Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

For Clinton, a Misfire on Gas Tax?
The Washington Post ^ | 05/08/08 | Chris Cillizza

Posted on 05/08/2008 7:06:00 AM PDT by wm_tate

(L)ocal Indiana media "relentlessly hammered" Clinton's gas tax proposal -- using local economists to dismiss the merits of the plan. O'Bannon faced nowhere near the level of scrutiny and negative coverage back in 2000 (in his gubernatorial race against a Republican.)

(Excerpt) Read more at blog.washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2008election; energy; gasoline; gastax; media; tax
Don't you love it when Big Media accidentally reveals its bias? When Democrat Frank O'Bannon proposed a gas tax holiday in his race for governor against Republican David McIntosh. "Although Republicans cried foul and denounced the move as a political ploy (sound familiar?), they could do little to blunt the boost O'Bannon enjoyed. He went on to crush McIntosh 57 percent to 42 percent to claim a second term." In other words, when it meant defeating a Republican, the media ignored the pandering they slammed Hillary for when she used it against their chosen candidate. -Wm Tate, www.atimelikethis.us
1 posted on 05/08/2008 7:06:03 AM PDT by wm_tate
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: wm_tate
I think it a great idea. Those who think the oil companies will merely take it ALL in a price increase are just dumb-ass economists. I have not read the list of those saying it is a bad idea but I'd bet they all would have qualified for a Lenin Peace prize.
Any time taxes are cut it is a good thing PERIOD.
2 posted on 05/08/2008 7:16:30 AM PDT by jmaroneps37 (Conservatives live in the truth. Liberals live in lies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmaroneps37
She should be “hammered” by the media for suggesting a “windfall profits tax”.

Sickening that the lefties in the media see nothing wrong with taxing productivity but squirm at the thought of you and I being allowed to keep our money in our pockets.

3 posted on 05/08/2008 7:25:18 AM PDT by BenLurkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jmaroneps37
I'm not crazy about cutting the gas tax because of the issues of paying for "free" roads. This tax also pays for mass transit. Cutting the gas tax means either raising other taxes to cover these costs, cutting spending from something else, increasing the deficit, or letting the roads decay.

We all know the Congress isn't going to cut spending from any program which generates votes, but it is more likely to just let roads decay so it can use that as an excuse to raise other taxes later.

Additionally, we do have a little bit of control over how much gas tax we pay, unlike with income or property taxes. I think a better way to save the American family would be to ban property taxes by Constitutional Amendment or sharply cut the income tax... but of course, this won't happen either.

4 posted on 05/08/2008 7:29:24 AM PDT by pnh102 (Save America - Ban Ethanol Now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wm_tate

One thing is for sure, the press hates Hillary.

Is that because she strongarmed the press as First Lady? Or because the press is so liberal that they actually prefer Obama?


5 posted on 05/08/2008 7:29:38 AM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wm_tate

One thing is for sure, the press hates Hillary.

Is that because she strongarmed the press as First Lady? Or because the press is so liberal that they actually prefer Obama?


6 posted on 05/08/2008 7:29:45 AM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pnh102

“I think a better way to save the American family would be to ban property taxes by Constitutional Amendment or sharply cut the income tax... but of course, this won’t happen either.”

Amen! I am in the military and was just moved from Florida to Texas. I don’t care what anyone says, this is the most liberal state I have ever lived in! I live in Corpus Christi.......this is a hellhole! I had to put my family in a relatively expensive house down here so my lily white kids don’t get beat up for being non-Mexican. I pay about $9000 a year in property taxes for a $350,000 house. Insane! My house in Florida was more expensive and the taxes were half. I haven’t seen a city cop since I have been here. Hwy 77 is lined with state troopers doing nothing but writing tickets to make money for the state. I hate this state.


7 posted on 05/08/2008 7:38:58 AM PDT by ThunderStruck94
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
"One thing is for sure, the press hates Hillary. Is that because she strongarmed the press as First Lady? Or because the press is so liberal that they actually prefer Obama?" The latter, I believe. Chris Matthews spoke for many--if not most--of them when he said," I felt this thrill go up my leg" when he hears Barry speak? -Wm Tate, www.atimelikethis.us
8 posted on 05/08/2008 7:42:36 AM PDT by wm_tate
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
Excellent, excellent point! -Wm Tate, www.atimelikethis.us
9 posted on 05/08/2008 7:44:43 AM PDT by wm_tate
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: wm_tate
Here, in Canada, a major oil-exporting nation, we charge ourselves about 30% more at the pump than U.S. gas prices.

As a major importer; and as a nation that sends boatloads of money overseas to buy oil — it would make more sense for you to raise prices to reduce demand. If demand for oil drops, the price drops disproportionately more.

10 posted on 05/08/2008 8:16:11 AM PDT by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA

The fallacy in your theory of reducing demand is that reducing demand in the US will have zero affect on the world oil prices . I don’t notice the Canadians reducing consumption of oil because of high prices. I see Canadians coming to the US to buy gas, though, and in turn raising the price of gas in our area.


11 posted on 05/08/2008 8:24:06 AM PDT by Eva (CHANGE- new euphemism for Marxist revolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Eva

The U.S. consumes 1/4 of the world’s oil — that’s more than enough to effect world prices. When oil demand is just slightly higher than supply; prices shoot up — and vice versa.

Canadians do buy cheap gas in the U.S. whenever possible — proving that economically rational people are influenced by price. We also do drive smaller cars, on average — partly because of the higher gas prices & partly because our dollar was worth a lot less than the greenback, until recently.

We don’t drive your prices up though — Canada is currently the largest single exporter of oil to the U.S. (more than Saudi Arabia an Kuwait combined), and we’re gearing up to supply another million barrels/day from the oil sands. That’s being done at special request from Bush. That is, if U.S. environmental organizations don’t succeed in their campaign to shut down the oil sands.

Ultimately, the decision of what you charge at the pumps is a political one — and totally your (American’s) business. Lowering gas prices would be bad economics (as your best economists have stated); but, it is probably also good politics. Consider the source of this idea — if Democrats lowered your gas taxes; don’t you think that they would just make up for it by raising other taxes?


12 posted on 05/08/2008 8:41:52 AM PDT by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA

The Canadian gas buyers in our area drive up our prices by 10 cents a gallon. We pay ten cents more than the rest of the state, even though the gas is refined right here. The reason given is the Canadian market is willing to pay ten cents more a gallon.

The reason that reduction of oil consumption by the US would not make a difference is because China and India would quickly pick up the difference.

The only thing that would reduce the world prices would be for the US to start drilling their own resources. We have plenty if the Chicken Little Gorites would allow us to bring it up out of the ground.


13 posted on 05/08/2008 8:49:57 AM PDT by Eva (CHANGE- new euphemism for Marxist revolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: pnh102

All this talk of “roads decaying” makes me nuts. Aren’t the massive “highway spending bills” supposed to take care of the roads? By the name of the bill, it should. However, we all know that highway funding bills have NOTHING to do with highways and everything to do with building parks in BFE, a museum in West Virginia, etc. I despise congress (including my reps).


14 posted on 05/08/2008 9:20:05 AM PDT by TxAg1981
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Eva
So, if you reduced the price by $0.18/gallon (the federal tax) — you would expect more Canadians to buy more gas. That's pretty much the same point I'm trying to make — people tend to buy more of things when the price drops, and less when the price increases.

More production in the U.S. would drive prices down. Similarly, if the Canadian oil-sands production were suddenly stopped (due to international environmental pressure groups — i.e. those same Gorebots) — that would cause a large increase in the price of oil.

There's a lot of talk about the U.S. trade deficit. Canadians know all about crippling deficits. We now have a surplus — but, it is entirely due to the high cost of oil and other resources (in particular potash, to fertilize fields of corn being grown for fuel). Our manufacturing sector is actually suffering as much, or more as it is in the U.S. Ontario is losing jobs faster than any rust-belt state. My point — most (maybe all) of the U.S. trade deficit is due to oil imports. It seems to me that you'd want to do whatever it takes to stop sending boatloads of money overseas to buy oil. If you want to get serious about it; you'll have to drill (or mine oil shales) for your own oil; and reduce demand.

The Democrats want to keep new U.S. supply sources locked up — yet, they also want to lower pump prices (which will drive up demand). That's no surprise to me — they always seem to heading in exactly the wrong direction. Conservatives shouldn't fall for their tricks. You won't be saving any money; and your deficits will just get bigger.

15 posted on 05/08/2008 9:46:37 AM PDT by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA

Even if you reduce the price by 18 cents/gallon, the price won’t be cheap, except for Canadians.

That’s exactly, what I have been saying. Drilling is the only way to reduce the cost of oil, but the Gorites don’t want that. They are more interested in crippling the economies of the top tier economies in the world, in favor of a level economic plain. They are all New World Order socialists, including Canadians (except that Canadians are not willing to sacrifice themselves to world socialism, just the US).

The US has plenty of oil resources, enough to ensure lower world prices, if the Chicken Little socialists would let us drill.


16 posted on 05/08/2008 9:58:08 AM PDT by Eva (CHANGE- new euphemism for Marxist revolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Eva
What all your leading economists are saying is that eliminating the federal gas tax wouldn't result in anyone saving any money at the pumps.

BTW, even if every Canadian bought all his gas in the U.S. — we would still be sending you nearly 2 million/bbl/day more than we use. The only ones losing from Canadian cross-border shopping are Canadian governments (taxes) and Canadian gas retailers.

The price system is by far the best way to sort out supply and demand. The U.S. is (AFAIK) the only western, oil-importing nation that doesn't use high gas prices to reduce demand. Instead, you have imposed fleet-mileage requirements on manufacturers. Consider the distortions that causes. U.S. manufacturers have had to jack up prices on large cars to cross-subsidize small cars; in order to meet their fleet mileage numbers. Light trucks have been exempt from the rules (I don't know what the new rules will say) — therefore, consumers, who wanted large vehicles bought vans and SUVs to avoid the cost penalties on large cars. The net result was to make matters worse. It's a needlessly complex way to attempt to reduce demand & no where as fair or effective as simply using the price system would be. It also costs consumers who want large cars a lot of money.

Canada is making a lot of money from high oil prices — so, you might wonder why I'm suggesting that you reduce your demand for oil. The reason is simple — the whole world needs the U.S. economy to be healthy. Also, that's what friends do — tell friends what they need to hear, not what they want to hear.

17 posted on 05/08/2008 10:14:47 AM PDT by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA

Government manipulation of prices never works. Most of the Canadians that I see drive big trucks and gas guzzling cars. I don’t see them cutting back on consumption.

I really don’t think that the eighteen cent federal tax cut will make much difference, but I’m happy that the libs in WA State are upset at the prospect of losing transportation matching funds because they have been spending so recklessly.

I am opposed to government interference in markets and I resent the rest of the world complaining about the comsumption by Americans. It would be a huge loss to the world if the US economy was brought down to the level that the European Union would like. The booming US economy keeps the rest of the world humming and our charitable giving to the third world is equal to none, but do we get any thanks?


18 posted on 05/08/2008 10:25:29 AM PDT by Eva (CHANGE- new euphemism for Marxist revolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Eva

“It would be a huge loss to the world if the US economy was brought down to the level that the European Union would like. The booming US economy keeps the rest of the world humming and our charitable giving to the third world is equal to none, but do we get any thanks?”

I say those exact same things to everyone here, who will listen — and plenty who won’t. So, yes — thanks.


19 posted on 05/08/2008 10:28:08 AM PDT by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson