in Portland, but where I live and bike to work everyday I do not enjoy much in the way of amenities geared toward cyclists. I would be more than happy to pay $27 a year if it went toward well-maintained bike lanes, bike-friendly intersections, and the like.
I have read about what a friendly state Oregon is to bikers & now they pull this crap! It’s more than likely that even those bikers have a car in their households; so now they are being double taxed! Give me a break.
Are they going to make walkers pay a registration fee to pay for the sidewalks they walk on too?
“I’m conflicted about this one- on one hand, there’s no reason cyclists should be exempt from paying for roads if drivers are paying for them”
Actually, as a tax paying citizen, I pay for the roads even though I don’t own a car. There is a very common misconception that gas taxes pay for more of the roads than they actually do. Also, I do much less damage to the roads than a car does, so I’m paying for a LOT more of the roads than I proportionally “use.”
I wonder if the guy that proposed this thinks that cyclists don’t pay taxes.
Also, how does he plan to have this enforced? Pulling over cyclists to check their registration? Are we all going to get license plates? Ugh.
I guess I’d have to ask how much it costs to include bicycles on roadways and then ask is it worth offsetting this cost? Then as Ber said, shouldn’t pedestrians be taxed for their use of sidewalks and roads? And if so, isn’t that included in income tax? *Or as I call it, the “You exist” tax.*
This is insane. Taxes are used for two reasons (correct me if I’m wrong): 1) affecting behaviour and 2) raising revenues.
Since the revenues aren’t significant, the assumption would be that this tax is designed to curb behaviour. However, cycling should be considered positive behaviour! If anything, there should be some sort of tax break for cycling instead of driving.
Roads are paid for in part by property taxes and county bonds, which cyclists also pay. A bicycle also uses a very small portion of the road and causes far less damage resulting in reduced maintenance costs. It seems like this works out to bicyclists already paying more than their fair share.