Why states are quietly moving to restrict how much you drive



Do you spend too much time in your car?

Your local state authorities think you do — and they’re quietly pushing through laws that will give them the power to do something about it.

Don’t want to pay a mileage tax? Don’t drive. Need to commute to a job 40 miles away? That’s your problem. Visit family out of state too often? Expect to pay a premium.

Meet Massachusetts Senate Bill S.2246. Introduced by state Senate Majority Leader Cynthia Creem, it sets the stage for a future where the government tracks and potentially limits how many miles you drive each year. This isn’t a fringe proposal — it’s working its way through the legislature right now, and similar ideas are being tested in other states across the country.

Is this really about emissions — or is it about power and control?

What’s in the bill?

The Massachusetts legislation proposes the creation of a new government entity that would track vehicle miles traveled, or VMT, and implement policies to reduce them over time. While the bill doesn’t yet impose mileage caps, it does instruct state agencies to create a “reasonable pathway” to cut how much people drive annually.

Translation: A government-mandated limit on personal travel is no longer hypothetical — it’s being drafted right now.

Bill S.2246 also outlines coordination with automakers and the use of vehicle inspection data to monitor individual mileage. It even suggests changes to urban planning, encouraging the development of walkable neighborhoods and fewer parking options, all with the goal of getting you out of your car — whether you want to or not.

This bill didn’t come out of nowhere. It’s modeled on similar policies in places like Colorado and Minnesota, where pilot programs are already testing new ways to tax drivers based on how far they travel.

The new war on drivers

While Massachusetts leads this particular charge, it’s far from alone. A number of states are exploring ways to replace traditional gas taxes with per-mile taxes. They claim it’s about addressing the rise of electric vehicles and declining fuel tax revenue. But behind that talking point is a broader plan to monitor and manage how people use their personal vehicles.

States to watch include:

  • Minnesota: Testing mileage-based taxes and creating policies to “reduce vehicle use”;
  • Colorado: Committed to reducing VMT through state-level planning;
  • Oregon: A pioneer in per-mile taxation with the OReGO program;
  • New York and New Jersey: Both states are implementing congestion pricing in urban zones — a foot in the door for broader travel-based taxation; and
  • California and Washington: Actively developing road usage charges and congestion pricing models. Their VMT tax is well into the planning stages.

“Pilot project.” Sounds like an innocent trial run, doesn’t it? But pilot projects have a way of becoming law — slowly, quietly, and without voter input.

RELATED: A Look at Oregon's Program to Tax Drivers by the Mile

Image source: KTVL-TV

Moving violations

Supporters say these measures are about managing traffic or protecting the environment. But let’s be honest: This is about expanding state authority into private life.

It’s not just taxation. It’s surveillance. Think about it: If a government agency has the authority to track your mileage, it has the authority to restrict it. Combine that with modern vehicles equipped with GPS, connected services, and remote data-sharing, and we’re talking about a future where the state doesn’t just monitor your driving — it can penalize it.

Don’t want to pay a mileage tax? Don’t drive. Need to commute to a job 40 miles away? That’s your problem. Visit family out of state too often? Expect to pay a premium. This is a direct attack on working Americans, rural residents, and anyone who depends on their vehicle for daily life.

It’s no coincidence that many of these policies target personal liberty while funneling more money into government-approved programs — public transit, bike lanes, and urban planning initiatives that don’t serve the vast majority of residents.

Tax by another name

What’s being proposed isn’t a substitute for the gas tax. It’s an additional layer of taxation — one that disproportionately affects low-income Americans, small-business owners, and people who live outside city centers. People who can’t hop on a bus or ride a bike to work will end up paying the most.

It also opens the door to data collection on a scale we’ve never seen before. Once the government starts tracking your mileage, what’s next? Will your insurance rates be tied to state mileage thresholds? Will “excessive driving” be taxed as a form of noncompliance?

Creeping regulation

We’ve seen this approach before — quietly introduce “pilot” programs, sell them as innovative or necessary, and then expand them into mandates. It’s the same strategy used with toll lanes, emissions testing, and now digital IDs and connected vehicles.

The Massachusetts’ bill is especially troubling because the state has a reputation for pushing back on centralized control. It was one of the first states to pass a right-to-repair law and strengthen data privacy for consumers. But even in that context, this legislation is moving forward — slowly, with little attention, and under the radar of most residents.

The goal is simple: Shift transportation from a private activity to a regulated service. If that doesn’t concern you, it should.

What can you do?

Freedom of movement is a basic American right. If lawmakers are going to put a price tag on it — or worse, limit it — then every citizen should be aware and vocal.

Now is the time to contact your legislators and let them know you oppose mileage tracking and per-mile taxation.

Many of these programs are pushed by consulting firms and vendors who profit from tracking infrastructure. As I always say, follow the money.

These kinds of authoritarian initiatives don’t care if you’re Republican or Democrat. And once government control over your mobility is normalized, it won’t stop at driving. The same logic can be applied to where you shop, when you travel, or how often you leave your home.

What’s happening in Massachusetts is a test case. If this legislation moves forward, expect a wave of similar bills in other states — all claiming to modernize transportation while actually expanding government power over your everyday life.

Personal vehicles represent more than just transportation. They’re a symbol of independence, flexibility, and the freedom to move as you choose. That freedom is under attack — not with a bang, but with quiet legislation buried in statehouse committees.

Watch closely. Push back early. Because once this kind of control is codified into law, it doesn’t go away easily. We need to get in front of these laws before it’s too late.

Why state mileage taxes violate your constitutional rights



Does your state charge you for every mile you drive?

Oregon's been doing it since 2015. Utah since 2020. And more states are planning to follow suit.

There's just one problem: So-called mileage taxes are blatantly unconstitutional.

The right to travel freely is a fundamental right; as such, it is protected under the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV and the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.

The $1.2 trillion "Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal" Sec. 13002 contains provisions that implement a federal per-mile user fee on drivers of passenger vehicles and requires carmakers to build driver monitoring technology.

How will the government check your mileage? Look no farther than your smartphone, which knows where you are and how fast you're going. Oh, and it listens to what you're saying, too.

Leave it to California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) to take such an Orwellian idea and run with it. He wants to install special GPS odometers in both gas and electric cars (as well as motorcycles) in order to charge Californians three cents for each mile driven.

Don't worry, these new tracking devices will stop charging you the minute you leave the state — honest!

Newsom claims the new by-the-mile system will let the state get rid of its gasoline tax — but don't hold your breath. At any rate, this mileage tax shouldn't be on the table at all — in any state.

In its 1868 decision Crandall v. State of Nevada, the Supreme Court ruled that states cannot impose taxes or regulations that burden the right of individuals to travel freely, including the modes of travel they use. The case specifically addressed Nevada's attempt to tax individuals leaving the state by various means of conveyance, such as stagecoaches or steamboats.

The right to travel freely is a fundamental right; as such, it is protected under the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV and the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.

The Court's reasoning was grounded in the principle that such taxes would infringe upon a fundamental right and exceed the permissible scope of state taxation powers.

Since all citizens have the right to move around freely, a state cannot impose taxes that interfere with their ability to leave.

The bottom line is the government does not have the right to charge you by the mile, no matter what these legislators may think. But legal niceties are of little interest to budding authoritarians looking for more cash from their subjects.

Now is the time to fight back against these laws before our rights as drivers — and as citizens — are eroded any further.

The Biden Administration’s Mileage Tax Idea Is Not Just Stupid, It’s Elitist

Biking Buttigieg can get out of a mileage tax, but that's not how most of America works. If the administration cared about working families, they'd know that.

Pete Buttigieg says taxing folks for every mile they drive is option for funding infrastructure plan



Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg suggested Friday that implementing a mileage tax on American drivers could be a possibility as the Biden administration considers ways to pay for their anticipated multi-trillion-dollar "green" infrastructure plan.

What are the details?

Buttigieg is calling for "a generational investment in infrastructure," but has offered few details regarding how it might be financed, as the Associated Press noted earlier this week.

The former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, was asked about the possibility of a mileage tax as an option during an interview on CNBC, and he replied, "So, I think that shows a lot of promise," explaining:

"If we believe in that so-called 'user pays principle' — the idea that part of how we pay for roads is you pay based on how much you drive — the gas tax used to be the obvious way to do it, it's not anymore. So a so-called Vehicle Miles Traveled tax or mileage tax, whatever you want to call it, could be a way to do it."

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg says taxing drivers by the mile “shows a lot of promise” and could be a way… https://t.co/YYXxjujv3T
— The Recount (@The Recount)1616767467.0

Implementing a mileage tax would involve installing every vehicle on the roadway with a distance-tracking device, which raises both privacy and tampering concerns.

Proponents of such a plan argue that it is more fair than a fuel tax because even electric cars are taxed under the scheme. But such a tax hits the poor the hardest, and opponents from both right and left came out swinging against Buttigieg to make that point.

"Truly brilliant way to completely screw over lower income and middle class Americans!" Meghan McCain, co-host of "The View," tweeted. "And every single person living in a rural area who has to drive far to get places! Just brilliant Pete, truly."

Fox News host Laura Ingraham said of Buttigieg's comments, "Once again, Biden & Secretary 'Pete' hurting the poor and middle class most with 'miles travelled' tax."

Progressive journalist Walker Bragman tweeted, "We should be 'funding' public infrastructure by taxing the wealthiest Americans. Pete Buttigieg's first big idea as transportation secretary is funding it with a mileage tax, which basically means people who use the roads more pay more. Regressive McKinsey brain."

Someone else argued, "I don't think he's thought this out very well. Housing costs in Nashville is causing ppl to move miles away to find affordable housing. This would hit those who could ill afford it hard as there is NO public transportation to take advantage of. This would hit rural areas hard."

But the transportation secretary had some defenders. One person tweeted, "Excellent idea! The more you drive, the more you pay. Seems like a fair proposal to me. The haters don't have an alternative and they'd rather see China racing us by apparently..."