It’s a vexing question for those in government: How do you pay to expand and maintain our highway system? For decades most states and the federal government relied on a tax levied per gallon of gasoline, but as cars become more fuel efficient by federal edict the gasoline tax does not produce the necessary funds. Moreover, the federal tax rate, which was enacted two decades ago – when cars averaged far fewer miles per gallon than their present-day successors – hasn’t budged because a tax increase would not exactly be popular. Yet the cost of building and maintaining roads has raced ahead.

Some see the mileage tax as a user fee fair to everyone, but critics contend it would penalize rural drivers and those who work in travel-intensive industries. Meanwhile, new concerns arise from privacy advocates who despise the “black box” technology tracking motorists’ movements or speed. A similar device is already used by a major auto insurer, which teases discounted premiums if drivers agree to install it.

Leading the way in adopting a mileage-based tax is the state of Oregon, where 5,000 volunteer drivers will soon pay a mileage tax in lieu of a gas tax as part of a test run for possible statewide adoption. While Oregon is, for now, presenting a choice of how intrusive their device would be, New York City’s idea is to enhance the device by allowing automatic payment of parking fees and per-mile insurance.

Yet even the ACLU remains concerned. Nevada, another state piloting such a project, warned, “It would be fairly easy to turn these devices into full-fledged tracking devices.” With the current regime in power, the probability of our nanny state snooping into your driving rivals that of death, health care and taxes.