kjmillig

Chicago Alderman Pat Dowell, III, suggests that bicyclists pay an annual $25 registration fee and have to take a class on road rules and safety.
The writer of this editorial from the Chicago Tribune also has his/her facts wrong in the statement, "We're not suggesting the cars should own the road simply because they were here first..." Check your history. Motorized vehicles are the last to become users of improved roadways.

Chris516

Can you provide the link from the Tribune?

AlmostTrick

"Chicagoans, would you pay $25 Registration Fee?"

No, because it will never happen.

rydabent

Why is it that some politicians can only think of more taxes. Cant you see some cop in Chicago clapping the cuffs on a four year old on her sidewalk bike?

And yes, it was the League of American Wheelmen that crusaded for better roads, before there were cars.

dynodonn 

That would be a sight to see, and why measures for mandatory bike licensing, registration end up going bust.

Chicago Al 

It's never going to happen, it's not a bill or even a proposal, it was just was an alderman speaking off the cuff. There's due to be an increase in the tax on cable TV, which aldermen are trying to figure out a way to cancel or replace, without losing the revenue. The alderman behind this comment is actually very supportive of cycling, probably regrets ever opening her mouth about this.

phoebeisis

Are you folks sure this isn't some punitive measure dressed up as bike safety?
Perhaps the VEHICULAR CYCLING folks are getting what they want??
Call it a vehicle- licensing taxing insuring what do you expect
Really a poor choice of terms if you DON'T want licensing taxing insuring.
JF clever fellow-maybe he wants that?
What do the Euros do in this respect-fees licensing ?

italktocats

do (other) motorist have to start taking safe classes too?

ItsJustMe

If it happened I'd like to see the same required of pedestrians. They cause their share of trouble.

atbman

You might, perhaps, read what John Forester actually says about the inadvisability of licensing bikes. You can find it in, I think, Bicycle Transportation, Ch.7, Systematic Traffic Law, where he pretty comprehesively demolishes the case for any form of licensing or registration of bikes.

Vehicular cycling, as espoused by Forester, concerns the safest way to ride in traffic. It does not, in any way, require bikes and cyclists to be treated as vehicles for taxation and insurance purposes.

Useful demolitions of the pro-registration/tax arguments can be found in
https://grist.org/article/2010-09-27-...uld-be-unfair/
https://www.toronto.ca/budget2005/pdf...censingcyc.PDF


As for Euros, the Swiss, who, I believe held out the longest in taxing and insuring cyclists, have recently abolished any such requirement as the cost wasn't worth the money collected, not to mention the cost of enforcement.

This is just another example of a politician calling for something he knows nothing about, hasn't researched the history of it and all too often, paradoxically, usually belongs to the "small government" school of politics.

phoebeisis

atbman you wrote the below

Exactly- it is usually republicans- small gov types- who propose these bike regs- but they have nothing to do with "goodness" or "common sense"
They are PUNITIVE-usually in response to some affluent voters complaining about bike riders "Controlling lanes."
They are backdoor bike banning- thinning the herd.

Vehicular cycling- "If theys VEE HICK CULLS theys can git a license like other VEE HICK CULLS"

kjmillig

The link was in my OP, but yes, I took the extra 60 seconds to look it up for you:
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/o...0,536855.story

CB HI

You have already been proven wrong on your mud slinging towards John Forester. Now I get to prove you wrong on your mud slinging towards republicans. Pat Dowell is a die hard democrat.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Dowell

You have done this type of mud slinging before and been proven wrong. The more you do it, the more foolish your post appear to be.

CB HI

Maybe read your OP again, because I also did not see any link there. Seems your 60 seconds in post 12 was worth it so we know what article you are talking about.

rydabent

I think we should prorate a registration fee on the basis of weight. Since a lighter weight vehicle does less damage to the roads this would seem to be the way to do it. Figure a 4000 pound car and a 25 pound bike. That means a bike owner should pay .006% of what a car owner in that area pays.

phoebeisis

"usually republicans" Apparently Lane Controlling pisses off Dems too-not a surprise.
"JF clever fellow-maybe he wants that?" Vicious!

Politicians aren't stupid.They can add.They know the proposed laws don't make $$ and cents sense.They are to impress some constituents who have complained about Lane Controllers and stop light runners lane splitters etc(used to be legal some places?)

But you folks never acknowledge the OBVIOUS- you annoy some voters.Bike riders are powerless now-because we are so few.

rydabent- sure that would make sense if it was about "paying for the roads" heck bikes do close to zero damage to concrete and it would take a long time to wear asphalt with bikes. The proposed laws-always in response to complaints from constituents about bike riders.

Bike "roads" are expensive- so with cheap gasoline from fracking and more efficient cars a poor economy bikes not suitable for oldsters so biking for transportation has a limited appeal -young agile
Expensive bike specific infrastructure won't happen.We don't count because we are so easy to count(so few of us).

Bike advocates who want good bike ways need to pray for $7 gas. $3.09 gas- forget it!

Oh well-laundry room filled with water-again-guess I had better finish attempting the gas water heater installation(turned on tub faucet-cold water back pressured the open hot water line-gushed out)
Anyone know anything about shark bite water connectors?? They just don't look plausible-jam them on-no leak- guess I'll find out.

Guess I'm getting punished for berating you lane controllers

I-Like-To-Bike

If the link is in your OP, where might I find it? Is there something wrong with my computer skills or yours?

daihard 

Would you mind using the "Reply With Quote" feature when replying to specific posters? Or would it be too much trouble for you?

CB HI

Now you are learning the cost of the "More butts on bikes advocacy".

turbo1889

As to collision liability insurance like cars drivers are (supposed to) have (someone already brought that up in this thread, look above to see who, just so I don't get harassed for supposedly making an off topic post by someone who can't even bother to read the previous posts like has happened before.). I really wish I could buy that in my state, there is one national insurance company that is selling collision liability insurance for bicycle riders as an optional policy for those who want it just like motorcycle insurance is optional but available but sadly not yet available in my state. If it were I would gladly buy it provided it wasn't any more expensive then a car policy, plus the way they have it set-up it covers you for any bicycle you might ride and isn't sold per bike like car insurance is sold per car.

Chicago Al 

As an actual Chicagoan, I'll answer the OP's question: yes, I would. $25 is a bottle of wine, no big deal. For me. For a lot of people, it might be. Of course there's no guarantee that this fee would actually go to anything cycling related, any more than any other tax or fee---just look at all the supposed 'education' money the various state lotteries are supposed to generate.

But none of that matters because, as noted above, this idea (not even a proposal, much less a bill, much less an ordinance) is going nowhere. Mayor Emmanuel is not a fan and that is that. Say what you will about him, the man can count. As a commenter on the below article noted, even if all 16000+ estimated bike commuters were registered (forget about the kids and recreational cyclists), that's less than $500K, so wouldn't even cover the cost of implementation.

But by all means, A&S regulars, use this as a stepping stone to get up on your usual soapbox. It's cheaper than medication.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/p...,7405166.story

BTW: OP, in fact you didn't link the article originally. And Alderman Dowell is female. The III doesn't mean Pat Dowell the Third, but the Third Ward.

and BTW2: All the politicians in this case can safely be assumed to be Democrats.

CB HI

From your very high A&S soapbox.

phoebeisis

CB-HI-
Right-bike infrastructure-retrofitting city streets is impossibly expensive.
The cheapest way would be to literally close some streets to cars buses trucks-but no way would that happen.In would put various merchants out of business.
And frankly to what point? Only 700 bike deaths per year-300,000,000 people.No doubt many of the deaths aren't the fault of a car driver.
So cars killing bike riders-not a huge problem.

VC with Lane Controlling or FRAP obeying the law- doubt anyone could measure a "death rate difference"- Main determiner of getting killed on a bike-how careful and experienced you are-how many miles you log- where you ride(pure guesses)
On the other hand Lane Controlling-certainly annoys drivers. Just listen to them. Is that important- I don't really know-no punitive regs passed anywhere yet-but some streets roads are closed to bikes.
Other behaviors-stop light running-lane splitting-slipping to the front-annoy drivers too.So lane controlling-probably just a small part of bike vs car friction.


daihard- I will hit reply with quote in the future-sometimes I don't because it seems "wasteful" as if I'm using more "ink"-old habit. I'll try to remember.

phoebeisis

Yikes-wine is $25?? You folks whining about bikes while something truly important-the price of an intoxicant- is ignored!

kjmillig

Seriously, the link was there. The second time I came to this thread and before logging in I could see the link. I logged in and the link wasn't there. I know I'm not hallucinating. The evil computer gremlins are playing tricks on me.
I don't see licensing or registrations happening either. Can you imagine the logistical nightmare on trying to implement and enforce such a thing? Authorities can't even come close to enforcing people driving with no license or insurance. How would they do it with bicycles without setting up a police state where everyone can be stopped just to show their papers?