AUSTIN, Texas -- Man bites dog! Or, how special interests accidentally
steered us toward good public policy. In a pleasant change from the norm, we
have a reversal of the usual dreary political story in which big donors and
special interests shaft the public: House Republicans Drop Call for Rollback
of Gasoline Tax.
Isn't that nice?
Leaving aside, as our elected leaders so often do, the wisdom of repealing
the 4.3-cent-a-gallon gasoline tax, lo, regard with wonder the politics of
the thing.
You may recall that this buffle-headed suggestion was made last week by
Gov. George W. Bush, backed by some Senate Republicans. Dubya, as we know,
has little interest in policy, but excellent political skills. And what
could sound better, as prices at the pump soar across the nation, than an
offer to cut 4.3 cents a gallon off the total? Great politics: Vote for that
guy, or you'll have to be Bill Gates to fill up the pickup, not to mention
those monster SUVs.
Even better, the R's get to call it "the Gore tax" because Veep Al Gore
cast the tie-breaking vote in the Senate back in '93 that raised the tax in
the first place. So here's Trent Lott urging, "Repeal the Gore tax," Dubya
holding the whole administration responsible and nobody of the R persuasion
even mentioning OPEC -- because what would OPEC have to do with it?
Alas for this lovely ploy, according to the wires, "An outcry from leading
Republicans, road builders and truckers has driven supporters of the repeal
into retreat."
Rep. Bud Schuster, the king of political pork as chairman of the
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee (that's your roads, bridges,
mass transit, airports and such), sent a letter to his colleagues reminding
them that repealing the tax would mean a $20.5 billion drop in highway money
over the next couple of years -- no new roads for your district, buddy.
Schuster predicted that a repeal would mean the loss of "420,000 high-paying
jobs in each of the years 2002 and 2003."
The New York Times went on to report, "If that were not chilling enough to
Republicans eager to maintain their tenuous control of the House this fall,
other party leaders voiced skepticism over the repeal's impact on
consumers."
"I don't know if the tax has any effect on fuel costs," said Rep. J.C.
Watts. "Supply and demand is driving price right now."
Actually, as policy, the repeal idea is even dumber than that. As economist
Paul Krugman points out, repeal wouldn't do a thing for prices at the
pump -- but it would mean a multibillion-dollar windfall for OPEC and U.S.
refiners.
What's a cartel to do if the U.S. cuts 4.3 cents off a gallon of gas? Raise
the price, of course, by about 4.3 cents a gallon. Gore, who does care about
policy, called it "a half-baked nonsolution" that would do little to cut
prices and leave the "highways in disrepair."
The R's left it up to Rep. Dick Armey to say: Oops, wrong move. "Let's not
get bogged down on only one dimension of the problem, that is in itself a
short-term dimension that offers scant relief," Armey said. "Let's look at
the larger long-term problem of U.S. dependency on foreign supplies, failed
diplomatic relationships with critical producing nations and our own
inability to fully develop our own domestic resource."
Yeah, let's not get bogged down.
The prospect of lowering the gas tax and letting the roads go to pot, or
potholes, is what set the road construction and trucking industries off, and
there you have some major contributors. What happy harmonic convergence for
us.
I have a modest suggestion: Before we drill in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge
(proven oil reserves -- that's what we can get at with existing technology
at existing prices -- have increased more than 50 percent since the oil
crisis of the '70s) or tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, we might
consider more effective long-term and short-term strategies.
Short-term, OPEC meets on March 27, and the Mexican and Saudi oil ministers
have indicated that the price may be dropped to $25 a barrel from the
current $30. Leaning on our friends is a time-honored way of dealing with
the cartel.
Long-term, one reason we haven't had much trouble with OPEC for a long time
is that fuel efficiency has also risen by more than 50 percent since the
'70s -- under pressure from the government, of course.
We all know that low gas prices encouraged people to buy the gas-guzzling
SUVs. Why not try cutting demand again?
During Texas droughts, we see bumper stickers urging, "Save water, shower
with a friend." Why not take a friend to work with you? We could also try
getting the Republicans in Congress to support the next step on standards to
improve fuel efficiency yet again. Or you could sell your SUV.
Molly Ivins is a columnist for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. To find out
more about Molly Ivins and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers
and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at
www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2000 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
