Electric vehicles are good for NJ

After reading Prof. Matthew Hale’s op-ed: “EVs are destroying the roads. (Their owners) should pay their fair share to fix them,” I would like readers to consider some other facts about electric vehicles.

Hale argued that electric vehicles are expensive to purchase, their higher weight is heavy on the road, and those who use cheaper conventional vehicles pay more than their fair share into the Transportation Trust Fund (TTF), through regressive motor fuel taxes that hurt people. (EV users are not subject to these specific taxes.)

This is nonsense. My wife and I have had an electric car for two years that we bought for $28,000. We are both working people. We pay less to power our cleaner electric vehicle than we do for our carbon dioxide-emitting gasoline car.

Hale claims he would like to buy a Ford F-150 pickup, whose new price, according to Consumer Reports, is $36,570-$77,980 for the 19-mpg gasoline versions. That is of course more expensive than our second-hand EV purchase.

Hale argues he is being unfairly taxed, just like the rest of the 90% of New Jersey drivers with gasoline or diesel vehicles. This means that only 10% of drivers using these roads have cleaner vehicles. So why shouldn’t the 90% pay the tax?

After further reviewing Consumer Reports, may I suggest Hale buy an electric Ford F-150 Lightning that costs $54,995-84,995? Yes, it is more expensive than the cheap gas version. However, he would save money at the pump, including those TTF taxes.

One thing Hale didn’t mention was the environmental cost of pumping more emissions into our “clean” New Jersey air. Let’s be realistic; our skies could use more EVs and fewer fossil fuel F-150s purchased for driver “emotions.”

Dirk Kelly, Newton

The state releases electric cars

I recently read about Governor Phil Murphy’s position on balancing the state budget. For 2004-2005, he plans to raise some taxes to help with that.

It seems like he’s leaving all-electric vehicles free in terms of revenue, especially for the highway system. There are 2.5 million cars registered in New Jersey, of which approximately 2.37 million run on fossil fuels. They pay an average annual motor fuel tax of $153, which brings in $363 million to the state coffers.

There are currently approximately 140,000 electric vehicles registered in NJ that do not contribute a dime in recurring revenue to the state except when traveling on toll roads. (EVs are exempt from sales tax, but Murphy wants to phase out that tax break.)

I understand and welcome the transition to electric vehicles, but if you use the roads, you have to help pay for them.

Chris Stanziale, Bloomfield

Immigration focus is a GOP magic trick

In a recent letter, Peter Leone responded to a recent column by Paul Mulshine. Leone stated that he supports Donald Trump based on taxes and his declining disposable income.

This is ironic because the virtually only legislation President Trump championed and passed during his presidency was a massive tax cut, most of which benefited himself, other wealthy people and corporations.

As part of this 2018 legislation, a Republican-majority Congress capped the SALT (state and local tax) deduction and the mortgage interest deduction from federal income taxes. This is what most likely increased Leone’s taxes. Many Republicans have also consistently proposed cutting programs such as Medicare and Social Security. They also refused to pass Democrats’ legislation to hold companies accountable for price gouging under the cover of inflation.

Perhaps this is why the Republican Party and Trump have spent so much time demonizing immigrants, something that has drawn Leone’s attention to that topic. If the Republican Party agreed to solve immigration problems, instead of sabotaging efforts to do so, people like Leone might look the other way and notice that it is Republicans who are responsible for his declining income.

As any pickpocket will tell you, deception is central to their work.

Daniel Farabaugh, Colonia

Paper proves the transaction

I read with horror about state legislation that would eliminate paper store receipts due to concerns about waste and chemicals in thermal paper. The bill (A-1840) was recently reintroduced for the 2024-2025 session by Assemblyman Herb Conaway, D-Burlington.

In this day and age when credit cards and, for many, debit cards, are the preferred payment method, my wife and I probably incur more than 100 charges per month. Maybe I’m a throwback in time, but I keep my receipts and carefully compare them to the credit card statements every month. I suspect there are many individuals and companies doing the same thing.

Does our legislature expect us to remember every purchase? Are they asking us to filter the emails every month – from the companies that can currently send email receipts – to compare them with the statements?

Have lawmakers taken into account the extra time at the checkout due to the cashier typing in your email address? Will we now be responsible for printing at home any receipts that may be needed in the future for item returns or tax purposes?

I can only hope that our senators and representatives see how bad an idea this is and don’t pass the bill.

Benjamin Hershkowitz, West Caldwell

Our journalism needs your support. Subscribe to NJ.com today.

The Star-Ledger/NJ.com encourages this submissions of opinions. Bookmark NJ.com/Opinion. follow us on twitter @NJ_Opinion and on Facebook at NJ.com opinion. Receive the latest news updates straight to your inbox. Subscribe to NJ.com newsletters.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *