Maryland MV owners are in trouble

[F18hornetM]

Thanks alot, Looks like 2 seperate bills regarding historic tags with HB 668 covering trucks over 10k.
After reading both, looks like big difference that would affect us, is the removal of "incidental" use as far as trucks are concerned.
I disagree with this, but I understand why. People who misuse the historic tags, use their vehicles under "incidental use" everyday.
Somebody mentioned before, no need to change the law just inforce it. If a trooper sees a historic vehicle go by everyday, maybe he should stop them and ask why!
These trucks and any other vehicle needs to be driving some. My son and I try to drive ours once a week, usually only a few miles to visit parents or brother, but enough to keep things working and batteries charged.
If this passes, guess I'm going to join alot of clubs.
I am still going to write letters, If a person has an antique vehcile such as a 1960 chevy, wouldnt they want to take a drive on summer day? Well so do I. And these bills will prevent that for everyone

 

[jeffhuey1n]

Here is a first draft of what I was thinking of sending to the legislators. Let's also send letters to michael.busch@house.state.md.us who is speaker of the house. I here he is looking to enter the next governors race, so he will not want any bad press from Veterans and other large respected groups.


Dear Sir,
It has come to my attention that there is a bill currently in the Judicial Proceedings Committee that disturbs me, as well as disturbing other likeminded vehicle collectors. It is Senate bill 846, concerning Historic vehicles. The bill proposes changes in the requirements to obtain Historic license plates. It is my understanding that this bill was supposed to prevent people from abusing the Historic registration in Maryland. After reading this bill, I fail to see anything that will affect people abusing the Historic registration. I do however see things that are going to have serious effects on law abiding, upstanding vehicle collectors. They have proposed to extend the required age of the vehicles from twenty to thirty years. This is going to affect a number of honest vehicle collectors who have already purchased, restored, and registered collectable vehicles that are not thirty years old yet. They are also proposing to remove the ‘occasional transportation’ wording. This is even more disturbing, as people who have spent countless hours and money making their cars perfect can not take them out and enjoy driving them from time to time. One of the most disturbing things is the proposal to limit Historic tags to vehicles under a ten thousand pound gross vehicle rating. I do not believe anyone has thought this out completely. By making this restriction, you will be eliminating retired Fire Trucks, retired Military Vehicles, and many other collectable vehicles. By doing this you will be alienating Veterans, Fire Fighters, and a number of business owners who have spent large amounts of money to restore their Historic trucks. Owners of these trucks will not respond well to having to pay eight times, or more, per year for their tags. They will also lose the ability to insure their vehicles with reduced rate classic vehicle insurance, costing very substantial amounts more to meet the Maryland insurance requirements.
I would appreciate it if you would review this bill, and hopefully you will see what many others have seen by reading it. It is not accomplishing any good, and will only result in many disappointed voters. This bill seems to be more of a way to raise money than anything else.
Thank you for your time, and I do hope to hear your thoughts on this subject. I will be following the progress of this bill, and keeping track of who supports it as well as who does not support it. I will be sharing all my findings with all collector car and truck clubs, as well as the VFW’s, American Legions, Fire Houses, and anyone or any group who is concerned or may be concerned with this bill.

I doubt it would do any good but if writing from outside MD would help, I'll write and send one in. Why? Many people move in to the state especially around Camp Springs and Pax River. If this law passes, those who are collectors will think twiice about moving there, which in turn will harm the economy of the state and local municipalities,

Thought I'd make the offer. Additional note: I served for 7 years at Andrews. I had oportunities to move back and work in the state. I won't move there any more than I'd move to California (And I was born in CA!) for the same tax, spend, tax more, tax even more and spend you right into the grave ploitics.

Jeff

 

[F18hornetM]

I dont see how anybody writing could hurt. Even people without historic vehicles.

 

[338lapua09]

They are really going push this thru ....just noticed the effective date is October 1 ,2012
So everyone to there Battle positions ...Stand strong..

 

[DieselBob]

The two separate bills are S.O.P in their divide and concur strategy that they have used time and time again about several issues in this state. If these bills get passed then they will start nibbling away at one or the other group with more restriction while telling the remaining group “don't worry, this doesn't effect you.” When it comes to regulating the masses all the governments rely on one simple fact that is so correctly stated by Pastor Martin Niemoller, I have changed a few words for current times but the meaning is there.


First they regulated (insert group), and I did not speak out because I wasn't a (insert group). Then they regulated the (insert group), and I did not speak out because I was not a (insert group). Then they regulated the (insert group) , and I did not speak out because I wasn't a (insert group). Then they regulated (insert group) , and I did not speak out because I was not a (insert group). Then they started regulating what I was doing, and there was no one left to speak out for me.


The groups may change and the date on the calendar may change but some things remain the same when dealing with a system that wants total control over the masses.

 

[midcounty]

I doubt it would do any good but if writing from outside MD would help, I'll write and send one in. Why? Many people move in to the state especially around Camp Springs and Pax River. If this law passes, those who are collectors will think twiice about moving there, which in turn will harm the economy of the state and local municipalities,

Thought I'd make the offer. Additional note: I served for 7 years at Andrews. I had oportunities to move back and work in the state. I won't move there any more than I'd move to California (And I was born in CA!) for the same tax, spend, tax more, tax even more and spend you right into the grave ploitics.

Jeff

please do write, and I encourage anyone out of state to write. Let them know that this will get national attention from Veterans, Firefighters, Historians, and Collectors alike.

 

[midcounty]

i didn't read thru the whole thread so sorry if a repeat..

here's the under 10K bill HB550
http://mlis.state.md.us/2012rs/bills/hb/hb0550f.pdf

and there is one for over 10K HB668
http://mlis.state.md.us/2012rs/bills/hb/hb0668f.pdf

and yes, ATHS is aware of this issue..

Mike

So under the HB668, we are covered? Now it will even include tractors? We could end up better off. I don't like the insurance thing, as I carry commercial insurance as a CYA thing, Historic insurance won't pay if you went to Lowes to pick up a couple boards. I don't want to get in a pinch over a technicality.

 

[DieselBob]

So under the HB668, we are covered? Now it will even include tractors? We could end up better off.

I would have to disagree that we would be better off. It still removes the "[occasional transportation]" language and replaces it with "use in exhibitions, club activities, parades, tours". Also the insurance clause is a killer for me. If I can't park it in my back yard outside and can't pickup a sheet of plywood or a bag of sack crete on my way home from a saturday afternoon drive I might as well sell it now. I have neither the funds or desire to have a trailer queen. Also don't forget most "HISTORIC VEHICLE, SHOW VEHICLE, OR ANTIQUE VEHICLE INSURANCE" will not cover you at all if you tow a trailer so forget that M105, 116, 2001, 332 and so on.

 

[DieselBob]

Sitting here going through these bills it just dawned on me they might be trying an end run on cutting off historic registration to vehicles over 10K. Every bill has to be presented in both the House of Representatives, HB***** and the Senate, SB****. Then if both are passed in the respective chambers the bills then go to a joint committee that merges them into one that is then sent to the Governor to sign. I find it very interesting there is no bill on the Senate side to cover the over 10K vehicles. As it stands currently the only possible bill that I see coming out of the joint committee would only allow historic registration for 10K and under.

 

[Tanner]

I'd say that they officials are trying to limit people on buying over 10k trucks, tagging them historic, and using them for commercial means... not that ANYONE would ever do this...

Similar to some states allowing purchase of an M35 but restricting you to 500 lb cargo in the bed.

'Tanner'

 

[tamangel]

I would be curious what the proponents of this bill ( Representatives named in the "..By.." area at the top of each bill ) had in mind when they initially proposed or signed on as sponsors for these bills..? Some special interest group or money involvement? or just don't have a clue as to the significance and ramifications..

HB 550:
By: Delegates Reznik, Arora, Carr, Elliott, Gutierrez, Kaiser, B. Robinson, S. Robinson, Schulz, and Zucker

HB 668:
By: Delegates Schulz, Wood, Aumann, Bates, Clagett, Cluster, Eckardt, Glass, Haddaway–Riccio, Hershey, Hogan, Jacobs, McComas, McDermott, W. Miller, O’Donnell, Otto, Serafini, Smigiel, and Weir

If any of these folks are your local reps, might want to inquire as to reasoning..They probably just don't have a clue..

Ha... one even named KAISER...

Mike

 

[F18hornetM]

Add a couple more for me to write too, my delegates. %$#@$%&*

Norman H. Conway, Maryland State Delegate
Michael A. McDermott, Maryland State Delegate

 

[F18hornetM]

Thanks Tamangel and Midcounty, the onfromation you guys have shared is great.

 

[undysworld]

If I'm reading this right, you guys are getting shoved into parade-ish related registration? This stinks like what happened to Wisconsin owners last year. Sorry if I'm getting into this late, and may have the details wrong...

If the issue is that the vehicles are unsafe, you guys should check out insurance rates for safety data. Another thing to refer to is the D.O.D. documents which show that military vehicles which ride on tires were required to meet the same civilian standards as every other vehicle on the road. Also, HVA has a great current study which shows the economic impact of older collector vehicles, to show that our hobby is a positive economic factor. \

This sounds like the fight we're fighting. If I can offer you any help, please pm.

Paul

 

[F18hornetM]

I think the real issue is, lots of people are registering historic vehicles [1992] and back and driving them everyday to and from work. 1992 does not seem old enough to be historic to me. but maybe I'm getting older. It only has to be 20 yrs old right now. By registering as historic, skips state inspection at time of sale, skips emissions in those countys that have it and only $25 a year for tags.
i really feel that the people who have been tasked with fixing this, just dont understand how far reaching a simple law can be. Maybe we can help them understand. I am not only goping to send letters tomorrow, but call them all as well. if enough people will do this, they may listen and make modifications to the law.
Does anyone have any idea, how you could keep MV and real antiques on the road as occasional use, while cleaning up those with 1992 cars driving everyday.
Its one thing to complain about something, a different matter if you can offer an option.

 

[DieselBob]

Paul,
Thank you for the offer of assistance in this matter. Currently they are not singling out MV's. The proposed changes would affect all vehicles with historic tags.

 

[DieselBob]

Does anyone have any idea, how you could keep MV and real antiques on the road as occasional use, while cleaning up those with 1992 cars driving everyday.
Its one thing to complain about something, a different matter if you can offer an option.

The only thing that comes to mind is what the state does with senior drivers and the BS emission test. A senior citizen can send the state emission test notice back with the current mileage on their car and if it is less than 5K sense their last notice, IIRC, they don't have to test their car. Maybe the same could be done with historic registration as far as showing we don't use the vehicle daily. I know I don't fit in the current culture but It just gulls me I have to prove I didn't do something wrong.

 

[Tanner]

I would be curious what the proponents of this bill ( Representatives named in the "..By.." area at the top of each bill ) had in mind when they initially proposed or signed on as sponsors for these bills..? Some special interest group or money involvement? or just don't have a clue as to the significance and ramifications..

HB 550:
By: Delegates Reznik, Arora, Carr, Elliott, Gutierrez, Kaiser, B. Robinson, S. Robinson, Schulz, and Zucker

HB 668:
By: Delegates Schulz, Wood, Aumann, Bates, Clagett, Cluster, Eckardt, Glass, Haddaway–Riccio, Hershey, Hogan, Jacobs, McComas, McDermott, W. Miller, O’Donnell, Otto, Serafini, Smigiel, and Weir

If any of these folks are your local reps, might want to inquire as to reasoning..They probably just don't have a clue..

Ha... one even named KAISER...

Mike

Those that signed onto the bill are merely there scratching the back of the initial bill proposers, so that those folks will support the supporters' piece of junk legislation, etc, etc, etc... when they need support for a bill.

Politics...

 

[tamangel]

Those that signed onto the bill are merely there scratching the back of the initial bill proposers, so that those folks will support the supporters' piece of junk legislation, etc, etc, etc... when they need support for a bill.

Politics...

Yes, and a quick phone call to their office with a message advising that their constituents won't be scratching their back come the next contest..

Mike

 

[tamangel]

quoted message deleted.

Boring......stick to a plan of action...find out what their reasoning is...educate them as a constituent..you can run alternative fuels and tell them you recycle corn cobs instead..

Mike

*****