Rearranging Deck Chairs on the Titanic

   Let's see if we've got this straight:

   Senators McCain and Clinton have endorsed a "gas-tax holiday" for the 2008 peak summer driving season.  If the proposal is enacted, the government will forgive and forgo collecting the 18.4 cent federal tax that is added to each gallon we pump. Senator Obama, who has come out against said tax holiday, has been widely trashed for his opposition. 

   Let's do a little math: 

   My 2003 Toyota Solara, which has four cylinders and a manual five-speed transmission, gets about 33 highway and 28 city miles to the gallon.  The tank holds just a shade over 15 gallons, which means I get about 450 miles per tank. I religiously fill the old girl up once a week.  At 18.4 cents per gallon, I am putting $2.76 into Uncle Sam's coffers each time I fill up.  Multiply that for, say eight weeks of "peak summer driving," and I will save precisely $22.08 in federal tax.  Factor in Annie's Toyota four cylinder Highlander, which has a slightly larger tank and gets about about 4 miles per gallon less, and we save a whopping $45.00 over this eight-week period. 

   Now, add to this the $1,200.00 rebate we're going to be receiving in the next couple of weeks, and we'll have just about enough to fly out to California and visit Alice, Riki & Bob, Mitzi &  Matt, Leon & Ximena, Leanna, Alan and the gang.  Car rental will of course be extra. 

    Call me crazy, but I'm with Senator Obama on this one; I think the gas tax holiday is a ridiculous idea whose time has come . . . to be expunged from  political dialog.  Far from being any kind of quick-fix for the nation's dolorous economic woes, it is yet another misguided, ill-conceived attempt to curry favor with voters by convincing us that there is such a thing as a free lunch. 

   WRONG!

   Last time I looked, if you want bagel 'n lox with a side of cole slaw and an iced tea, you'd better be prepared to pay. 

   Yes, I certainly understand that those who  fill-'er-up up more than once a week, along with those who make their living driving the nation's highways -- especially truckers -- will be saving quite a bit more than Annie and me.  But what is missing from the equation are a couple of sobering facts:

• For every tax dollar that is forgiven, another indebted dollar gets swallowed up by the bankers of Beijing.  This is yet another case of puffing a putative short-term "gain" at the expense of a very real long-term  calamity.
• If we assume that tax-forgiveness will permit folks to add even one additional fill-up during the eight week period, that will put more money into Saudi coffers.
• Oil company profits continue setting records [Exxon Mobil, weeping  like Bessie Smith, just announced that it earned $10.9 billion in the first quarter of 2008.]

   Some have suggested that if McCain, Clinton et al are so hellbent on enacting this gas tax holiday, they ought to at least figure out where the offset money is going to come from.  How's about let's tax excess oil company profits?  Yeah right.  So long as this -- or any other -- oil-besotted administration reigns, there's about as much chance of that happening as my waking up tomorrow, looking in the mirror, and discovering I've become a five-foot redhead.

   In a hastily called press conference the other day, President Bush addressed soaring gas prices and what we can do about it.  So what was his prescription? Drilling in the Alaska Natural Wildlife Reserve [ANWAR], building new oil refining plants, and taking another long hard look at both coal and "nukular" energy.  All of these are -- or ideally should be -- nonstarters.  The proposal to open up ANWAR to drilling is most monstrous of all.  For not only would it irreparably damage much of what the Good Lord created [Something I am sure no Bible-thumping pol would ever want to do!], it would take more than a decade to be up and running.  And, to add insult to injury, even if the president's prediction of "one million barrels a day" is correct, it would likely lower gas prices by no more than a penny a gallon. 

   Of course what's going on here is nothing more, nothing less, than the 2008 version of "rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic;" changing light bulbs while the whole house is on fire.  No one is addressing alternate sources of energy.  No one has the words "wind," "solar" or "geothermal" in their vocabulary. No one is sounding an alarm or issuing a challenge.

   The creation and development of renewable sources of energy is both essential and makes good sense from many different perspectives:

• It is the moral thing to do: All people of faith -- regardless of whether one pays obeisance to God, Allah, Vishnu, Buddha or Mother Nature -- agree that we have been placed here to be stewards of the earth.  To act otherwise, to blithely denude the good earth of its riches, is to churlishly hurl the works of creation back in the face of the divine.
• It makes good economic sense: The creation, manufacture and sales of alternate renewable energy devices can and will create thousands of new businesses and millions of new jobs.  It can have the added bonus of taking an overwhelming economic weapon out of the hands of some of the most corrupt, inhumane regimes on earth.
• These epochal changes are not only essential, they are energizing: It has been close to a half-century since JFK issued what many deem to be the last significant challenge to the American people.  In challenging us to "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country," JFK energized an entire nation.

   I don't know about you, but if a leader were to, say, issue a "10-Point Program to Create an Energy-Independent America;" have the political skill and courage to get Congress to go along with him or her, and then tell the big oil companies to either get with the program or suffer the consequences, I would feel more focused, more energized, more optimistic about the future, than at any time in my life.  For that leader would, in essence, be instilling within us the belief and understanding that we are a significant part of the solution.  Today, all we hear is "there may be a slight problem; trust us to take care of it."

   So far as the Stone household is concerned, the government can take our $45.00 in gas tax savings and apply it as a credit to any company that is building solar panels, wind turbines or an automobile that runs on steam.  Meanwhile, we'll keep the $1,200 and make a visit to the folks back home.

      ©2008 Kurt F. Stone

       

Comments

[Doug]

I really think that the word 'solar' has the most potential here in the sunshine state. I am a bit shocked to see the number of politicians environmentally-challenged enough proposing "clean coal" technologies. Perhaps they forget that you have to carve vast artificial caverns in order to get coal. I can't imagine extra nuclear waste is a good idea either.

[ARW]

Along the lines of your blog: Congress could take the Metro to national airport instead of being driven. Bushie can take his vacation at Camp David instead of that weed ridden patch of Texas he calls a ranch, saving tons of fuel, feeding and lodging of staff members.
We all know he is a phony cowboy; enough already.
Congress could fly back every other weekend instead of every and reallocate that budget for energy research. Dirty energy produces pay into an educational fund that will pay for professorships and grad student stipends for fuel cell,. surface catalysts (find an alloy that is as good as platinum, probably a nickel allow. Promote vegetarianism, it is cheaper to grow soybeans and eat them for protein than to feed them to cattle. The body only cares that it gets the rate mix of amino acids., fermenation techniques to use wood chips and sawdust and agricural waste. Start with the BS coming from the weight house and turn that into methane and then make electricity with fuel cells (Kaiser anahiem has been using a truck size fuel cell unit to make elecritty from natural gas for over 15 years now, Time for the public to wake up.

[Warren Weinstein]

It's wonderful to read your rehash of articles and opinions that have been said many times in other sources of information . . . such as the NY Times.
How about crediting others with some of your "original" thoughts.

[Sam]

The suspension of the gas tax borders on the idiotic! It
would make a great deal more sense to add a 50 cent additional tax. Forget it!!

[David]

You're undoubtly correct in your math, but it does affect a great many more people than you or I who do little more than go to work (locally) and have small efficient cars. But for the person who lost his job and found work 50 miles away that he/she has to drive twice a day and for the trucker who travels the highways, these savings could be substantial. In addition, Hillary is advocating a excess profits tax on the oil companies. I don't know if McCain is too. You're probably right about this administration preventing this from happenong, but I would hate to be a Senator or a Congressman running for office this year if I voted against it.For you it could be like pissing in the ocean. For someone else it could be a tidal wave. Another consideration would be for heating fuel oil in our northern states and for our seniors on social security and/or fixed incomes who have to cut back on some necessary expense just to fill his/her gas tank. Is a puzzlement!!!

[Ken]

Very well stated. What about mandating higher miles per gallon vehicles. Does everyone need a truck to drive to Publix?