Lansing — Our family owns four e-bikes. We were probably one of the first families to own one in the Lansing area. I ride mine to work on days the weather is good, and Lansing and East Lansing actually have a decent network of bike lanes. The first bike has 8,500 miles on it now and the second around 3,500. We use them for church trips, grocery store trips, and pleasure riding too.

Compared with traditional bicycles, e-bikes are especially helpful when you want to get somewhere a little faster, or with less effort, so you aren’t sweaty at your destination. Older folks sometimes comment that using an e-bike makes them feel younger again. Riding feels as easy as it was for them when they were 20. I knew after my first ride that they would become popular.

As you probably know, the Democrats, disliking the recent decision by voters to end their unchallenged rule, have been on a high-speed legislative spree during the lame duck session. Among the bills under consideration is one that would offer Michigan residents making modest incomes a voucher worth 90% of the cost, or $500, whichever is less, toward the purchase of an electric bicycle. When I purchased our first e-bike, the cheapest available was around $1,000. But they’ve come down quite a bit in price, and you could easily find a basic model selling new for around $500 these days. So the state is essentially offering to purchase you an e-bike. 

A state voucher is a bad idea for at least three reasons.

First, for the vast majority of people, e-bikes replace bicycles. They don’t replace cars. So the environmental benefit of the voucher program from this perspective will be near zero, and possibly negative. E-bikes are pretty light vehicles, but this will encourage cyclists to use slightly more electricity, not less. You also have to manufacture, and eventually dispose of, the battery. 

Second, and I feel this one a little personally since I was seeking to sell our oldest bicycle, this will kill the used e-bike market. If the state is going to make purchasing a new one nearly free, why consider a used one? I’m not an environmental genius, but I thought that reusing an already existing item was generally thought to be superior to using materials and energy to create a new one. A flourishing used marketplace is greener. The bicycle I have with 8,500 miles on it still works great, I just wanted to upgrade. These machines last a long time.

Finally, some people, young men especially, will use this subsidy to purchase a new toy that they will ride hard. Some will become a menace on the sidewalks. We already see this sometimes in East Lansing. It bothers me and endangers others.

It’s easy to imagine some people riding irresponsibly and the government passing a bunch of new rules that will worsen life for those of us who behave responsibly in response. (For example, an enhanced licensing regime or further restricting where bicycles are permitted.)

Make people pay full cost, and they’ll take what they’re doing more seriously. They’ll treat their ride better. I have no problem with people purchasing toys for themselves, but why are we using tax dollars funneled through the Michigan Economic Development Corporation to help them buy one?

E-bikes are wonderful. If they fit your lifestyle, I heartily recommend you try one out and perhaps purchase one for yourself. But they aren’t a sensible item for state subsidy.

David Shane is a teacher of science and mathematics at a classical school in Lansing.