So I'm not Joe the Plumber, but like him I'm one of those self-employed and I drive a truck, one with a Hemi-engine, Detroit's thirsty brutes. I drive it prudently and have even gotten 23mpg on the highway with it (for the record: I'm not endorsing CHRYSLER). I sit here in the middle of the day, hoping that my next check for my next job comes in. It is the most dismal time and I brace myself for a rough year.
Like everyone else I delight in the lower prices for gas. I see it as a reprieve, an opportunity to reassess and get priorities straight. But I favor a higher tax on gas, not because I'm a masochist, but because we need to reshift our 'needs and wants'.
Several things in the energy policy went terribly wrong in this country.
President Bush today signed a bipartisan bill that transferred 8 billion dollars to the federal highway trust fund to avoid the bankruptcy of the fund caused by decreased collections. The fund was going broke because of declining collections caused by the recent spike in gas prices. This bailout (financed undoubtedly by additional borrowing from China et al) was necessary because state construction projects would have been disrupted with a resulting loss of over 300,000 jobs.
I am not sure how, or if, John McCain voted on this bill and I have seen no comments from his campaign on this subject. Just imagine what would have happened if John McCain had been in charge and his proposal for a summer federal gas tax holiday had been adopted. This is just further proof that John McCain just doesn't get it when it comes to the economy or economics.
I shared this thoughts with the Obama Rapid Response Team on the Gas Tax and published it in my own blog (http://ordinaryfaces.blogspot.com) earlier today.
I caught a glimpse of cnn's this week in politics where there was talk of the economic program that senators mccain and obama are proposing. There was a clip about senator mccain touting the idea of the gas tax holiday again
Well I just got done filling up my gas tank. It cost me about 75 bucks. Something that used to cost me about 50 six months ago. The fed gas tax is around 19 cents a gallon. So I would have saved a little over 3 dollars. I have to fill my tank about three times a month. So for the month it would be around 10 bucks a month and 120 bucks a year. For a family with two cars it will be around 240 bucks a year. There aint much you can do with 240 bucks. I would rather pay that to insure reasonable roads and safe bridges. Senator mccain talked about folks getting a break buying textbooks. He apparently does not know that an average textbook is around 100 easy unless you get creative
Statistics are just that......but it is the real stories that we need to get out there. This will be how we will insure senator obama gets the mandate he needs
cmp.2008.06.10ed.2008.06.10.02 (Concept Draft)
Every election I find myself baffled by the reaction of the current president of the United States of America along with the inaction of candidates who are currently serving in the senate or congress.
In every election, there are seemingly at least two candidates who represent the voices of the American people. In every case, these individuals promise to tackle the most signficant issues of that day. But, in every case, those issues that are considered relevant for today, are not actually and practically engaged until after an election or even years down the road.
But what about the current president? What prohibits a president from proposing the same solutions that the candidates are? If these solutions are really that important, why do we have to wait until the next president is elected? It seems that if the current president cared, they would take action immediately--especially in a state of perceived crises. Why does it always seem that during the last year of presidential office, the president never cares about any of the issues that the next candidates are trying to overcome?
For example, a gas tax holiday was proposed this election season by a candidate. Now, if the President of the United States cannot enact this now, what assurance is there that it could be enacted in the future? Furthermore, the candidate that proposed this "Gas Tax Holiday" is currently a senator and has the means to propose this legislation now, and without the help of the president. What gives?
Is it unreasonable to expect a candidate who promises certain changes to show efforts to make these changes now? Certainly running for the office of the President of the United States is not easy--on the contray, it takes extraordinary effort. So, why is it so difficult for a candidate to publish their proposed legislation beforehand? For some reason, it seems far less complex to bring legislation like this to congress than it is to run for president.
What if a candidate for the presidency, especially one already in office, presented their proposed bills to congress and to the senate before they were ever elected president? What kind of impact would this action have?
One, we would know that they were being faithful to the commitments that they have already made. Two, we would know that they were serious about the actions that they promise to take. Three, either through the rejection of these propositions, or the acceptance of them, an incredible dynamic emerges where that metaphorical "line" is drawn in the sand and we are allowed to see into the character of those who represent us in Washington.
But far be it for our president or our presidential nominees to take these issues to congress now. After all, as long as these issues are unresolved, then there are those who believe that these issues can be taken advantage of to secure for themselves a position in office. Truly, the test of selflessness would be to begin the process of change now, in a practical way--regardless of whether or not the presidency is ever attained. With the platform that a candidate has, it would seem reasonable that they would try to invoke as much change as they could. What happens to the aspirations and dreams of those voting for a candidate that never gets elected?
Obama is right that a gas-tax holiday is political pandering. But the issue's is a tough one.
Fortunately, there's a great solution. An old economics trick (known to old economists like myself) tells us we can tax the gas, give all the money back, help poor people and it will work to cut back on oil use.
This is not a trick or a joke. I'll explain more later, or you can read more on zFacts.com, my website.
Morning!
Well, West Virginia, the circus has arrived. Make sure you have plenty of flea powder. I hope it brings lot of money to the people in your state. My name is Liz Berry and I'm a democrat from Texas who blogs on the DNC. I am very active in my party here in Texas. For example I have served numerous times as an election judge here in Dallas county.
I support Barack Obama, and I've attached a letter for submission to your opinion section. I've also included my post for the day at the DNC blog.
Sincerely,
Liz(My name, address, telephone number here)
“Your paper has my permission to edit or use any part of this information."
What happens to Hillary's populist argument when she can't pass the Gas Tax Holiday in a Democratic Congress? How will she convince people that she can reach across the aisle and end gridlock when she can't even get her own party to rally behind her.
This will be the headline in November if people don't get behind Barack Obama. The Gas Tax promises Hillary made, but can't keep by any stretch of the imagination will end our hopes for an end to the Bush era. Hillary won Indiana by claiming she could give people a break on the gas tax - polls show that Rev Wright did not impact Obama much, if at all with white voters - his numbers remained steady, which says to me that once we have a nominee he won't have much trouble swaying white voters in the General once Hillary is no longer an option.
We need a Democrat in office and if a backroom deal takes the nomination away, one of the biggest wild cards no one is talking about for the general election is what will happen when Hillary's Gas Tax Stunt fails. McCain will say that even in a Democratic Congress and Senate Hillary did not keep her promise. He will say that it is even more proof that she is a politician that will say anything to get elected, but fail to deliver to the people that got her elected. McCain can simply blame the Democrats for a failure to pass the Gas Tax, saying it's further proof that Democrats don't care about the working class voter.
If Obama is the nominee he can simply show what happened in the past with Gas Tax Holidays. In the end they benefit Big Oil and Obama will use this as proof to the American people that McCain was pandering for votes. He can also say that with all of his experience McCain knew from the start who this "Holiday" would benefit and it will be more evidence that he is loyal to Big Business and Special Interests over all else. Over the past 8 years we have learned just how dangerous it is when Big Business essentially runs the government.
Even if you support Hillary or are undecided, tonights primaries have proven that she simply can't get the delegates to win. It's time to back the only viable candidate for the nomination before the Democratic Party self-destructs. If the Super Delegates have to decide this at the convention, we will have no time to come together to defeat McCain.
Hillary has to discount states or change rules to even make the argument that she can win the nomination. Obama has the math (any way you slice it), the money, the delegates, and the popular vote. Now Hillary is trying to change the number of delegates needed to win because she knows she can't reach the target currently set. It seems that if she can't win within the rules - change them again and again until she figures out a way to win.
So please, vote for the good of the American people and the Democratic Party. We can't win if the black community and voters under 40 stay home in November. We also need the Independents and Republicans that will vote for Obama but not Clinton. Many conservative voters will stay home rather than vote for McCain if Obama is the nominee, but the antipathy they have for the Clintons will cause them to come out en mass to defeat her if she somehow got the nomination.
Many Independents are upset with McCain for going so far to the right appease the extremist Jerry Fallwell/Pat Robertson contingent in the GOP. There are many that are sick of Bush and have left the GOP or gone a bit to the left because of a disasterous 8 years and the hold the extreme Christian Right now exerts on the party. Many have gone independent because of the war in Iraq and Obama has a much better shot of getting their votes than Hillary does. I have spoken to many of them when making phone calls for Senator Obama's campaign and I have changed quite a few minds and have swayed even more that were leaning towards Obama but still undecided to get behind him.
My final argument is that Hillary has not been "battle tested" as she claims. Obama has not stooped to Rovian tactics to get elected and McCain thus far has focused on Obama. In this election no one has not gone after her on any of her financial scandals. They have barely touched on her exaggeration of her foreign policy experience, neither has the main stream media. That will change drastically once this is a Democrat vs. Republican race instead of and intraparty struggle. If McCain and the GOP "Swiftboat" 527 organizations get to run against her in the General Election. They will also go after all of Bill Clintons pardons, Lincoln Bedroom "rentals," and Bill's Chinese business deals. This is going to get nasty, but Hillary has already dragged out anything she could get on Obama, and frankly all she can find is a couple of people he knows - nothing on the man himself.
Stephanie Marushia, Virginia Beach, VA
When asked if she could name a single economist who backs her call for a gas tax holiday this summer, HRC said "I'm not going to put my lot in with economists."
Robert Reich, a former Clinton Administration Labor Secretary, concluded on his blog that HRC's response to the question about the gas tax holiday gimmick is economically stupid (not really an economic term) and highly unlikely to become law anyway, given the fact that neither Hillary Clinton nor John McCain are president.
But the fact that HRC has gone on record that she doesn't trust economists certainly places her in a bind. At some point, a president usually finds some good news from economists to crow about.
That's hard to do if you've already told everyone that you don't trust them.
There are over 10 million motorcycle owners in this country that probably own at least 1 or 2 street legal motorcycles. Motorcycles, without having to drive them very conservatively, can achieve 50 mpg. Only a small minority of them use them for everyday commuting. Those that don't own gas guzzlers as well. If everybody that supports Barack Obama were to have some kind of Barack Obama flag flying on their motorcyle everywhere they go and rode their motorcycles everywhere until the election, just think what kind of message that would send. Of course alot of publicity would be needed. I am one of those white, middle aged blue collar workers that the MSM keeps saying doesn't support Obama. The stereotype of motorcycle riders is "white, blue collar, middle class". Anyway I think Barack needs just this kind of a message getting out. Any and all ideas are welcome.
Amazingly, no matter how many economists, editorials and even former Clinton advisors come out against this wondrously panderous gas tax holiday - there are those who are simply taking it at face value and saying, "So what? I don't trust all those "elitists" who don't understand me telling me about their long-term plans. Hillary is just trying to help us out a little."
Hey Indiana and North Carolina Democrats, do not fall for Hillary Clinton's gas tax "savings." It may save you a few bucks, but it will not help the economy, especially those construction workers who depend upon those taxes for summer construction jobs. And gas prices will continue to rise anyway as long as "politics as usual" is in charge in Washington - the people who continue to allow big oil companies to make huge profits on the backs of American consumers. Hillary Clinton represents "politics as usual." Her husband, Bill, was president last century, before 9/11, before climate change really became evident.
We haven't just entered a new era for American politics, but for the way we behave in the world arena. We are no longer the strong country we used to be because we have squandered our goodwill along with our resources. For the most part, we have engaged in negative activities like war and revenge rather than positive activities like helping people who are truly in need, including our own citizens who are working harder, making less, and getting nowhere. We need to get rid of the "fat cats" in Washington, the politicians who make promises that they don't intend to follow through with or have no real meaning, like gas tax relief for the summer.
This would buy one dinner out for an average family. It is similar to the stimulus checks we're receiving in the mail this month. They are so small in comparison to how much more they have increased our country's debt to probably China, who is not only rolling in the dough but buying large amounts of stock in our once American banks and corporations. Band-aids may heal a small wound, but they don't do much for gaping wounds like our present economy which has been fueled by fear, greed, an unnecessary war, and lies. Barack Obama tells the truth. Can you handle it? Then vote for him. If congress passes a gas tax relief for the summer, that money will be a past memory by the time he takes office and really gets to work for this country.
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. Full story here: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aTzCmqCNyLho&refer=home
I simply cannot believe the media sometimes. It is remarkable how they can slant information depending on what will give them the best benefit. Today, as I watch MSNBC, I would think I'd tuned in to the Hillary Channel. Just prior to this, it was owned by Rev. Wright. Today it's all about the 'gas tax' thing. The poll they showed said 70 % knew it was a 'gimmick' and then the talking head went on to say how so many people were in favor of the Clinton suggestion (and it is just that, because it ain't gonn' happen!) My god! How many times can you talk about the same stupid things. It's race about whether or not you want to change Washington and who can do that effectively. Their positions on almost every issue are virtually the same so it's all about who you like and think can do the job.
I doubt few of us actually think much change will occur. Washington is a very entrenched place with special interests locked in with money, big money. But it has been my hope that Mr. Obama could affect even a little bit of change, maybe a few less lobbyists, a bit more orientation to what they people of the USA feel, want and need.
When I listen to Hillary, I cannot believe her. She has gotten better at the game of campaigning, becoming what is needed in a given area. I don't think it's relevant that she was born in Scranton, lived in Illinois and Arkansas. Sometimes the best people to fight for the 'everyday' man is the super rich guy or woman. It is not where you came from, but what your philosophy is . . . what you believe is the right thing to do and whether or not you can do it.
We desperately need a paradigm shift in politics. I honestly feel Obama is the only one running this year who can do it or even be willing to approach it. Hillary is old politics, knows all the old tricks, knows how to fit into the old guard so if you wish to keep it the way it was, then she is the one to elect.
But all this is actually insane. Barack has won. There is no way for her to catch him in any way except in a Tanya Harding move. Would she be willing to do it? Yes, she is willing. As is her unscrupulous husband, the infamous 'slick willy'. What would it do to those of us with hope for real change? Guess, just guess.
Leonard Burman, a Brookings Institution economist interviewed by The Washington Post, calls the Hillary plan "utterly incoherent." Windfall taxes of the sort she proposes, he points out, reduce oil company income. What do oil companies do with all of this income? They typically use a good chunk of it to locate and develop new sources of oil. Grabbing profits, then, ultimately reduces oil supplies, which in turn raises prices, exacerbating the very problem panderers like Clinton and McCain claim to be addressing. (LINK)
Both Sen. John McCain and Sen. Hillary Clinton have embraced a gas tax holiday in a transparent attempt to pander to voters. Sen. Barack Obama opposes the idea. On this issue, only one presidential candidate has shown he believes Americans' votes can't be bought cheaply and that citizens have the sense to understand where the nation's interests lie. (LINK)
Campaigning in North Carolina Saturday, Hillary Clinton said her disagreement with Barack Obama on the viability of the "gas tax holiday" is "part of a larger difference between us." And that's true. Clinton will embrace anything and pander to anyone to get elected. (LINK)
Sen. John McCain's idea to give Americans a summer holiday from federal gas taxes is about as weighty as a Barbie Dream Car, yet he can't stop driving it into the ground. Neither can Sen. Hillary Clinton. The two presidential contenders can't resist the chance to pander to voters and, as a bonus, paint Sen. Barack Obama as an elitist. By doing so, they're missing an opportunity to show leadership on some major long-term challenges -- such as updating the nation's crowded roads and aging bridges...This is an election-year sop, not a plan for the future. Yet the millionaire senator and presumptive Republican nominee has stuck with it, using it as shorthand to call Obama -- who opposes the tax holiday -- out of touch with ordinary Americans. (LINK)
This is part of a conference call by Howard Wolfson, Senator Clinton's campaign communications director:
"That’s a critical distinction in this race between, in Senator Clinton, someone who understands the pain that middle class and working class families are feeling…and Senator Obama, somebody who just doesn’t seem to understand that middle class families are hurting, working class families are hurting and that they need relief," Clinton Communications Director Howard Wolfson said.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/04/obama-campaign-out-with-new-gas-tax-ad/
How are they planning to rally behind the candidate after the primaries are over? Yes, he doesn't understand the small people but we still support him?
Consider this Q&A:
Q: ... do you see it as a mistake for the Senate to proceed with a bill that would suspend the gas tax?
A: ... the problem I have with it, apart from what it might do to the Highway Trust Fund and the spending obligations that have already been incurred by the acts of Congress, the budgets, is that I'm not sure that the savings would be passed along to the consumers ...
Sounds like the person making the answers is opposed to suspending the gas tax for a number of reasons, including doubts that the consumers would see any savings. Is this person Barack Obama? No, it is President Bill Clinton, answering a question at a news conference in March 2000.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E07E0D7143CF933A05750C0A9669C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all
http://www.youtube.com/v/QloB5TS3bJU&hl=en"></param><param
May 6th...2 days and we vote here in Indiana. We need everyones help. Please share this with everyone in Indiana and No. Carolina and don't forget to email all the Super Delegates!
Thanks!
LuAnn Terre Haute...........................We Still Can..if we all work together!!
In his appearance on "Meet the Press" Obama is asked about his vote for a gas tax holiday when he was a state senator in Illinois. Obama says that he did vote for it, but when they went back 6 months later and looked at the results, they found that the price of gas went up to compensate and that consumers received no benefit at all. Tim asks "So you learned from a wrong vote" and Obama replies "I learned from a mistake" (emphasis his).
What I wish he had added is that Clinton is running on her experience, but what good is experience if you can't learn from it? Hillary's claims of experience include her time as First Lady, and her largest project there was her failed attempt to pass legislation for universal health insurance. If she didn't learn from what she did wrong then, is there any chance we will actually get universal health insurance under a new Clinton administration?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22425001/vp/24452556#24452556
