|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
How about Vermont, and what other useless programs can we scrap?
by Rob Roper
There is an overwhelming psychology on the Left that if government isn’t doing something, nothing is being done. It’s an expensive, inefficient, and often counterproductive mindset. But sometimes reality and common sense prevail, and a recent case of this just occurred in neighboring New Hampshire where that state eliminated its mandate for vehicle inspections. According to the Josiah Bartlett Center for Public Policy, the move will save Granite Staters approximately $41.5 million to $69.2 million a year. That’s just the cost of the sticker and does not include the cost of unnecessary repairs to obtain said sticker.
Critics wailed, oh, but if government didn’t require auto inspections the irresponsible citizenry would allow their vehicles to degrade into ticking time bombs detonating at random on the roads, creating death and mayhem throughout the land! (I’m paraphrasing.)
Nope.
Turns out that numerous studies of other states and countries that do not require vehicle safety inspections indicate no significant differences in safety caused by vehicle failures between inspection and non-inspection zones. New Jersey, which ended its inspection requirement in 2010, did a before and after analysis and, yup, found no significant difference in safety outcomes. (The Josiah Bartlett Center lists and links to the studies in THIS POST.)
Also interesting to those of us boiled frogs who’ve grown up on the northeast coast where vehicle inspections seem to be a given natural state of affairs, most states don’t require them. Only eleven — well, now ten — do. And those other forty states are, would you believe it, just fine. So, there’s plenty of evidence that this whole government mandated inspection scheme is just a racket. Let’s get rid of it! It is as so much of what government does a useless expense that robs citizens of other opportunities to invest our time and money in actually productive and beneficial activities.
It turns out that with free markets/free people, we citizens are incentivized to keep our cars in safe operating condition without Big Brother’s prodding because who among us wants to die in a fiery ball of twisted metal? Not me! Nor do I relish the idea of being stranded on the side of the highway looking under a hood and having to pretend to all those whizzing by I have a clue about what I’m looking at. And, with those consumer selling points in mind, auto manufacturers are incentivized to make safer, more reliable vehicles, which they have done progressively throughout the industry’s history.
All of this is contrary to the Left’s governing hypothesis that without their sage meddling businesses would, while twirling their Simon Legree mustaches, make shoddier and shoddier products that too stupid consumers would for some inexplicable reason purchase anyway.
So, just some back of the napkin calculations here… Vermont is home to over half a million registered vehicles. At $70 a pop for an annual inspection (that’s what I just paid), Vermonters would save around $35 million a year and lose nothing on the public safety side into the bargain. Repeal! No brainer. And don’t stop there.
$35 million a year isn’t chicken feed. How many other unnecessary and unproductive government mandates are out there we could cut as well? The mandate to buy more expensive, less reliable renewable energy comes to mind. Forcing most Vermonters to subsidize the purchase of electric vehicles for a select few of their neighbors. “Net Zero” building requirements driving up the cost of housing construction. If these things provided actual value, there would be no reason for government mandates and subsidies. Like vehicles that don’t break down or blow up, people would seek out and pay for those things willingly.
But this stuff is part of what I’ll call the useless political economy – an island of misfit projects that are not valued by the consumer and inefficient in their implementation They consume more resources than they generate on their own so have to be propped up by government taxing and spending. As such, they are by definition, inherently “unsustainable.”
These exist because of political patronage; buying votes with other people’s money For example, the businesses that perform vehicle inspections are understandably happy to have government force the owners of half a million cars to utilize their services. One can’t blame them. But let’s not pretend this is an efficient or effective use of resources.
Too often these days, this the “business model” enterprises are counting on — rather than make a quality product consumers want and can afford, just hire some lobbyists to get the government to force people to buy (or subsidize) your undesired and/or overpriced widget. It’s parasitic. Unhealthy economic endeavors living at the expense of the healthy ones. Too many or too ravenous parasites will eventually kill the host.
Vermont has a path back to affordability. The path is just overgrown with the weeds and vines of over-taxation, over-regulation, and an over-proliferation of inefficient, unprofitable political activity that saps the working economy. Time to bring out the machete. Eliminating our vehicle inspection mandates like forty other states would be a good – and easy — first whack.
Rob Roper is a freelance writer who has been involved with Vermont politics and policy for over 20 years. This article reprinted with permission from Behind the Lines: Rob Roper on Vermont Politics, robertroper.substack.com
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Commentary
DMV will just find another way to bilk taxpayers so they can keep growing . DOGE them !
In my recent survey looking at Vermont Inspection Stickers… 60% of Vermont drivers drive vehicles with expired Inspection stickers. Easy answer….Vermont’s short staffed State Police have to set priorities so not their fault. Same with city of Burlington…how much do they have to pay to get qualified law enforcement candidates with the insane COL increase in Chittenden County. Have patience, history has repeatedly shown ….in a few years it will be so overbuilt that housing costs could go down 50%.
By all means, axe the vehicle inspections, and that definitely would be a start in a much better direction. For those who have to work during normal garage shop hours, taking time to get your vehicle inspected is crazy expensive, especially if it doesn’t pass, you’re stuck!
Vehicle inspections don’t increase safety. It’s a burden both due to it’s high cost to get it done and the time involved. Archaic thinking mandates inspections from the days of metal vehicle skins and now plastic that doesn’t rust. The number of accidents and deaths are due to other causes, drugs, DUI, sleeping, careless driving, etc being human factors. Haven’t heard much about brake failures causing harm.
Inspections are a money matter another way to control people. The right to drive is a privilege and that is taxed, licenses. Inspections are avoided by those that have difficulty in getting it done and then there’s garage scheduling. Many states don’t require inspections, glad to see NH is following suit. Vt will drag it’s feet and be the last to conform, it’s that Socialist mentality. I’ve driven over 2 million miles in the continental 49 states. Maddening to see what other states require and don’t require. Have had only a minor bumper dent. Being a pilot, I have that discipline of knowing my surroundings fore and aft and don’t fall asleep
I was delivering auto parts in Brattleboro for a while and one of the owners of a garage there when we were discussing the subject of auto inspections told me a Vermont State Rep. who came in for the inspection had a check engine light was told that by law, they had to have their car fixed to pass the inspection. That State Rep. didn’t even know that law was passed.
The inspection system is a money-making SCAM.
The State of Vermont repealing, lowering, or retiring any fees, penalties or taxation without representation on any of their legalized or legitimized extortion? Their incorporated corporations will stand, increase penalization, and further pilfer wages through lawfare warfare. All with impunity, venomous vim, and vigorous vigor – until we are in rigor – or their codified corporation is bound, dissolved, and sent packing to the abyss from which it came.
A Big NO! We need some assurances that cars on the road are safe for both the driver and the other vehicles and pedestrians that share the road!
However, what the State of VT can do is have “reasonable” standards and eliminate or ameliorate pollution requirements, especially for older vehicles which really is the biggest cost issues.
What most thoughtful people have know for years, is that whatever Vt does in regards to the environment are for naught. China produces more CO2 emissions that the US and Europe combined, not to mention India and other countries who enrgy demands have skyrocketed.
And let’s bring back Registration stickers! The Vt legislature always finds ways to help criminal voters.
Let’s use common sense.
If the reassurance is needed, go back to the system used for decades, once a year, make sure brakes hold, lights and wipers work, the undercarriage isn’t ready to break in half taking about 15-20 minutes, instead of the current one plus hour.
Regulate, then tax ,equals control.
Good research, as usual, Rob! Great idea!
Vermont is a tourist state. Who and by what means are they inspected to see if they are “safe”. Expect in a popular season, leaf pepping, skiing, hiking, hunting, etc there are many vehicles on VT roads and you don’t know about it. I’ve been in states without inspections and they are quite safe. How do I know—common sense evaluating. In the south and west, no salt. The salt use states use to have rust buckets on four wheels. Compare the inspection cost of VT vs other states, very high and garages have to have expensive mandatory equipment just to inspect it’s crazy.
Speaking of mandatory equipment, the cost of which drove some 300 inspection stations out of business. Then there’s the training to operate the equipment. Try to get an appointment for an inspection. Then after waiting a month if you fail some stations charge a one half fee for a failed inspection. Then you need to get it fixed. It’s not like the old days. Since new cars and trucks have sky rocketed in price, people are keeping and repairing their cars. Try to get an appointment for car repair, all the garages are booked way in advance. So, what are you supposed to do then, walk 20 miles to work or drive it uninspected. The whole thing is a mess and leave it to our Vermont overlords to make just living here miserable. Repeal, Repeal, Repeal is the only solution. Remember progressives are really repressives, think about it. What do they do to help? You can hardly leave the house without breaking one of their laws or restrictions. We don’t have to live like this, vote them out.
VIP 1,
Where is the information confirming that some 300 inspection stations were driven out of business due solely to the cost of mandated inspection equipment??
Note that there are many snow belt states with no inspection requirements.
FYI: Regulatory Capture
Equipment Costs Impacting Inspection Stations:
The closure of approximately 300 inspection stations has been significantly influenced by the rising costs associated with the required equipment for vehicle inspections. This situation has been particularly notable in Texas, where changes in inspection requirements have also played a role.
Reasons for Closure:
Increased Equipment Costs: The financial burden of maintaining and upgrading inspection equipment has become unsustainable for many small inspection stations. The costs associated with modern diagnostic tools and compliance with regulatory standards have escalated.
Regulatory Changes:
Starting in January 2025, Texas will no longer require non-commercial vehicles to undergo annual safety inspections, which has led to a decrease in demand for inspection services. This change is expected to further strain the viability of many inspection stations.
Market Competition:
Larger automotive service providers may have the resources to absorb these costs better than smaller, independent stations, leading to a competitive disadvantage for the latter.
Impact on the Industry:
The closure of these inspection stations not only affects the businesses themselves but also has broader implications for vehicle safety and emissions standards in the region. With fewer stations available, consumers may face longer wait times and reduced access to inspection services.
In summary, the combination of rising equipment costs and significant regulatory changes has led to the closure of numerous inspection stations, particularly in Texas, impacting the automotive service landscape.
In addition to Texas, several other states are experiencing closures of inspection stations due to rising equipment costs and regulatory changes. Here are some notable examples:
Hawaii: Increased fees for vehicle safety inspections, with a new fee structure implemented in July 2025.
Utah: Elimination of mandatory safety inspections for most vehicles since January 2018, leading to reduced demand.
Pennsylvania: Ongoing adjustments in inspection requirements and fees, impacting the viability of smaller inspection stations.
H. Jay Eshelman and VIP 1,
So did 300 inspection stations close in Vermont due to mandatory equipment costs or not?
Clearly, Mr. Davis, the report on 300 closed inspection stations I posted does not mention Vermont. And, in fairness, VIP1 didn’t say that the 300 closed stations were in Vermont. Although he did say “The whole thing is a mess and leave it to our Vermont overlords to make just living here miserable.”
When I posed the following question:
Have any Vermont car inspection stations closed because of expensive equipment? … the answer was…:
“Yes, some car inspection stations in Vermont have faced challenges due to the costs associated with expensive equipment. The implementation of Vermont’s enhanced vehicle inspection system has led to increased operational costs for many inspection stations, which has, in some cases, resulted in closures or reduced services.”
When I asked: Can you name one of those Vermont inspection stations?… the answer was:
“One notable car inspection station in Vermont is VIP Tires & Service. They offer state vehicle inspections at multiple locations throughout the state, including Burlington and Barre. VIP is known for employing certified automotive professionals and providing a comprehensive inspection service.”
Does that help your understanding of the circumstance?
H. Jay Eshelman,
VIP 1 was ambiguous with his accusations. I asked for clarity and have been shown by you that 300 stations did not close in Vermont due to the cost of mandated inspection equipment.
Radio silence from the VIP
And an FYI to all,
If you’re currently in need of a VT state inspection VIP Tires & Services offer state inspection opportunities at all four of their VT locations. Including Burlington and Barre
GROK: Did any Vermont vehicle inspection stations close due to expensive 2017 equipment requirements?
Yes, some Vermont vehicle inspection stations did close or opt out of the inspection program due to the expensive equipment requirements introduced with the Automated Vehicle Inspection Program (AVIP) in 2017. The AVIP required stations to purchase military-grade tablets costing approximately $1,600 and pay a $2.21 fee per inspection for data uploads. According to a 2017 source, around 21 of the state’s approximately 1,400 inspection stations dropped out of the program by early 2017 due to these costs. A 2023 Reddit post also mentioned that some stations couldn’t afford the AVIP tablets when they were implemented, contributing to a reduction in the number of inspection stations at that time. While the exact number of closures may have been small relative to the total number of stations, the financial burden of the new equipment did lead to some stations ceasing inspections.
Additional Findings:
• Confirmed Closures: A 2017 Burlington Free Press article explicitly states that about 21 inspection stations opted out of the inspection program due to the AVIP equipment costs, which included a ruggedized tablet, OBD scan tool, wireless router, and printer, totaling around $1,600, plus ongoing fees. This was out of roughly 1,400 stations, with 970 signing up for AVIP by February 2017. The article doesn’t name specific stations but indicates these were likely smaller shops with lower inspection volumes, where the cost-benefit didn’t justify continuing inspections.burlingtonfreepress.comeu.burlingtonfreepress.com
• Impact on Small Shops: A 2017 Vermont Public report highlighted concerns from small repair shops, like Moto Venture near Montpelier, which estimated that with low inspection volumes (15–25 per year), the $1,625 equipment cost and ongoing $2.21 per-inspection fee (plus a $6 sticker fee) could take years to recoup, especially for shops charging $25 per inspection. This financial strain likely contributed to the decision of some small shops to stop offering inspections, though specific closures aren’t named.
__________
The first point being made here is that while precise data concerning the effect of Vermont’s regulatory directives on vehicle inspection costs can always be debated, Vermont’s expanded regulations did, indeed, increase costs and serve to limit services… what is often called ‘regulatory capture’.
The second point I’m making is that readers should always beware of points raised to divert attention from the matter at hand. Case in point: Pseudonym Usage.
The third point, and perhaps more important than all others, is the research power of AI that is now in the hands of the average person. Chat GPT, Google AI, Duck AI, and others, level the playing field. Today, I prefer GROK. But with competing platforms, as with any free market, those that become faster, better, and cheaper will prevail. Not only do we have the world at our fingertips. We can no longer blame others for ‘fake news’.
Can we believe everything we see, smell, feel and hear? That’s a matter of faith. In the final analysis, trust your instincts.
Same rules for all, right? Full name for VIP 1, moderator.
I delete all pseudonym comments. Takes time sometimes.
Quick note: New Jersey does require inspection every 2 years for gasoline powered cars built after 2013 and certain vehicles built after 2007. Historic cars and fully electric cars do not require inspections.
Cars that fail may receive a 30 day grace period to make repairs or be detained until repairs are made.
Interestingly, the state provides free inspection at many DMV locations.
Thank you June, very interesting contribution to this discussion.
VIP 1, You are thumbing your nose at the rules that everyone else must follow, and, the moderator is giving you special treatment by not requiring you to use your real name.
You’re conflating issues, Mr. Costello.
Yes, VIP1 is complaining about over-regulation. So am I.
Separately, Mr. Page tried to explain that he ‘deletes all pseudonym comments. Takes time sometimes.’
Hopefully, you appreciate that Mr. Page is the editor of one of the only news platforms that still allows comments, imperfect as his management may be. Digger, Seven Days, Front Porch Forum, and the like, for example, simply censor opinion that doesn’t meet their preferred narrative. Have you complained about that?
Seeing the shape of some cars on the road, I would recommend no inspections the first five years or 60,000 miles. After that an inspection every two years especially breaks. I have to drive on the roads with some vehicles that just aren’t safe in my opinion.
H., I commented only on the ‘real name needed for comments’ rule; over-regulation is your own issue. My point was, that VIP 1 has been around long enough to know the rules but seems to figure that he doesn’t need to follow them like everyone else.
Guy explained his challenge playing whack-a-mole with pseudonym commenters, I respected his answer.
I also respect that VDC welcomes comments, even those ‘against the tide’, as mine often are.
Re: ” over-regulation is your own issue.”
Mr. Costello, your words suggest otherwise. You accused VIP1 (whoever he/she is) of “..thumbing your nose at the rules that everyone else must follow.”
That is a commentary on ‘over-regulation’, ‘against the tide’ as it may be.
H., Are you saying that VDC is over-regulating its commenters? As usual, I disagree with you.
My mistake. I thought you were referring to the topic at hand – vehicle inspections – which I believe are overly regulated. Otherwise, I too have been a long-time critic of the use of pseudonyms on VDC comments.