Comments (50)

The high price of gas has actually been good for me. I now walk to places when I would have driven before. I'm getting in shape, enjoying the weather...

Personally, I don't think the answer to the energy crisis lies in finding alternate forms of fuel unless that fuel is renewable, ex. if you could figure out a way to turn recyclables (like plastic bottles and rubber tires) into fuel. Of course, that would probably result in the emmission of dangerous hydrocarbons into the atmosphere so scratch that :-D

The most efficient answer would be a change in culture: 4 day work weeks, bike rides to work, extension of public transportation, development of more pedestrian friendly infrastructure in suburban communities...

I just got back from Republican country - farm and ranch people who support Chimpy and Cheney (even when Chimpy is trying to take away their land)

EVERYBODY out there drives a huge gas-hog pickup truck, even if they don't really need one. Either a big V-8 gas engine or a big diesel.

And diesel is $4.05 here. So it hurts them every fillup.

Food has also gone way up there. Everything ships by diesel so everything is going up.

A gas tax holiday is just another attempt by Chimpy to bribe us with our own money. Just like the Chimpy Checks. Take your money and shut up about the economy.

this so called Tax-Holiday will only amount to about $25-30 for the person who fills up their 15g tank once a week for 3 months.

I agree with Barack (though I am not voting for him) in that this is wasting our time and resource even discussing it.

Better to get rid of the Ethanol no? It reduces mileage by about 20% and is causing a large part of the food crisis!

Our culture and our politics work against us. We got carried away with our power and influence after World War II, as did the Soviets. The Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, no shooting necessary. The Soviet media tried mightily to conceal gaping cracks in the Soviet Empire. Our corporate controlled media try desperately to conceal the gaping cracks in our empire- they talk about flag pins, American idol, you name it. Our politicians are encouraged to promise something for nothing. Power corrupts and it has corrupted the US of A.

In the real world, you must save for the bad years to survive. That was behind the Mormon idea of every family storing food for hard times. Our country saves nothing, nada. We borrow from our Asian masters and entertain ourselves with fantasies of military dominance. We must save for the future- that means less driving, less gasoline consumption. Clinton and McCain are panderers like 90% of those in Congress. No we don't need to reduce gasoline taxes- if there is to be any change they should go up- look at the revenue that European governments get from their gasoline taxes. We could use that revenue. No subsidies for corn ethanol- Congress fiddles while the country disintegrates. Stop talking about Brittney Spears and tell us about our serious problems and our pandering politicians.

Hey, it's an election year. This is a time-honored tradition. Propose lower taxes. But explicitly or implicitly describe the cuts as pain-free; do NOT spell out any ways in which the cuts would reduce government services, raise the deficit, etc. John McCain, for example, can favor continuation of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan at a cost of some $10 billion plus a month, but can still advocate tax cuts, and not spell out any belt-tightening Americans would need to undergo to have both war and tax cuts at the same time. It WORKS.

VJ, don't you think that when gasoline is $10/gallon, even the cost of public transportation will skyrocket? With the high fuel costs, the public transport providers have to pass the cost on to someone, namely the passengers. The only meaningful solution to this energy crisis and pollution problem is the reduction of human population. But few of us are willingly to acknowledge the elephant in the room.

I have always maintained that the US gas price is not expensive enough to reflect reality, especially considering the non-renewable and non-recycable ending of crude. We US consumers have it lucky for decades because our strong-arming government (whether you like it or not) has been able to get the best bargains for the voters. But the world is changing, and the declining dollar reflects how oil is the real king. Think a little.... it is still cheaper than coffee.... and we are still having it cheaper than our European counterparts.

This is a joke. The gas tax is not the problem. The US energy policy is the problem. Reduce the tax on diesel (which will help out truckers and reduce some other costs) which will also force Americans to start buying diesel cars and trucks (something the Europeans have been doing for a long time) which get at least 25% better gas mileage than gasoline vehicles. The higher cost of fuel will make the US become more conservative, buy more fuel efficient vehicles, and reduce our use of oil until the next type of vehicle is available (electric, plugin hybrids, hydrogen, etc). Which will get us finally to reduce our use of oil. The rest of the world would follow suit.

And for the "let's drill for more crowd" when's the last time you saw a dinosaur? There is a finite amount of oil, we aren't making anymore.

Would you rather burn it out your tailpipe or have it used as plastic in your pacemaker, medical devices, electronics, replacing car parts, etc, etc, etc? Easy choice...

The Illinois experience with a temporary repeal is that the price of gas decreased about half of what it should have, given the discount. So we would look at a 9 cent discount, which for most consumers would be $5 a month, give or take.

Why can't reporters perform this analysis? Let people know how little this will actually affect them. Voters care less about what economists think, and should be informed that McCain's idea is trying to buy their votes on the cheap, VERY cheap. Obama is right to call him on it.

Not sure what it is like for others, but on my way to work I pass two gas stations. EVERY day the price goes up, sometimes a penny, sometimes more. There is no let up in sight on this price spiral. Even if they passed the full $.18 on to consumers, we would be back to rising prices in three weeks. Why bother? This is another knee jerk reaction to a problem that is too big for knee jerk solutions. We have already screwed up the world food supply so we can put some ethanol into our gas. Now we are willing to dip into the fund to repair our roads and bridges so we can make the oil companies a few more dollars. When will it end?

Raise the gas/carbon tax, please!
If the gas tax had been raised five cents a year from 1975 until now, gas would still be less expensive then the almost $4 a gallon some are paying. Not raising the gas tax since 1993 hasn't exactly helped protect the infrastructure, either.

Two ways to raise the tax, one just raise it a nickle or dime a year. Or, set the price of gas at say $5 or $6 a gallon (which we may reach by the end of the summer, anyway) and the tax fluctuates as the world price fluctuates. But people and businesses can plan, and it could help stablize the economy.

Take the extra tax and split it up into several pieces. New funds for infrastructure, mass transit (including subsidizing low or free rides on buses and trains), rebates to businesses and individuals in need, funding for new technologies, including hydrogen, solar, wind, tide, and stuff people haven't thought of yet, and some could even go to funding the deficit, social security, and medicare/cade.

Pay the oil companies and producers, or pay ourselves.

There was once an unwritten rule amongst the OPEC nations. It was "keep the price of oil low enough so people aren't forced to use something else". This was done primarily by moderating the gallons per day put on the market.

A substantial issue with the price today is the "risk" factor. Every time some backwards third world nation, even though it may only pump a few hundred thousands barrels a day into the world supply, goes into conflict, the price of oil jumps 5 dollars a barrel.

While I am certainly not happy with the increased energy costs, I do think it is long overdue and a means to an end. It will be eventually be over.

For decades, save for one quick issue with Iran and the energy crisis, the cost of oil has been kept low so as to not give anyone reason to invest in alternative technologies. OPEC nations still make hundreds of billions in easy profits, and they keep the world, and their largest customer (U.S.) happy. We Americans, as the worlds largest consumer of crude oil have fallen for that, hook line and sinker.

We are energy slaves to OPEC, and to big oil, who like any company in existence is looking to make as much profit as possible. I am not excusing the obscene profits on the backs of already taxed Americans, but they aren't doing anything we don't teach people to do in capitalisim 101 classes.

The worlds only remaining superpower are energy slaves to nations of the world that were backwards tribal bedouin factions not 70 years ago, that we've made into gleaming, modern and posh nations because of our addiction to their cheap oil. Well...it ain't cheap anymore.

The good part...

Well, this won't last forever. While the cause would certainly benefit from some aggressive energy policy from the Federal Government, something other than fiddling with the clocks and changing daylight savings time to keep the lights off longer, the cost of energy over the past 6 years has driven billions of dollars of private money into the fight. Money into hydrogen programs, fuel cell technologies for both car and home, affordable and useful electric and hybrid/plug car programs.

After hundreds of billions in losses over a few year period from 2001-2004, on building cars that got the same milage as cars did 20 years ago, American auto companies are finally delivering (more) efficient cars, and they are actually selling.

Without the Fed's help it is going to take atleast anothother decade to see any real reduction in oil consumption from these efforts. There are currently ~200 million fuel inefficient cars on the road today and it is going to take some time for the more efficent ones to work their way through the system. But all it takes is time. We just reached the 1 millionth hybrid on US roads earlier this year, all built marketed and sold when oil was but 60-90 a barrel. At 120 and up, that pace will quicken.

The price of oil would fall 25 dollars a barrel tomorrow morning if President Bush held a press conference and announced a 100 billion dollar (the funds to pay for one year in Iraq mind you) push into alternative energy programs to free ourselves from our reliance on oil, and that in 10 years every car/truck made in America through a combined fuel cell/hybrid/electric technologies, would have to get atleast 40 miles to the gallon (My diesel Passat gets ~35 mpg combined right now).

I can't wait until the day when the OPEC nations of the world revert back to their 4th world bedouin days because we simply don't need their oil anymore.

tokugawa wrote "Excuse me, but chaos is the best word to describe Iraq for the last five years:"

Couldn't agree more.

"The ONLY way to realistically stop the chaos is a complete U.S. military withdrawal."

Perhaps ultimately, but I believe that there certainly will be chaos in the years following the U.S. military withdrawal (whenever that happens).

"Right now, Obama has the best credibility to end the war, since he was opposed to it before it started."

He may be the "best shot" but for me, that's not saying much. Again, I know I'm cynical but despite all the promises being made, my feeling is that come next summer, we'll be told that "realities on the ground in Iraq" prevent a "precipitous U.S. withdrawal".

Republicans have no intention of pulling out. Democrats can't because they won't risk "looking weak".

Energy taxes should be made high enough to pay for all the externalities: Middle-East conflicts, environmental degradation, highway maintenance, etc. That will allow the market to correct itself. This would uncover the real competitive edge that green technologies have in not contributing as much to global conflict and pollution. The tax holiday idea is just stupid, and I'm a McCain supporter.

mdlaxer wrote: "Color me cynical, but my view on Iraq is that the place is going to slip into chaos right after we pull our military out of there."

Excuse me, but chaos is the best word to describe Iraq for the last five years:

1) 400,000 - 1,000,000 Iraqi civilians dead (notice how when the total U.S. military dead is announced, that the total Iraqi dead is always omitted),

2) 4,000,000 Iraqi refugees from their homes, and

3) Blackwater has a "license to kill" anything they think might be a threat.

The ONLY way to realistically stop the chaos is a complete U.S. military withdrawal. (Predication: this will not happen under a Republican president, since oil companies like high gas prices.) Right now, Obama has the best credibility to end the war, since he was opposed to it before it started.

Would American citizens (with their right to bear arms) not fight a foreign occupier until they withdrew?

And since this is a discussion of energy, there are huge undeveloped reserves of oil in Iraq which could be developed after the "chaos" ends, which would increase the supply of oil on the world market, and result in decreased oil prices much more than any temporary tax holiday.

Why the bloody hell none of the so-called "Leaders" are taking about improving the public transportation in all the Large/Medium/Small cities?

Even with a decent Bus/Rail system in DC, why do people want to drive to office everyday?

I'd be happy when the gas price reaches $10/gallon. Maybe then everyone will give Public Transport the first priority.

It looks like the Media companies including the WashPost, have succeffully being able to change the focus of the problem, instead of talking about 18 cent holiday,that went up just from thursday to monday,Comon poeple you are educated, we need to see What is causing this price of Barrel and gas, they keep seing before demande and supply, then after the dollar is going down, so today that the dollar strat gpoing up, GS said that is not going to hold the price is going to go up.
The price is going up because the Hedge Funds including your 401K are bidding it higher and higher is has nothing to do with demand and supply or the value of the dollars, we should regulat that not woory about sales tax.

The proceeds from the gas tax are the People's money. If lower prices are desired, the obscene, predatory profits of the oil industry need to be reduced. The US should nationalize its oil & gas industries, seizing the illegitimate profits being accrued by unscrupulous individuals (through the privatization of public property) and devoting them instead to research and development of alternative energy sources (solar, wind & tide, NOT corporate ethanol).

McCain & Clinton are playing the "bread and circuses" game, trying to appear magnanimous without revealing the true cost to the public. Similar to the tax rebate, this amounts to granting the peasants a few extra pennies today while the corporations gear up to take our houses and furniture tomorrow.

The prudent, responsible candidate would advise Americans to reduce their carbon fuel usage over the summer, rather than finding a way to burn as much as possible, as requested by the oil companies.

We need to be more critical of the short-term 'quick-fixes' being proposed. Even if you assume that the oil producers AND gas companies AND filling station owners resisted the temptation and reduced the cost of gas (and diesel) in concert with the gas tax holiday, what will happen in the Fall when the holiday is over? Imagine the screaming about the jump in fuel costs - everyone knows the suppliers won't be absorbing the re-instated federal taxes, so we'll see instantaneous jumps of 15-20 cents a gallon prices.
A also like the idea of a commuter fee holiday - but the issue is that mass transit costs are managed largely by local governments, so imposing a federally-mandated fee holiday would require a negotiation between Federal and local governments to cover the costs. This is certainly doable, but could the local governments afford to cover the costs until the Federal gvoernment reached an agreeable way to re-imburse those costs?

I now see that Eagle (1:36 AM) beat me to it; he saw the obvious idiocy (or dishonesty) of the McCain/Clinton proposal. Give him an A.

I now see that Eagle (1:36 AM) beat me to it; he saw the obvious idiocy (or dishonesty) of the McCain/Clinton proposal. Give him an A.

now we know which politicians have the nerve to oppose a politically attractive hoax. Just one. The tax holiday is a turkey. It depletes the road fund that funds construction that creates jobs. It would go to the wrong people. poor people who take the bus or metro to work don't get as much as those who clog our highways. the rich who drive their gas guzzlers, sports cars, limos, get more than those who bought hybrids or high mileage cars. the rich and poor alike get the same break. the revenue has to be made up somewhere. and lowering the cost is counterproductive to boot.

maybe just the diesel tax to help truckers. that makes at least some sense.

Want to lower gasoline prices and lessen dependency of foreign oil? Then we need to pressure congress to allow more domestic oil drilling.

There was a time about 20 years ago when we would actually drill for oil in places like Texas and Oklahoma. We are aware of many other oil deposits right here in our own country. Yet, we don't access them.

We continue to allow other countries to dictate price to us rather than produce our own.

Hillary has a big ad here in NC about how she will tax all the oil profits. Now, explain to me how that is going to do anything other than raise oil prices?

We need to start drilling here, now. It might not hurt either if we built a new refinery as well.

I live in Oregon and guess what? The local politician's are ALREADY talking about **raising** the county gas tax by the federal gas tax holiday amount in ordder to provide pay and benefit increases for county employees. At the state level, they are talking about doing the same thing for the benefit of state employees. Couple this, with our past experience, that businesses do not decrease the retail cost of products they sell qand I can see where this foolish idea would actually make an already intolerable situation even worse! Just imagine, new state and county (and the People's Republic Of Eugene is certain to get into the act, too) gas taxes, oil company's and local gas station "automatic" increases-windfall profits (whch never seem to go away) and the gas tax holiday ends adding that back on, too! Anyone who doesn't see this sort of thing happening all over the country is simply being delussional. It's a horrible idea.

First off we all know that global warming and anything to do with it is a scam being used to promote new taxes and legislation. Mother nature is doing her part to prove Al a lier by lowering earth temperature on her own. Second there is plenty of oil to take care of the supply side we just need to stop listening to the lies from the environmentalist and start drilling in ANWR and in the gulf. We are now paying the high price of listening to environmentalist with higher cost at the pump and the grocery store. Yes the tax break is small and temporary but any little bit will help the consumer. After all they are the first priority.

Obama:
"You don't know that the oil companies are going to pass the savings on to the consumers, or if you'll just see an increase in prices by the same amount that the gas tax goes down,"

We don't know? Of course we do. If the oil cos. can charge $3.91/gal (the national median price this morning) when they have to share $0.21 of that $3.91 with the gov't, why should they charge less if the gov't gives up its share? Does anyone -anyone but our idiotic politicians, that is - believe they will?

Nevertheless, Obama's comment is far more intelligent than Clinton's or McCain's. So give him a C, they get F's.

I have some more ideas that any "populist" politician can use (heh heh):

1. Elimination of all highway tolls - this will cause less fuel consumption due to less driving time. Will also give people more time with their families instead of waiting at toll booths.

2. Elimination of speed limits - again, less time on the road, more time with our families. (I wonder what we should do about stop signs?)

I'm sure there are others, but by now you must all be thinking "How will we pay for the lost government revenue?"

Simple, my friends. We can either tax the rich, tax the oil companies, or eliminate all government transportation expenses.

Yeah, let's keep an eye on those TV commercials and see who supports "the people"!!!

Stuart: (The site wouldn't let me answer you right away). You asked "maybe we can borrow $1 bil a week from the Iraq occupation to fix infrastructure in the USA."

And: "But if we can find $2-$3 bil/week to subsidize oil companies in Iraq, we can certainly spend a few billion building a modern transportation system in our own country."

Is $2-3 bil/week what the "War" in Iraq is costing? Or is this a seperate, specific subsidy you are refering to?

Color me cynical, but my view on Iraq is that the place is going to slip into chaos right after we pull our military out of there. Whether that pull out ocurrs next week, next year, in 10 years, or even in 100 years.

So I agree that we could save a lot of money and lives if we pull out of Iraq. And theoretically we could use that money to pay for our infrastructure. Just don't see any of the three front runners pulling us out of Iraq any time soon.

Oh, and remember that money doesn't really exist. It's just "credit" that our grand children will be stuck with paying.

What about hydrogen-cell fuel car technology? GM already has working prototypes that they say would be ready for mass production by 2011. The output from the tailpipe is literally, water.

I suspect that the oil companies probably see the handwriting on the wall and that this is the wave of the future. So, before they are federally mandated to support/fund this technology, they are going to get all the profits that they can out of the current system.

Additionally, to convert the current gas station/gas pump delivery system infrastructure to deliver hydrogen-cell fuel is going to take billions of dollars and years to implement.

EAC: Exactly - I like how people talk around this issue. The problem is our currency devaluation. Oil prices are not rising by the same amount globally. Further the suppliers have stated multiple times that production could be raised but isnt because there is not shortage. We have a refinery shortage here that is propped up by the oil companies to keep prices high. But more than anything the problem is that the currency is hurting AND people have the option of diverting investments via NYMEX to oil futures.

Why are we using vital commodities as investment tools?

What about hydrogen-cell fuel cars? GM already has working protypes that they are marketing as the cars of the future. The output from the tailpipe is literally water. They are saying that the cars can be ready for mass production by 2011.

I suspect that the oil companies can see the handwriting on the wall and are trying to maximize their profits before they are federally mandated to support hydrogen-cell technology.

Additionally, the in order to use the cars on a national scale, the existing gas station/gas pump delivery system will have to be converted to deliver hydrogen-cell fuel. This conversion is going to take trillions of dollars and years to implement nationally.

If the US suspended federal fuels taxes, and I were leader of an oil exporting country, I would immediately raise prices so that fuel costs would remain the same in the US. Why not? People were willing to pay the price with the tax, so now I just get the money that Uncle used to get. Then think how unhappy everyone would be the administration (most likely the next one) finally has to resume the tax. Is Obama the only one who thinks an issue through to the next step?

Stuart: You asked "maybe we can borrow $1 bil a week from the Iraq occupation to fix infrastructure in the USA."

And: "But if we can find $2-$3 bil/week to subsidize oil companies in Iraq, we can certainly spend a few billion building a modern transportation system in our own country."

Is $2-3 bil/week what the "War" in Iraq is costing? Or is this a seperate, specific subsidy you are refering to?

Color me cynical, but my view on Iraq is that the place is going to slip into chaos right after we pull our military out of there. Whether that pull out ocurrs next week, next year, in 10 years, or even in 100 years.

So I agree that we could save a lot of money and lives if we pull out of Iraq. And theoretically we could use that money to pay for our infrastructure. Just don't see any of the three front runners pulling us out of Iraq any time soon.

Oh, and remember that money doesn't really exist. It's just "credit" that our grand children will be stuck with paying.

Even with gas prices this high, people still continue to spew massive amounts of pollution into the environment with their cars. I'd love to see gas prices at $6/gallon. Maybe then we'll finally see people change their wasteful ways.

I am for higher gas prices, even though I personally can't afford it. The only way to get people to stop wasting gas is to make it so expensive that they will voluntarily stop. I am for gas rationing. We need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and we need to do it now. Consumption is down 7%, I hear. We can reduce it even more.

The issue isn't how much a barrel of oil costs. That price is determined by a market that is mostly based on the value of the dollar. As the value of the dollar continues to decline, the price of oil continues to rise. That is why the price for a barrel of oil is nearing $120 and rising.

We don't have an oil supply shortage in this country whatsoever. In fact, we have plenty of oil. We have surpluses. The problem is we don't have the capacity to refine all of the oil we have in supply. If the politicians in WDC really wanted to find a solution, they would find a way to insist that oil company's build more refineries AND upgrade the ancient refineries that are currently producing to increase capacity and output.

I believe that the "windfall tax on oil companies" is just more pandering by our political elites.

I don't have any problem with oil companies making money - even insane profits.

What does bug me is that we'll implement this "windfall profit tax" this year, and next year, one of the three front-runners (as president) will be leading the charge to provide Oil Companies with 100's of millions of dollars in subsidies in order for them to conduct Research, Development and Exploration (for oil and alternative fuels). That's robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Let them make as much money as they want, but don't expect the taxpayers to pay for their R&D. That's all a part of the risks they take in this field of industry. No one is forcing them to remain in the energy business. If they don't want to take the risk, fine. SOMEONE else will and ulitmately take their market share.

MDLaxer: maybe we can borrow $1 bil a week from the Iraq occupation to fix infrastructure in the USA.

The USA with its collapsing bridges, pathetic jumble of roads and lack of train transportation looks more like third world South America than First World Japan or Europe. We have to do something about it, and yes, it will cost lots of money. But if we can find $2-$3 bil/week to subsidize oil companies in Iraq, we can certainly spend a few billion building a modern transportation system in our own country.

On April 25th, Barack Obama proposed a windfall tax on oil companies on oil sold for over $80 per barrel, to be used to assist low-income families in paying heating and cooling bills.

I am writing to inform you of this partly due to false and misleading statements appearing today (April 29th) in the New York Times which repeatedly implied that Obama was against a windfall tax.

"Commuter Fare Holiday"? How does Metro (in DC) make up the lost revenue? I'm already hearing about the Metro wanting to increase fares because they are not currently high enough to meet operating expenses.

If we do adopt a Fare Holiday, and people drive less and use Metro for free, then there would be a lot less gas sold, which means you wouldn't get much revenue by increasing the taxes on gas.

Increase income taxes? Increase Property taxes? Or maybe we can borrow the money from the Social Security Trust Fund.

Ted,

Unfortunately solar powered cars are a long way from being manufactured on a large-scale basis and affordable to the general public.

Ethanol has resulted in the increase in food prices and you take more energy to convert corn to usable fuel than what you actually get from it.

So until you can mass produce cars that rely on solar power, we are going to continue to depend on oil for those needs.

We can cut elsewhere by building more enviromentally friendly houses, office buildings etc, but we will still depend on oil, epsecially for transporation (when is the new bigger HUMMER coming out?).

That leads to points 2 and 3.

The US is the worlds largest consumer of oil. Even other nations send their oil to the US because they do not have the refinery capacity to refine it all. There is a need for more refinieries in the country to be able to meet the market demand.

If you do not want to depend on foreign governments for oil, then you have to search for more of your own, which leads you to having to open new areas for oil exploration. If you dont not want to do that, then Canada (25%) and Mexico (15%) both friendly countries supply a large portion of the daily oil needs to the US market.

You can say whatever you want about the Saudi's, but they are probably more reliable than, say, Venezuela for the oil needs of the country.

Points 2 and 3 are necessary in the short-term because point 1 is a long-term effort.

What McCain and Clinton are proposing is known by a very simple name: pandering.

Unfortunately, too many people are stupid enough to fall for it again (as always).

Jeff, raising the gas tax to pay for public transportation is a great idea. Let's raise it, say, 18.4 cents/gal and use the money as a dedicated revenue stream to fund commuter rail expansion.

Why on earth do "they have to do something"

Everybody knew this day was coming. Next year we'll probably hit $5. Nobody who isn't wasting gasoline is seriously hurt. If you're not commuting an excessive distance or driving a ridiculous vehicle, the increase just isn't that much.

If you are driving an excessive distance or driving a ridiculous vehicle, change your lifestyle. Three wars and a dying planet are enough subsidization to the automobile.

Anybody who thinks we're anywhere close to the top is going to be more miserable every year. This is permanent.

Stuart, that is a great idea. It would have to be funded, however. How about a gas tax hike to pay for it? Seems to me that we really haven't reached the point where high gas prices are changing driving habits. It's better to get to that point by increasing the taxes on gas and reaping the benefits for alternative transit options, than merely letting the market keep prices going upward until it reaches the same point, with the difference going into oil's profits.

Vic:

Proposal #1 is good... #2-4 are flawed.

#2 and 3 would provide no short-term benefit, while focusing long-term resources back on fossil fuels when we (as you rightly pointed out in #1) should be focusing on renewable energy sources. From an environmental standpoint, that's absolutely the wrong path. There's also no guarantee that once we have that oil stream that we would stop using foreign oil instead of just using more oil in total as our energy demands continue to grow.

#4 implies that we dont currently have strong ties with mexico and canada, and that saudi arabia is truly our friend.

----

I really like Stuart's idea about the "commuter fare holiday"? Does anyone see unintended consequences that would make that a bad idea? None are readily apparent to me.

They have to do something to help with the price of gasoline... Hillary has a short term way of doing it... But at least it will be some relief until they get a better idea how to do it... One thing for sure... Bush will not charge the oil Companies high taxes... Because it would cut into His profit... So until we get Hillary into office.. We will have to wait until they get taxeds!!!

1. More research into solar and wind energy to decrease consumption at homes and businesses.
2. Build more refineries.
3. Open up new areas for oil exploration.
4. Increase ties with friendly countries - aka, Canada, Mexico (silly Obama and Hillary with their anti-NAFTA rhetoric), Saudi Arabia.

How about a "commuter fare holiday" where bus and train fees are lifted for the month of August? Not only would commuters save money on gas, more people would use public transportation, getting thousands of cars off the road during the month of most frequent ozone alert days.

Now THAT is good public policy!