Bush/Obama vs McCain Clinton? The New Gas Tax Political Football

[Cleverboy]

"Score one for Obama," wrote Greg Mankiw, a former chairman of President George W. Bush's Council of Economic Advisers. "In light of the side effects associated with driving ... gasoline taxes should be higher than they are, not lower."

Republican McCain and Democrat Clinton, who is battling Obama for their party's nomination, both want to suspend the 18.4-cents-per-gallon federal gas tax during the peak summer driving months to ease the pain of soaring gas prices. The tax is used to fund the Highway Trust Fund that builds and maintains roads and bridges."You are just going to push up the price of gas by almost the size of the tax cut," said Eric Toder, a senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center in Washington.

Obama criticized the plan as pure politics and said the only way to lower the price of gas is to use less oil.

"It would last for three months and it would save you on average half a tank of gas, $25 to $30. That's what Senator Clinton and Senator McCain are proposing to deal with the gas crisis," he said on Tuesday in Winston-Salem, North Carolina.

"This isn't an idea designed to get you through the summer, it's an idea designed to get them through an election."

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN3038243520080430?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews
http://www.reuters.com/news/video?videoId=81429&newsChannel=topNews

Let's see how Clinton and McCain spin this. Sounds like the economics on this are soundly on the otherside of the field.
~ CB

[MacNut]

We pay the highest gas taxes in the country here, it is way to high as it is.

[CalBoy]

We pay the highest gas taxes in the country here, it is way to high as it is.

I'm pretty sure CA gas taxes have you beat.

Plus our summer blend is more expensive.

Thank god train ticket prices aren't linked to gas! :o

[atszyman]

"It would last for three months and it would save you on average half a tank of gas, $25 to $30. That's what Senator Clinton and Senator McCain are proposing to deal with the gas crisis," he said on Tuesday in Winston-Salem, North Carolina.

Glad to see someone is doing the math. I figured it out yesterday and with my car, I'd save roughly $35. Combine our family and we'd maybe save $100.

How many people are going to say "hey, cheaper gas, we can drive a little more!" and will end up filing their tank 2-3 more times over the summer costing them more in the long run?

And if it's supposed to help struggling families, other costs will continue to rise, they'll drive "only a little" more because gas is cheaper and the extra tank or two will have wiped out their savings from the gas tax suspension while taking income for highway maintenance away from the government.

[MacNut]

CA ad CT are 1,2 in highest gas tax.

People are going to drive no matter what the price, cutting the tax will bring some relief. We get taxed on everything in this country as it is.

[CalBoy]

CA ad CT are 1,2 in highest gas tax.

Yup. Whenever we shift to the summer blend we normally see a 10-cent hike.

I can't imagine what the hike is going to be like this year.

Might as well take out a mortgage to fill up a tank.

[amik]

Here's a cut/paste of my response in a similar thread on another forum.

It's nice to know we've got an stupid plan from two presidential candidates for a 3 month gas tax holiday. They completely ignore the fact that prices will likely remain inflated because supply will not be able to match demand if the prices drop.

But hey, the voters want to hear about gas prices so candidates will waste tax dollars, decrease tax revenues, and save the average citizen a couple dollars so they can appear to be "doing something" about the situation. Clinton and McCain support the gas tax holiday while Obama and Bush oppose it. Strange bedfellows on both sides of this issue.


Some economists say that a nationwide "gas tax holiday" would have even less impact on gas prices than temporary state moratoriums, such as the one passed by Illinois in 2000. "It's basic economics," said Leonard Burman, director of the Tax Policy Center, a non-partisan thinktank. "Gas is always in very short supply during the summer, which is why prices go up. In order to reduce the price, you would have to increase supply, but that is difficult over the short term, because the refineries cannot add capacity."


According to James Hamilton, professor of the Economics at the University of California-San Diego, said that most of the benefits from a temporary tax moratorium would likely go to producers rather than consumers. He said that states that suspend gas taxes are able to respond to rising demand more efficiently than the country as a whole, because gasoline supplies can be easily moved from one state to another.

"Prices would certainly rise to the market-clearing level," said Hamilton. "I would expect the price [of gas] to go back to very close to where it was before [the tax cut], in which case consumers would not see any benefit."

Another economist, Jeffrey Perloff, of UC-Berkeley, agreed that a federal tax moratorium would likely have less impact on consumer gas prices than a state moratorium. He said his models showed that a suspension of the 18.4-cent federal tax on gasoline would likely result in a temporary 9 to 12 cent reduction in the cost of a gallon of gas to the consumer and a 6 to 9 cent reduction in wholesale prices.

[MacNut]

All the taxes on gas that are supposed to fix the roads, well where does that money go, the roads are still ****.

[leekohler]

Look who's on the wrong side of the issue once again- Clinton/McCain. Nothing to see here. Move along.

[MacNut]

Look who's on the worng side of the issue once again- Clinton/McCain. Nothing to see here. Move along.The way I see it the government dips into our pockets for everything. I think not taxing the crap out of us for once would do some good.

Amazing that Bush wants tax cuts until it comes to oil. So oil companies no tax, consumer up the ass.

[leekohler]

The way I see it the government dips into our pockets for everything. I think not taxing the crap out of us for once would do some good.

Amazing that Bush wants tax cuts until it comes to oil. So oil companies no tax, consumer up the ass.

It's symbolic and accomplishes nothing as has already been illustrated in this thread

[CalBoy]

The way I see it the government dips into our pockets for everything. I think not taxing the crap out of us for once would do some good.

We really don't pay that much in taxes on gas if you think about it.

If you consider how much it takes to maintain roads, emergency services, and other services related to car-based transportation, the gas tax really pays for itself from a consumer standpoint.

Frankly I think high gas prices are a good thing. Sure we're hurting in the short term right now, but maybe it'll push us to do other things and stop using a fuel which really only has a few decades left anyway.

[MacNut]

It's symbolic and accomplishes nothing as has already been illustrated in this threadSo how much should we be taxed, until we can't afford to eat or sleep in a house. Everyone on the streets the government took all our money.

Emergency service comes from local taxes here. State roads get the gas tax, and the state roads here are crap.

The whole supply in demand thing I think is a load of bull. I haven't see any shortages on gas, they say we are paying more because there is less. Well I don't see stations closing because there is no gas left. It is just a money grab plain and simple.

[CalBoy]

Emergency service comes from local taxes here.

Most states receive Federal subsidies for emergency services.

Nonetheless, it doesn't change the equation from your point of view. You're still getting more out of your gas tax than what you're paying into it. Even with a tax that's higher like CA or CT, we still don't pay nearly what it actually costs to drive on a road per passenger mile.

[PlaceofDis]

So how much should we be taxed, until we can't afford to eat or sleep in a house. Everyone on the streets the government took all our money.

Emergency service comes from local taxes here. State roads get the gas tax, and the state roads here are crap.

a bit over dramatic don't you think?

okay, lets not tax, then all our cars will be damaged since we don't have the money to fix the road their driving on. the actual tax on gas isn't that much, nor is it the reason why prices are so high.

so we save a few cents over the summer, come winter when the tax is reinstate there will be a huge jump again. this is a short term idea that is only being played out to get 'rep points' for hilary and mccain. it makes absolutely no sense.

[MacNut]

Oil companies are using the fear strategy, they say we need to raise prices because it costs more to refine. Well then why are the oil companies bottom lies sky rocketing if they need to pay for the refineries. Where is all that needed money going but into the oil mans pocket. Price and demand is just to make it look good. I want to see how much demand has gone up. People have and will always drive. Greed is the main factor not demand.

[leekohler]

So how much should we be taxed, until we can't afford to eat or sleep in a house. Everyone on the streets the government took all our money.

Emergency service comes from local taxes here. State roads get the gas tax, and the state roads here are crap.

The whole supply in demand thing I think is a load of bull. I haven't see any shortages on gas, they say we are paying more because there is less. Well I don't see stations closing because there is no gas left. It is just a money grab plain and simple.

"And the Oscar for Best Dramatic Performance goes to..." :) Of course oil companies and OPEC are gouging us. That's a given. But if your roads suck, write your state reps.

[PlaceofDis]

Oil companies are using the fear strategy, they say we need to raise prices because it costs more to refine. Well then why are the oil companies bottom lies sky rocketing if they need to pay for the refineries. Where is all that needed money going but into the oil mans pocket. Price and demand is just to make it look good. I want to see how much demand has gone up. People have and will always drive. Greed is the main factor not demand.

you don't think there are more drivers? if its the oil companies being greedy, then what does that have to to with the government taxes on gas?

[amik]

The whole supply in demand thing I think is a load of bull. I haven't see any shortages on gas, they say we are paying more because there is less. Well I don't see stations closing because there is no gas left. It is just a money grab plain and simple.


Supply and demand is simple economics. In order for it to fail, there has to be a fundamental change in human behavior or some sort of illegal price fixing/monopolistic competition. The latter is not entirely out of the realm of possibility.

When prices go up, use goes down. The reverse is also true. Suppliers have incentive to keep the price sufficiently low so that they operate at capacity. If they see that they can increase the price and still operate at full capacity, why wouldn't they do it? As demand increases in the summer months, prices increase to the point where demand falls off enough to meet supply. You don't see gas stations running out of gas because there are, for lack of better term, wide spots in the line. It's not as if the pump is connected directly to the refineries and when demand exceeds capacity the pump runs dry. We briefly draw down small storage supplies until the price correction, and resulting sag in demand, allows them to gain level.

Couple the basic supply/demand economics with more complex issues around the US dollars declining value and oil speculators and the whole mess gets more cloudy.

It is worth investigating how much additional refining capacity has been added over the last few decades. The answer does not make big oil look good and largely supports your claims of a money grab, but it has been going on for a long time.

[CalBoy]

But if your roads suck, write your state reps.

Not that that will do anything, at least not out here anyways. The Bay Area has arguably the worst roads anywhere in the country, and I know state leaders bring it up during their campaigns, yet nothing gets done.

[MacNut]

"And the Oscar for Best Dramatic Performance goes to..." :)I bet I'm a better actor than most of Hollywood.:p Have you seen some of the movies out.

[zioxide]

All the taxes on gas that are supposed to fix the roads, well where does that money go, the roads are still ****.

They would be even worse if they didn't have this tax money.

This idea is ****ing awful. Basically, you'd save 15 cents per gallon for the first week. Then, more people here about the no tax on gas, and they're like, "Hey lets go driving because gas is cheaper!" So demand increases, but the supply doesn't. Prices go back up, and then they're back where they started. On top of this, we lose the tax dollars and our roads and bridges get even ********.

edit: Here's my new idea: Charge gas taxes depending on what kind of car you drive. So if you drive a Hybrid, there's no tax. Small car like a Civic, 10 cents a gallon. If you're a ****tard with a Hummer, its 50 cents a gallon.

[jb60606]

Call me selfish and cruel, but I'd give my left nut to see that Humvee driver in unit 1608 downgraded to a Prius. I'm with Obama on this one. :D

[Cleverboy]

The ironic thing about this issue, is that Obama can't be caught saying what the economists are saying. He has to (rightly) say that "it isn't enough". --Cause its not. Economists, meanwhile, get to say the absolute truth of "gas prices aren't high enough". Demand drives price. If a meaningless cut spurs gas purchases, the price will increase, and the cut will likely end up in the deep deeeeeep pockets of the oil companies.

Clinton says we'll TAX 'em to get the money paid for. That's kind of stupid. Tax them as part of a comprehensive plan to encourage better consumer environmental options, but don't try to lower prices artificially for a temporary time... increase demand... increase taxes on the provider... and expect the prices not to reflect it.

Gas Tax Holiday? MADNESS is THY NAME.

I want lower gas prices too, but unless Americans consume less (demand), or supply is positively effected (supply)... gas prices won't be going in the right direction any time soon. Hopefully the strikes and incidents will get resolved and lower volatility speculation though. That's entirely out of our control though.

Hopefully people will be smart enough to reward common sense on this issue, and not political posturing.

~ CB

[MacNut]

They would be even worse if they didn't have this tax money.

On top of this, we lose the tax dollars and our roads and bridges get even ********.Just to humor myself, would the big dig not have happened if the money wasn't there. That was maybe the biggest bunch of waste ever created in this country.

[amik]

Hopefully people will be smart enough to reward common sense on this issue, and not political posturing.


Unfortunately they'll fall victim to the political misdirection. I believe the average voter, regardless of affiliation, is an uninformed self serving moron.

This gas tax holiday scheme is directed squarely at the average selfish voter. Listen to the interviews people are doing at gas stations, the comments would be funny if they weren't serious and coming from people who will actually cast a vote.

[emmawu]

I'm glad you guys have megabucks. I, for one, am on Worker's Compensation and have seen my $30K a year job go to $734 a month. Thank God I have some dough put aside. I can't walk very far any more, (my favorite activity) so i depend upon my well maintained 1997 Honda Accord to get around.

I would love to go to a State Park or someplace green and paint all day and an extra $30-35 would allow me to do it.

I just want to have a nice summer. I know that is selfish
It's been a crappy winter and I hate being stuck in the city.

The tax break is just for three months, not forever. When you get stuck in an unwanted situation financially every little bit helps. Wisconsin is tax Hell and I'd like to have a little back.

Just my very humble opinion. By the way, I drive 6,000 miles a year and used to walk or take public transportation everywhere. It's awful to have your physical freedom away (not to mention most of your salary)

[zioxide]

Just to humor myself, would the big dig not have happened if the money wasn't there. That was maybe the biggest bunch of waste ever created in this country.

The big dig was definitely very far from efficient as far as the actual construction went, but Boston is much better now.

[PlaceofDis]

I'm glad you guys have megabucks. I, for one, am on Worker's Compensation and have seen my $30K a year job go to $734 a month. Thank God I have some dough put aside. I can't walk very far any more, (my favorite activity) so i depend upon my well maintained 1997 Honda Accord to get around.

I would love to go to a State Park or someplace green and paint all day and an extra $30-35 would allow me to do it.

I just want to have a nice summer. I know that is selfish
It's been a crappy winter and I hate being stuck in the city.

The tax break is just for three months, not forever. When you get stuck in an unwanted situation financially every little bit helps. Wisconsin is tax Hell and I'd like to have a little back.

Just my very humble opinion. By the way, I drive 6,000 miles a year and used to walk or take public transportation everywhere. It's awful to have your physical freedom away (not to mention most of your salary)

again, that $0.15 isn't going to make much difference over three months, other than give the false idea that gas it cheaper, meaning more people using it, meaning the price adjusts for that $0.15 so you end up paying it again.

[emw]

I just want to have a nice summer. I know that is selfish
It's been a crappy winter and I hate being stuck in the city.If you look into it more deeply, you'll realize that your "nice summer" may turn out to be an "okay June", because by July prices will rise to erase the tax drop you just got because demand has increased. Then your fall will really suck because not only can't you walk because the weather sucks, but now you'll be paying even more for gas.

This whole idea does indeed stink of election year politicking. It has no basis in fact, but appeals to the average voter who, no offense, doesn't look past their next couple of months. It doesn't resolve the underlying issues of alternative fuel development and implementation, nor does it really even provide any significant benefit to any family.

But it sure sounds good. :rolleyes:

[Cleverboy]

edit: Here's my new idea: Charge gas taxes depending on what kind of car you drive. So if you drive a Hybrid, there's no tax. Small car like a Civic, 10 cents a gallon. If you're a ****tard with a Hummer, its 50 cents a gallon. Hm. Methinks anyone suggesting this, even with the most common sense motives, would be tarred as an elitist. Them @#$%-in latte-sipping yuppies already git too many breaks. What about the little guy! --Not to mention that would never be practical. I can imagine a gazillion gas station attendants who'll happily misidentify the Expedition driven by the leggy blond with the intoxicating wink.

Anyway, I have an Explorer Sport, which is paid off and now feels like 4 tons of bad idea... (especially with my commute) so, I'm weighing my alternatives for the coming winter. Right now, I wish I had a Camry or even a Focus.

~ CB

[walangij]

again, that $0.15 isn't going to make much difference over three months, other than give the false idea that gas it cheaper, meaning more people using it, meaning the price adjusts for that $0.15 so you end up paying it again.

I don't get how some people don't understand this sentence. You'll save $300 if you drive 60,000 miles! WHAT A DEAL! All the while spending $7000 to save that $300.

Take down gas $.15, people drive more, price goes up, price continues to rise, infrastructure continues to degrade and I'll have to spend another $200 to change my tires b/c of broken sidewalls (which I just changed) thanks to the giant holes in the road.

[Mike Teezie]

They would be even worse if they didn't have this tax money.

This idea is ****ing awful. Basically, you'd save 15 cents per gallon for the first week. Then, more people here about the no tax on gas, and they're like, "Hey lets go driving because gas is cheaper!" So demand increases, but the supply doesn't. Prices go back up, and then they're back where they started. On top of this, we lose the tax dollars and our roads and bridges get even ********.

edit: Here's my new idea: Charge gas taxes depending on what kind of car you drive. So if you drive a Hybrid, there's no tax. Small car like a Civic, 10 cents a gallon. If you're a ****tard with a Hummer, its 50 cents a gallon.

I freaking love this idea. Is this being discussed anywhere, and I just missed it? Civic and Hybrid should be in the same bracket, but that's just a nitpick.

This only problem would be the logistics of applying the tax at the pump, but certainly it could be figured out.

[emmawu]

If you look into it more deeply, you'll realize that your "nice summer" may turn out to be an "okay June", because by July prices will rise to erase the tax drop you just got because demand has increased. Then your fall will really suck because not only can't you walk because the weather sucks, but now you'll be paying even more for gas.

This whole idea does indeed stink of election year politicking. It has no basis in fact, but appeals to the average voter who, no offense, doesn't look past their next couple of months. It doesn't resolve the underlying issues of alternative fuel development and implementation, nor does it really even provide any significant benefit to any family.

But it sure sounds good. :rolleyes:

You're probably right and just being pissy right now. It's incredibly frightening to face a life of maybe permanent disability and it's really hard to scale down one's finances in such a short period of time because someone
didn't do the job right.

Forgive my foolishness. :(

[Cleverboy]

You're probably right and just being pissy right now. It's incredibly frightening to face a life of maybe permanent disability and it's really hard to scale down one's finances in such a short period of time because someone
didn't do the job right.

Forgive my foolishness. :( Your best bet, with all due respect, is not to face your challenges with your heart in your throat, puppetted around by a politician pandering for your vote in spite of major signs of snake oil.

With a clear head, the "tax holiday" by pretty much ALL economists worth their salt (a platoon of independent advisors), is a BAD IDEA. But, don't make the mistake of thinking "it's better than nothing". If it ends up favoring a sharper trend of heightening gas prices... we all lose. If all the candidates did more than beat one drum, you might notice that other options are being offered. This isn't "take the money and run". Obama is in favor of more tax relief in other ways. Check them out before declaring that the laws of supply and demand apply only some of the time.

~ CB

[solvs]

We get taxed on everything in this country as it is.
Europeans pay a lot more, but then they get more. We don't like taxes because we don't seem to get much. This won't help though. It's a few dollars for us, and a lot of money that should be being spent elsewhere. Sucks that it isn't, but that's a separate issue.

[emw]

Forgive my foolishness. :(I did not intend to make light of your situation - I am certain that things are not easy for you right now, and I hope you're able to get back on track soon enough. I can understand your desire to look to any way to improve the financial situation you're in right now; just trying to help point out that this isn't the solution you're looking for.

Best of luck.

[zioxide]

I freaking love this idea. Is this being discussed anywhere, and I just missed it? Civic and Hybrid should be in the same bracket, but that's just a nitpick.

This only problem would be the logistics of applying the tax at the pump, but certainly it could be figured out.

I don't know if it's being discussed anywhere.. I just made it up. I guess you could also do it by MPG. >35MPG: no tax. 25-35MPG: 10 cents, 15-25MPG: 20 cents, <15MPG: 30 cents.

[PlaceofDis]

I don't know if it's being discussed anywhere.. I just made it up. I guess you could also do it by MPG. >35MPG: no tax. 25-35MPG: 10 cents, 15-25MPG: 20 cents, <15MPG: 30 cents.

are we doing to go by the ratings that the car is given, or real world usage? and even that varies. hwy ≠ city driving, do you pick the higher or the lower.

problems abound. a flat tax is best, afterall it works similar to what you proposed above. those who don't get as much mpg end up paying more tax due to having to fill up more often. so in a way its already present.

[Thomas Veil]

I freaking love this idea. Is this being discussed anywhere, and I just missed it? Civic and Hybrid should be in the same bracket, but that's just a nitpick.

This only problem would be the logistics of applying the tax at the pump, but certainly it could be figured out.On the surface, I like the idea a lot myself. But it is problematical.

How would you apply this tax at the pump?

And then there's the issue of need. Should the couple who's got four little ones and are driving a minivan be penalized the same as someone else who's driving the same vehicle but is single and doesn't really need a vehicle that large? How would you apply the tax in that situation?

What about the poorest people, the ones who are lucky to be able to afford any car to get to work? If some minimum-wage kid or underemployed worker is lucky enough to get that same minivan as a hand-me-down from his dad, is it fair to punish him with a higher tax than a guy making $50,000 a year who can afford a nice new Prius? In this case you're actually taxing the poor person higher for being poor.

Like I said, on the surface the idea has merit, but there are a lot of bugs you'd have to work out.

In the meantime, here are a few political cartoons on the issue just to lighten up this thread:

[quagmire]

I freaking love this idea. Is this being discussed anywhere, and I just missed it? Civic and Hybrid should be in the same bracket, but that's just a nitpick.

This only problem would be the logistics of applying the tax at the pump, but certainly it could be figured out.

I don't like it. What for those who actually uses their SUV's for it's designed purpose? You'll be charging my mom for something that is a necessity. I would love to see a hybrid tow a horse trailer like our Suburban does.

[zioxide]

I don't like it. What for those who actually uses their SUV's for it's designed purpose? You'll be charging my mom for something that is a necessity. I would love to see a hybrid tow a horse trailer like our Suburban does.

Those people are definitely a minority, and they could get an exemption or something.

[MacNut]

I don't like it. What for those who actually uses their SUV's for it's designed purpose? You'll be charging my mom for something that is a necessity. I would love to see a hybrid tow a horse trailer like our Suburban does.Why not just ride the horse? I thought pickups were for towing.

[quagmire]

Why not just ride the horse? I thought pickups were for towing.

Pickups are the heavy duty towing vehicles( 10,500 lb. for the Silverado and Tundra, 11K lb. for the F-150), but can't hold 7 people and all their crap. :p The Suburban can tow 8000 lb. which is plenty for my moms horse trailer and haul the family around.

[Cleverboy]

Just to humor myself, would the big dig not have happened if the money wasn't there. That was maybe the biggest bunch of waste ever created in this country. If you're implying that a tax holiday (for 3 months) would somehow stop wasteful spending on roads and infrastructure, I think you're in la la land. That's the only implications to be gained by the connection you're making, and its a bogus implication. It sounds like you're concerned about money being spent on the RIGHT things and not the WRONG things, but you think simply taking money out of the system for 3 months would somehow be a "positive" thing.

No... it would simply take money away from the system. Where the missing money was going before will be a crap shoot. Clinton says she'll rub a magic lamp by proposing a "windfall" tax on the oil companies. McCain says he'll wave a magic wand and find the money by cutting unspecified programs. Economists say the EXTRA WORK involved in implementing this temporary freeze will ALSO be expensive. Are they going to somehow find that money too? I honestly can't see how anyone doesn't see how much this insults our intelligence.

Considering the bridge collapses we had in this country a short time ago, and the emergency round of inspections that happened... it sounds like pure STUPID to remove money from a system that needs more funding... but to your point, could benefit from additional oversight... and transparency (you know... like this (http://www.usaspending.gov/)). If oversight is the problem, let's work on oversight.

Magical solutions only work in movies and childhood dreams.

~ CB

[MacNut]

Lets talk about the bridge collapses, if we have gas tax dollars to pay for such things why did we let the bridges fall apart in the first place. I thought the gas tax is supposed to make sure the bridges are safe. So where is all that money going. We should not need emergency inspections, they should be common place. So I ask again where is the gas tax going.

[Cleverboy]

Lets talk about the bridge collapses, if we have gas tax dollars to pay for such things why did we let the bridges fall apart in the first place. I thought the gas tax is supposed to make sure the bridges are safe. So where is all that money going. You should use logic instead of emotion on this question.

Think about it.

Does it make more sense to remove money for infrastructure, because you do not believe it is being spent correctly, or should such needs be brought to the attention of representatives so that those projects get more attention in the future?

Logically, if you simply remove money... nothing changes, except that less money is available. Does this promise prioritization due to less resources? No, more likely people will simply point to the budgetary loss as a scapegoat and hundreds of thousands will be out of work (from published estimates). It's MUCH easier to pretend as if a bridge is "ok" for another year because money isn't there... than to fight for resources for structures that may or may not fail at some undefined time in the future.

If you're looking for improved results for our tax dollars, transparency and oversight go a long way towards fomenting accountability. We're not talking "spot inspections", we're talking #1.) No no-bid contracts #2.) Public disclosure/publication of infrastructure projects and costs over time. #3.) Checks and balances, not simply limited to spot inspections, but agreed policies on independent inspections and clear financial responsibility built into that system. If you read into the Big Dig dust-up, you'll note that the companies involved were watching over themselves. That stuff needs to end.

We should not need emergency inspections, they should be common place. Well, if you're one of those people that subscribe to the notion that the words "should be" will solve all of our problems as long as someone is simply around to say them, I'll just respectfully disagree. It may make you sleep more soundly at night, but if I said, "Our streets SHOULD BE safe." and didn't vote for representatives that promise more police patrols and voted out those that only offer lip-service about declining morality more money in my pocket... personally I'd have a hard time getting any rest. That's just reality.
So I ask again where is the gas tax going. No... you're not. Everything you're saying says that you're asking that the gas tax be repealed, because you don't believe the money is being used to your satisfaction or benefit (or that it could be).

That's not what this thread is about. A tax "holiday" is a gimmick. When the "holiday" is over, it will be a sharp slap in the face to consumers who've gotten used to the temporarily lowered price. I think it is delusion that anyone is arguing whether the tax should just go away.

That's a whole OTHER conversation.

~ CB

[MacNut]

What I am arguing is use the money where it should be, if you are gonna tax us up the wazoo for gas and say it is for road repair use it for that purpose. Don't use it for pet projects than say we need to tax you more because the roads are falling apart. Why should I be taxed for gas and not have that money used on roads.

In CT the lotto was going to pay for schools. Well all that money goes into the general fund and the schools suffer. Government likes to syphon money from it's intended purpose and fund their own needs. That is what needs to stop. I don't care if they tax my gas but I want it put to use where it was intended.

[hulugu]

What I am arguing is use the money where it should be, if you are gonna tax us up the wazoo for gas and say it is for road repair use it for that purpose. Don't use it for pet projects than say we need to tax you more because the roads are falling apart. Why should I be taxed for gas and not have that money used on roads.

In CT the lotto was going to pay for schools. Well all that money goes into the general fund and the schools suffer. Government likes to syphon money from it's intended purpose and fund their own needs. That is what needs to stop. I don't care if they tax my gas but I want it put to use where it was intended.

But, isn't that example a separate problem from the tax? The problem, it seems to me, is not the tax, but rather problems in getting funding to the correct places. This is a problem with local government, especially state governments which a federal gas-tax holiday would fail to solve either way.

If you're unhappy with where your tax dollars are going, it's time to start bothering your state and federal legislators.

[solvs]

Lets talk about the bridge collapses, if we have gas tax dollars to pay for such things why did we let the bridges fall apart in the first place.
Because the people telling you gov doesn't work go out of their way to prove it.

I don't care if they tax my gas but I want it put to use where it was intended.
That would be nice.

I don't know what to tell you.

[Cleverboy]

Economists Criticize Clinton, McCain Gas-Tax Plans
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aTzCmqCNyLho
More than 200 economists, including four Nobel prize winners, signed a letter rejecting proposals by presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and John McCain to offer a summertime gas-tax holiday.

Columbia University economist Joseph Stiglitz, former Congressional Budget Office Director Alice Rivlin and 2007 Nobel winner Roger Myerson are among those who signed the letter calling proposals to temporarily lift the tax a bad idea. Another is Richard Schmalensee of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who was member of President George H.W. Bush's Council of Economic Advisers.

The moratorium would mostly benefit oil companies while increasing the federal budget deficit and reducing funding for the government highway maintenance trust fund, the economists said.

``Suspending the federal tax on gasoline this summer is a bad idea, and we oppose it,'' the letter says. Economist Henry Aaron of the Brookings Institution is among those circulating the letter. Aaron said that while he supports Obama, the list includes Republicans and Clinton supporters.

~ CB

[aLoC]

Usually when the oil price gets too high they send some high ranking officials to the Middle East to ask them (in no uncertain terms) to increase production. I don't know why they can't do the same this time.

[solvs]

Usually when the oil price gets too high they send some high ranking officials to the Middle East to ask them (in no uncertain terms) to increase production. I don't know why they can't do the same this time.

We tried that. Didn't work. Bush also said his administration would eliminate the barriers to building new refineries. Still no refineries. Kinda the issue.

[solvs]

I love the response to this, against those who are saying what CB posted. When confronted with the fact that most economists disagree with doing this, Hillary's camp is actually doing the same type of thing McCain, and the GOP are. Dismissing the economists. :rolleyes:

Clinton Gas Tax Holiday: Hillary Attacks Economists (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/04/clinton-gas-tax-holiday-h_n_100025.html)
When asked to name a credible economist who backed her idea to use a windfall profit tax against oil companies to fund the suspension of a tax on gasoline, Clinton responded:

"I'm not going to put my lot in with economists"... Clinton added that the tax holiday would work "if we actually did it right."

She continued the line of attack, criticizing more generally "this mindset where elite opinion is always on the side of doing things that really disadvantage the vast majority of Americans."

And more here:

Clinton Camp Expands Strategic Umbrella Of Stupidity In Their Global War On Economists (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/06/clinton-camp-expands-stra_n_100389.html)

The best part being what Kristol said:

KRISTOL: The gas tax is I think an interesting issue. You know, the entire liberal establishment is against Senator Clinton and Senator McCain and their proposal to have a summer holiday on the gas tax. Clinton has taken on the issue. I sort of admire her for this. She has not backed up at all. She has challenged elite liberal economists. She has an ad up now in North Carolina and Indiana asking why Obama doesn't want to give consumers a little bit of a break. I actually think that she has a pretty good argument on this, that the entire establishment disagrees. If she could win taking on the entire conventional liberal establishment on an issue like this, with a populist middle-class appeal, I think that would be interesting and would say something about where the Democratic primary electorate is as opposed to where the elite opinion pages of the newspapers are.
When you're agreeing with Mr. Wrong About Everything Ever, you know something's wrong.