State Considers $100 Surcharge On Gas-Guzzlers

FORT WORTH (AP) – State officials are considering levying a $100 surcharge on some new vehicles that fall short of federal fuel efficiency standards.

No legislation has been filed to add the surcharge, but it’s among several recommendations in a recent Legislative Budget Board to cover an anticipated massive budget shortfall. The board is a joint committee of top Teas House and Senate members, including Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst and House Speaker Joe Straus.

The report says light-duty trucks and sport utility vehicles pollute more than average size vehicles and are less energy-efficient.

Other suggestions include repeal of the prohibition of liquor sales on Sunday and raising the amount state employees pay for their health insurance.

(Copyright 2011 by The Associated Press.  All Rights Reserved.)


One Comment

  1. Donnat says:

    Texas would never have the guts to do this…but I think it’s not a bad idea.

    1. dngynbdy says:

      It wouldn’t work but I’m all for it. They have gas guzzler surcharges in other countries. And Texans deserve it. They howl and whine about “high gas prices” when they absolutely REFUSE to change their habits. Speed limit 35? Nope, they go 45. Speed limit 45? Nope, they go 51. Speed limit 70? Nope, they go 85. EVERY day they do this – in their huge V-8 powered pickups and 6-ton SUVs. They have no right to cry about “high gas prices” because they will NEVER change their habits even if their lives depended on it. I know that even when gas hits $5 a gallon they’ll still be going 75 mph down the highway. Guess what? Gas prices are still LOWER than they were two years ago. Remember when it hit $4.10 a gallon? I bet nobody else does. I find nothing wrong with making the speed demon in that 6 liter V8 pickup/suv pay an extra $5 each time the tank is filled because he/she would never dare to try to drive “sensibly.” Doesn’t surprise me a bit that they’re the ones who are most likely to commit road rage too.

      1. H. Legg says:

        You are obviously from Rhode island or some other massive U.S State. The issue is not whether or not we “deserve” it, it’s whether we as consumers can make our own choices without being penalized by the government for the buying choices we make. In this country, if I have been lucky enough to earn a good living and I want to buy a 4 wheel drive truck, then I can make that choice…until lately. Also keep in mind, my poor uninformed friend, that Texas is full of people who need these trucks to run their farms and ranches. Maybe we should just put a surcharge on all the beef that goes outside the state instead of taxing people who need the vehicles to support their way of life.
        The last point is, if I can afford $40,000 for a 4 wheel drive Chevy, I’m not likely to worry about the price of gasoline OR $100.00 in surcharges…just quit trying to make my choices for me!

      2. Jennifer says:

        6 Ton SUV? Really?!? Chevy Suburbans are 1/2 ton… so where are the 6 tons? V-8 Trucks? OK, I concede, there are plenty of those throughout Texas. But they are needed to haul cattle, rocks, etc… Not EVERY Texan goes above the speed limit. The ones that go the fastest are the vehicles that get less mpg. Road rage are the people like you who have a chip on your shoulder and assume the worst about everyone. I think that manufactors and dealerships should incur the surcharge, as it would (ppossibly) move them to make more gas efficient vehicles with the same hauling and/or seating capability of a large truck and/or SUV

      3. JT says:

        This is more big government B.S.. Owners of these vehicles already pay more taxes at the gas pump, as they must fill up more often. Also driving slower in many cases reduces the fuel efficiency of a vehicle as engines are typically more efficient at higher speeds.

      4. Yodaddy says:

        I bet you drive a smart car… luck in a crash…..D-bag

      5. ROY HOPKINS says:


      6. Ashmead says:

        I don’t think it is about “making someone’s choices for them”. Rather, this is a way to reflect the actual cost of those choices. If a less fuel efficient vehicle creates more pollution (causing relatively more in the way of respiratory diseases and cancer for society as a whole than some other vehicles), why should the cost of choosing that vehicle reflect the greater cost of that choice to everyone else? To assume that gasoline taxes capture this is wrong. These taxes, which have not been raised in Texas for over 20 years, go to pay for the road construction that subsidizes automobile travel.

      7. Mekhong Kurt says:

        I’m a Texan. . . . and I largely agree. I do wonder about the roade rage part, though.

        Anyway, I feel fuel prices ought to be higher — much higher — than they are nhow. Well, actually, no. We already pay more than we realize via tax breaks and subsidies for the fossil fuel industry. If we ended those, prices would HAVE to go up at the pump to reflect the ACTUAL price. As it is, we send off our tax payments without (necessarily) thinkiing about the fact that some portion of our tax dollars will end up defraying the fuel industry’s expenses, so we don’t count that in as part of the price we’re paying for fuel. But a whole lot of folks sure do seem to be unable (or is it unwilling?) to understand that.

        And no, this is NOT an anti-oil tirade, merely a reflection upon the facts. I am not one of those viscerally opposed to “Big Oil,” period.

      8. Kermit says:

        I drive a V-8 GMC Pick-up. I never speed, in 37 years of driving I have never gotten a speeding ticket. I live in Texas and I drive in Texas. So let’s get a smaller paint brush there pal. All of my friends drive the speed limit as well.

      9. Don Maxwell says:

        Though I have to agree that Texas has its faire share of gas hog, road rage, lane jumping folk but, we also have more land and more people per capita than any other state in the “Continental United States”. I am also well traveled and have been in countries that pay the “surcharge” for vehicles that consume large amounts of fuel but, these countries are also paying incentives to people who design, build and implements fuel saving ideas, I wish the US would do this as well. This country needs to stop whining about its “gas pocket books” and start working as a team to reduce the amount of recourses we consume.
        It does not take much time and research to see that the US is one of the top consumers of energy in the world, and we do not even has the largest population. Yes, I drive (when I need to do major work) a 1989 Suburban but, it is driven to haul and move heavy equipment about. We also drive a HHR which, by US standards gets a good MPG but, by world standards its MPG sucks. Most vehicles in other countries rang from 40 to 80+ MPG and we are excited when one gets 40! We should be slamming the oil people like George Bush and his bunch, as well as Congress and the Senate. These are the people causing the problem, not the guy that make the first post or the people who jumped him for voicing his thoughts on the mater. Americans should start coming together and standing up to government and stop bending over and taking it up the ass!
        If all else fails, smile! It keeps people guessing.

      10. R says:

        You must be from some poor 3rd world communist country to believe we should follow suite

      11. Tommy says:

        It’s ignorant to make generalizations like that. But a simple thing to do would be to raise gas taxes. The costs of road contruction should never come from any other source than the taxes that are in what you pay at the pump. So if we aren’t collecting what we need to get our roads fixed, we shouldn’t be discussing having this stupid gas surcharge tax. If we raise taxes on gasoline then the people with less efficient vehicles are going to pay more anyway. Which makes complete sense because heavier vehicles cause more wear to roadways.

    2. Ronald Thomas says:

      the big guys want us to pay . Why they get away with jacking up prices on gas .It does not hurt them because they have all the money .Why we the lillte people have to work so hard for money for gas .

    3. rkm says:

      All you do is prove how little you know about anything and what a big mouth you seem to have about everything.
      for your info.
      I happen to live in Texas, have all my life. Don’t know anyone with a vehical like the ones you speak of.
      Myself. I drive a 14 year old jeep grand cheerokee. It still gets 26 MPG and has about 285,000 miles on it. Most everyone I know has something simular if not quite so many miles (I’m trying to see how far it will go).
      Try getting some facts next time or STFU.

      1. Randy says:

        26 miles per gallon on a jeep grand cherokee. Whos the liar….. comon lol

    4. Donald Joseph Schulteis says:

      Why place a measly $100.00. Why not $500.00,more so a $1000.00. I think our lives are worth more than that.

    5. Jaded says:

      Shouldn’t the state be encouraging more people to drive gas guzzlers? After all, they are getting 20 cents a gallon already….

    6. Trusader says:

      I know this is a couple of months late but better than never. It has ZERO to do with the gas guzzlers and ALL to do with OUTIGHT CORPORATE GREED AND BOLD~FACED LYING.
      For the record I drive a Ford F150 four-door 6cyl. with a 25 gal tank. OUCH, and just running around here I get 17 – 18 mpg.on highway and 14 on this sorry “FRY-DADDY” gas. When I went to New Mexico two years ago for a vacation I discovered the real story behind the Ethanol scam.
      I filled up in Fort Worth,TX, drove to Lubbock and had to fill up again and only getting about 14mpg – road miles. At this time I was buying Wal Mart gas and have since changed to Chevron and get the 17-18mpg now. The surprise was that they didn’t have ethanol in their gas in West Texas or NM. I drove on to NM and the next fill up I had a whopping 10 mpg increase making it 24 mpg. This is what the mpg diesel trucks are getting. I can assure you I wasn’t driving the speed limit. I drove and filled up 3 more times before leaving the great state of NM and every time I recorded 600 miles per tank of gas. Coming back thru Snyder, TX and filling up again with the “Fry Daddy” gas my mileage went back down to about 14mpg.
      I have also noticed that during times when gas prices rise as they are now – close to $4 gal. the mileage drops quite a bit around 50 to 75 miles less per fill-up.

  2. oldbutlowmileage says:

    Ridiculous ideas like this will not fix a budget shortfall. Besides, folks in gas guzzlers already pay higher taxes by using more gas, thus paying more in gas taxes. What about those who drive well below the average miles per year? Perhaps an additional tax for those who use the roadways more would be appropriate. No? No. Fix the problem where it originates and stop taxing us to death.

    1. Hoss Delgado says:

      Taxing you to death? You are out of touch with reality: taxes are the lowest sine FIFTIES!!! Wake up and see where you live.

      1. Alan says:

        What fantasy world are you living in? Sales and Property Tax Rates are between double and triple what they were just 30 years ago.

      2. yvonne says:

        Feel free to give them more of YOUR money if you feel so moved, but leave me and my money out of your decision making.

      3. Roundman says:


      4. Jim says:

        You’re a More-on,,,,,,,

      5. Ashmead says:

        Income tax rates are lower than they have been in a very long time. The last time the top marginal rate (now 35%) was this low was the 1920s. Texas does not have a state income tax, which might spread the tax burden across the state’s entire population, and relies on property taxes and sales taxes, which place the tax burden more on property owners.

        As for Texans being taxed to death, the overall total state tax burden for an average Texan was 8.4% of income in 2008, compared to 9.7% average for the rest of the US. Note that this rate peaked at 9.0% for Texans and 10.2% for the rest of the US in 1994. In other words, overall tax burden is less now that it was during the last period of major economic expansion in the US.

        Reality and perception do not always meet.

    2. Zach says:

      Fix the real problem where it originates and quit using oil that powers other countries………..foreign funding needs to end and domestic funding needs to begin. Oil is whack!

    3. Roundman says:


  3. Lara says:

    I got a better idea reduce the pay of those in state office from the governor by 35%. See if they like that then think about a surcharge.

    1. stacia says:

      Way to go!

    2. H. Legg says:

      Amen to that, sister!

      1. Roundman says:

        Good start!

  4. Steve C says:

    They’re wanting to charge ELECTRIC cars for NOT using gasoline & gas-guzzlers for using TOO MUCH gasoline…. I say we charge CONGRESS for all the HOT AIR they create every session without doing anything more than WASTING our money………..

  5. Ray Tart says:

    The governor, before he was re-elected said, “Texas has plenty of money”–
    so why the anticipation of a shortfall? Instead of levying new taxes–prove that the tax money we pay in now is being used as it is supposed to be. Part of the lottery tax money was supposed to help the school s—where did it go? Schools are in trouble. The taxpayers would like to see proof of where this money went. Texans should really be mad hearing this proposal,

    1. Hoss Delgado says:

      While he was “refudiating” DC stimulus package with his mouth and LYING to everyone how Texas is a conservative success story, he was begging Feds for the same money because he KNEW that TX is in hole for $27B!

  6. joe says:

    How silly. Why don’t they just enforce the speed limits. That’s supposed to save gas and cut down one missions. Today I drove Loop 820 and I-20 and probably seven out of 10 vehicles on the highway were going 15 or more mph over the speed limits. And no, I don’t drive a big something that uses a lot of gas or spews carbon thingies.

    1. joe says:

      I meant to write “emissions” not “missions.” Silly typo.
      I just think that would make tons of money for the coffers.

  7. john says:

    time to get a new car

  8. Hoss Delgado says:

    Raise taxes on gas, raise sales tax, introduce monthly surcharge for non-commercial vans, pick ups and SUVs… Texas budget woes will be resolved within a year.

    I believe that people who are bellowing against taxes with one corner of their mouths while praising Texas with the other are nothing but gasbags!

    1. Kris G. says:

      You my friend are ignorant. Do you actually believe that this would fix the problem in its entirety? Apparently you are overlooking the big picture, even if your proposed taxation did fix the budget in Texas do you honestly believe that the problem will disappear? What about all the other deficits, and putting money into the hands of the ones who have no idea how to manage our money in the first place? You probably like Obama, and his endless surge and race toward a new highest level of National debt, slowly pushing us to the brink of an entire economical meltdown? Some people…….

    2. JT in TX says:

      Hoss you sound like a typical Democrat or liberal, thinking the governemnt can fix most of our problems when in fact the government is most of our problem. It is like lawyers writing laws to keep themselves employed arguing in court about the laws they have created. You start firing and cutting pay on government employees and you will see this problem start to disapear.

  9. stacia says:

    Once again we are wanting to TAX the successful working folks who W O R K for what they have and should be able to enjoy the fruits of their labor. How would you like it if we suggested cut the freebie plans for those who won’t work and make a living and will be first to chastise those of us who do. Get a
    J O B, pay your correct amount of taxes, we would all be better off. I’m sorry but I have a problem with pay in 1,000. in employ tax and get 8,000.00 back, what is wrong with this picture, wish I could get a check for one third to one half of my annual salary back. We the 1% of society support the other 99% and you want to criticize me for driving an SUV….

    1. bill says:

      you are right on I know several that are getting over 9,000 $ back and also draw food stamps – med care – and free lunchs – and any thing they can get

      1. Disenchanted Mooch says:

        Wow really? I am collecting UI benefits and I didn’t qualify for any additional benefits that you mentioned. What is really strange is that I actully owe the IRS this year. When collecting UI benefits you are disqualified from the EIC. So you guys keep whining about all of us mooch types. Well my job of 20 years was sent offshore so you guys could get more return on your stock portfolios! Oh yeah there are lot of jobs in Texas! Maybe you will see me at the drive thru window of McDonalds. Go service industry!

    2. ben says:

      agreed 100% but this perspective is not politically correct and, therefore, will not get the time. this is reality but we, as a society, will continue to ignore this fact while we all go down the BK drain.

    3. Zach says:

      People who make the most money should have to pay the most taxes, plain and simple. You complain that you work for the fruits of your labor and you should enjoy the fruits of your labor, but the reality is you were able to come about the fruits because of this great country; therefore, you should have to pay back this country that gave you the opportunity to succeed in the first place…….greed is a pathetic disease and there is never enough money for people with your viewpoint.

  10. bill says:

    you are a bunch of bleeding hearts taxing the people has not worked
    all it does is give the polictco more $$ to waste of some give away program
    I say work not get not quite give to the dead beats

  11. ALWAYSCOLD2000 says:


  12. Dirty Harry says:

    Our founding Fathers never intended our elected officials to come up with ideas on how to rob the working man of his hard earned income! We are not an open wallet for the taking. If there is a problem with polution why not deal with the root of the problem and make a decent vehicle that is efficent and gets great gas mileage. The people have to purchase the vehicles that are made, we didn’t design them. We can sent a rocket to the moon and not have to stop for gas, why can’t we develope a vehicle that gets 100 mipg? How about if we cut the pay of our elected officials in half, make them pay into social security like they make everyone else then see if they have any more money to donate to stupid causes. Do not cut off the hand that works so you have a paycheck. You were not elected to see how much money you could take out of our hands. Think about it! Election days are coming Do the right things and you may be re-elected, do the stupid stuff and you will be like everyone else, trying to keep what you have earned.

    1. Camille says:

      The “Smart Cars” in the UK get upwards of 60-80 Kilometers per liter (I think they use liters instead of gallons) but here… the smart car maxes out at 40 or 50mpg.. So the technology for more fuel efficient vehicles is out there.. the USA is just not using it at the moment..

  13. Lisa says:

    Everyone should do like me and ride a Harley…I have a big SUV,…and I save it for icy roads, rain ( in the morning only, I take my chances on the way home) and trips to Home Depot and for towing when needed….I get excellent gas mileage, about 38 mpg, better than most compact cars, it’s a lot of fun and I cause a LOT less wear and tear on the roads. Since any car, truck, SUV or 18 wheeler could kill me in a heartbeat, I have to drive very, very carefully and stay fully alert every single second. I’d like to see state money raised by having more tickets given for bad driving in general,…changing lanes unnecesarily at the last minute with no turn signal, driving without headlights at dawn & dusk & on dark days and rainy times (see that all the time and am always amazed…do people NOT KNOW that others only see them with a mirror through dark tinted windows?), not using turn signals, tailgating, and for texting and talking on cell phones when driving, hands free or not. That would make everyone safer on the roads, and raise needed money, and it’s totally a voluntary “tax”. I’ve lived in 9 states and two foreign countries and Texas drivers in DFW are the WORST (worse even than Italians and that’s saying ALOT)

  14. A$$h0Le says:

    GOP, Well will NOT raise taxes. small print but Fees and subcharges for the poor and middle class we will raise though the ROOF.

  15. Jay says:

    It’s funny that there is a group of people who think that they should be given all the gas they want, at a cheap price, endlessly forever…if not they freak out and start complaining.

    It really freaks them out if gas prices go up, if someone start talking about shortages, or about pollution, or about electirc cars, or even about hybrids or high gas mileage cars.

  16. Michael says:

    Is it about conservation of resources or money? I like the idea of conservation but I am not sure this is the way to encourage it. A hundred bucks? Why don’t we make the oil companies pay? Let’s limit the amount of fuel that can be dispensed at the pump to one person per day, week, etc. We then would encourage the gas guzzlers to convert to vehicles that can go farther on a tank of gas. That would be conservation. The $100 is just another tax and I only have about 8 cents left out of my dollar as it stands!

  17. Lynne says:

    I think it’s a good idea. There should be an extra tax on gas guzzling, air polluting vehicles. We need the extra money to help clean up the air and pay for people’s medical costs as a result of the pollution. Let the people contributing to the pollution help pay for it. An extra $100 will not make or break any farmers or small businesses, although I doubt they are the majority of truck owners in this state. Besides, truck owners already get a reduced fee on their vehicle registrations every year that we car owners don’t get.

    1. Chris says:

      I think you are misinformed on the reduced fee for truck owners on registration fees. These fees are based on gross vehicular weight.

  18. richard w says:

    socialism all around

  19. M.Herman says:

    i’m gonna get a hores and buggy…they will find something to tax on that as well

  20. Jim says:

    ~ Texas Lawmakers are Thieves!!!!

    1. Shirley says:

      I’m a Texan and I agree with you. Perry is a joke and liar……Texas is hurting too. Of course he really NEEDS that $ 10,000 a month house we’re renting for him. So, my question is, what are we suppose to do…..go out and buy a new vehicle? We pay our fair share of taxes when we pay for our gas! In Dallas they want us to pay for the HOV lanes when we have already paid for them. Bunch of Crooks!

  21. JD says:

    Oly in America do we have to alwasy beon a witch hunt. Always finding someone to blame.

    1. JD says:

      HOw about for once asking those in congress, to include thegovernor, to cut back on the lavishing spending amounts they receive? Call them on that and make them accountable for their exhuburant spending.

  22. wade says:

    ……..hmmmm How about a tax on internet COMMENTS?

  23. Cole Younger says:

    I love it ……needed this for a long time …………..WONDERFULL

  24. Jeff L says:

    What a joke. Whose business is it anyways regarding what I drive? So much for freedoms and liberties in this country! We are awash in oild and natural gas and the federal government refuses to let us go get it! Pathetic!

  25. RL says:


  26. JasonR says:

    “Other suggestions include repeal of the prohibition of liquor sales on Sunday… ”

    Wow, they will propose alcohol be sold on a Sunday before they even allow marijuana on a Monday.

    1. JT in TX says:

      Allowing liquor sales on Sunday will do about nothing. People in Tx already know if I want liquor on Sunday I buy it on Saturday. The lack of thinking in our elected officials and some of the people here is a sad display of the educational system.

  27. chris says:

    Have you people missed the cloudy haze that surrounds every major US city? i’m not implying it’s due strictly to gas guzzling SUV’s, but they certainly don’t help. Personally i’m all for these taxes, byincreased fuel consumption we create a higher demand…throw in the fact that these vehicles by in large weigh considerably more creating more raod wear and you find musltiple reasons to come up with taxes the persuade people into purchasing more fuel effecient smaller vehicles. no one is trying to control your ability to purchase the vehicle of your choosing, but as a nation we need to get away from thing bigger is better mentality

    1. chris says:

      apologies for poor spelling, i can barely read the comment box they have you type in

    2. JT in TX says:

      “no one is trying to control your ability to purchase the vehicle of your choosing” That is exactly what you and the government are implying with these types of law. If I can afford a vehicle that I must drive 100 miles a day and it gets 1 MPG that is my business and not yours. With this type of rationalization anyone with a TV over 19 inches should pay a surcharge as it uses more electricity. Wake up dullards.

      1. Michele says:

        You pay the cost of electricity- well mostly anyway and the cost for a larger TV. But you don’t even come close to paying the difference for your vehicles pollution and damage to roads. Or the negative health consequences it has such as increased childhood asthma. I think 100 dollars is minimal, and a one time fee is not the best sollution, but at least it will make people think about how their actions DO affect other people. It won’t come close to fixing the enourmous road and air quality improvements we need but its a start and if it makes people think twice about buying a polluting gas-guzzler then its fine by me.

  28. Michael frank says:

    How about cutting the state budget and live within your means? Texas is already selling all our roads to the Japs. We need 4 wheel drives to get around the toll booths.

    How about that damned yankee idea of high speed rail? Just a way to help Burlington Northern and every other railroad with their hand stuck out. Crooks all of them.

  29. COREY JACKSON says:

    I know that our elected state officials can be more creative than this. How long did it take you guys to come up with this idea? We have to be more creative than this. This surcharge should be billed to the manufactures and dealerships who sell these gas guzzling vehicles. To charge the consumers and not the manufactures of these vehicles is truly avoiding the root cause of the problem. A blind eye, deaf ear, and shut lips about the true problem is an omission of the truth. The technology is out there and manufactures can make fuel efficient vehicles, so bill them for not complying with the federal fuel efficiency standards. We already have speeding laws in place to deal with it on the consumer end – Who have no control over the fuel systems manufactures choose to install in the vehicles they build.

    And liquor sales on Sunday’s, now that’s creative. What the hell that’s not the problem. We should be selling liquor on Sunday’s anyway. We need to learn how to effectively use the funds we already receive from tax revenue.

    Raise the insurance premiums on state employees. How about cutting some of the expenditures that and expenses of our elected state officials -put that on the table.

  30. bustop says:

    So far, I’ve not seen anyone scream “TAX ENOUGH ALREADY” or govt take over of our lives, mainly because the suggestion came from a Repub govt in a Repub state. If the fed suggest similar thing, everyone here will be up in arms, screaming get out of my life Obama. One question, if the type of trucks mentioned in this report are considered polluters, I wonder what they will propose for 18-wheelers that does not get inspected at all.

  31. retirepresident says:

    Make it $5000 and give it to anyone that buy a car that get over 50 mpg.

  32. Chris says:

    All of you that say the manufacturer should be charged know nothing about economics. If they charge the manufacturer, the consumer will pay for it in the end anyway. No manufacturer will just take the hit, they will build that charge into the pricing of the vehicle. I would rather pay the $100 surcharge for the comfort and safety of my gas guzzling SUV than pay an extra $10-$15K for a hybrid or all-electric death trap.

  33. big willmac says:


  34. rgb says:

    Suburbans weigh 3 tons, not 6. The half or three quarter ton rating is for load capacity. I think it is just another way for government to control personal freedom and lives.

  35. big willmac says:


  36. kermit says:

    The current tax rate per gallon of fuel is 55% that is well over $1.00 on every gallon we buy. Truck owners buy more gas so it seems to me they are already paying hundreds of dollars in sur charges already just because they choose to buy trucks. and you thought the Big oil companies were getting it. Taxes use 55% the delivery company gets 15% , the Station owner gets 20% leaving only 10% of the cost of fuel to the oil company that has to spend most of that to pay taxes, insurance, payroll, and discovery of new sources to find the oil in the first place.

  37. Rick McDaniel says:

    How about a $100000 surcharge on the corporations sending our jobs overseas?

    I think that makes a lot more sense, than continuing to erode personal freedoms.

  38. mikey says:

    put the blame where it goes oil companys and the big 3 auto makers, the technology has been there since the 50s to get better gas milage. you burn more gas they make more money… natural gas burns cleaner and with no carbon motors can last forever,think about it and look it up yourselves

  39. Mike says:

    I think the owners of these vehicles should refuse to pay the surcharge, until Governor Perry starts to foot the bill for his mansion, the housekeepers, gardeners, etc at said mansion, out the salary we pay him as Governor. He also shouldn’t be able to spend one red cent on parties and what not for his campaign contributors and business buddies out of taxpayer money. If he wants to throw a party, he can pay for it himself. Sick of him spending millions so he can live in one of the most upscale neighborhoods in Austin, waited on hand and foot, at the taxpayer’s expense, when we pay him a dang good salary. If he can’t afford it on the generous salary we pay, then I guess he better find a place to live in Austin that he can afford. He also won’t touch that “rainy day fund”, despite the fact that the U.S. economy still sucks. Our economy isn’t that great here either. A bunch of minimum wage jobs, which nobody can live on unless they have 2 of them, and then the opposite end of the spectrum, the already plenty wealthy, making a fortune off those minimum wage workers. All that “rainy day fund” is, is a way for Perry to funnel money to his business pals.

  40. Elmer says:

    The real gas guzzlers are the ones that commute long distances no matter what they drive. My SUV that drives 2 miles to work compared to your Prius that drives 50 miles is not the guzzler. You have to consider the miles driven and the number of passengers carried.

  41. Harry says:

    If they want bring income to the state. how about gambling!!!! What an idea. You should see the cars pass gainesville, tx going to Winstar. They bring in over 90 million a year from Texas.

  42. Michele says:

    I am all in favor. large fuel consuming vehicle pollute more than lighter fuel efficent cars and cause more damage to roads. This costs the government billions in cleaning the environment and repairing roads. Not to mention the increased cost of health care due to high rates of asthma from air pollution (DFW has worse air quality then LA!). Since the government has to cover all these costs then need to get revenue from somewhere. I have no problem with people driving big cars but they need to accept that they cost more to the state and do have negative impacts on other taxpayer’s health. As a fellow taxpayer, I don’t want my tax dollars to subsidize your vehicle when it costs the state more then mine does. I would also be in favor of a higher gas tax and/or more toll roads.

  43. Adriel says:

    I agree with Michele. SUVs are the perfect example of why America has 5% of the world’s population, but consumes 25% of the world’s energy. If we would stop driving SUVs, we could put a huge dent in our foreign oil dependence. Plus SUVs are dangerous to others on the road. I am glad you are safe driving your SUV, but at the expense of everyone else on the road. In summary, we should be more humble with the riches we have here in the US. SUVs are unnecessary and obnoxious.

Comments are closed.

More From CBS Dallas / Fort Worth

Drip Pan: CBS Local App
Drip Pan: Weather App

Listen Live