Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, June 06, 2008
Charles Krauthammer :: Townhall.com Columnist
The Power of Four Dollars
by Charles Krauthammer
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
What would you rather watch?

WASHINGTON -- So now we know: The price point is $4.

At $3 a gallon, Americans just grin and bear it, suck it up, and, while complaining profusely, keep driving like crazy. At $4, it is a world transformed. Americans become rational creatures. Mass transit ridership is at a 50-year high. Driving is down 4 percent. (Any U.S. decline is something close to a miracle.) Hybrids and compacts are flying off the lots. SUV sales are in free fall.

The wholesale flight from gas guzzlers is stunning in its swiftness, but utterly predictable. Everything has a price point. Remember that "love affair" with SUVs? Love, it seems, has its price too.

America's sudden change in car-buying habits makes suitable mockery of that absurd debate Congress put on last December on fuel efficiency standards. At stake was precisely what miles-per-gallon average would every car company's fleet have to meet by precisely what date.

It was one out-of-a-hat number (35 mpg) compounded by another (by 2020). It involved, as always, dozens of regulations, loopholes and throws at a dartboard. And we already knew from past history what the fleet average number does. When oil is cheap and everybody wants a gas guzzler, fuel efficiency standards force manufacturers to make cars that nobody wants to buy. When gas prices go through the roof, this agent of inefficiency becomes an utter redundancy.

At $4 a gallon, the fleet composition is changing spontaneously and overnight, not over the 13 years mandated by Congress. (Even Stalin had the modesty to restrict himself to five-year plans.) Just Tuesday, GM announced that it would shutter four SUV and truck plants, add a third shift to its compact and midsize sedan plants in Ohio and Michigan, and green light for 2010 the Chevy Volt, an electric hybrid.

Some things, like renal physiology, are difficult. Some things, like Arab-Israeli peace, are impossible. And some things are preternaturally simple. You want more fuel-efficient cars? Don't regulate. Don't mandate. Don't scold. Don't appeal to the better angels of our nature. Do one thing: Hike the cost of gas until you find the price point.

Unfortunately, instead of hiking the price ourselves by means of a gasoline tax that could be instantly refunded to the American people in the form of lower payroll taxes, we let the Saudis, Venezuelans, Russians and Iranians do the taxing for us -- and pocket the money that the tax would have recycled back to the American worker.

This is insanity. For 25 years and with utter futility (starting with "The Oil-Bust Panic," The New Republic, February 1983), I have been advocating the cure: a U.S. energy tax as a way to curtail consumption and keep the money at home. In this space in May 2004 (and again in November 2005), I called for "the government -- through a tax -- to establish a new floor for gasoline," by fully taxing any drop in price below a certain benchmark. The point was to suppress demand and to keep the savings (from any subsequent world price drop) at home in the U.S. Treasury rather than going abroad. At the time, oil was $41 a barrel. It is now $123.

But instead of doing the obvious -- tax the damn thing -- we go through spasms of destructive alternatives, such as efficiency standards, ethanol mandates, and now a crazy carbon cap-and-trade system the Senate is debating this week. These are infinitely complex mandates for inefficiency and invitations to corruption. But they have a singular virtue: They hide the cost to the American consumer.

Want to wean us off oil? Be open and honest. The British are paying $8 a gallon for petrol. Goldman Sachs is predicting we will be paying $6 by next year. Why have the extra $2 (above the current $4) go abroad? Have it go to the U.S. Treasury as a gasoline tax and be recycled back into lower payroll taxes.

Announce a schedule of gas tax hikes of 50 cents every six months for the next two years. And put a tax floor under $4 gasoline, so that as high gas prices transform the U.S. auto fleet, change driving habits, and thus hugely reduce U.S. demand -- and bring down world crude oil prices -- the American consumer and the American economy reap all of the benefit.

Herewith concludes my annual exercise in futility. By the time I advocate the tax floor again next year, you'll be paying for gas in bullion.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Charles Krauthammer is a 1987 Pulitzer Prize winner, 1984 National Magazine Award winner, and a columnist for The Washington Post since 1985.

Be the first to read Charles Krauthammer's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

The Power of Four Dollars
Why tax us? Bush missed a precious opportunity after 9/11 to remind us daily that we are at war by reducing the speed limit to 55 mph. This would have achieved a dramatic reduction in demand for oil, saved lives and required nearly all of us to make a small sacrifice.

Not Very Conservative
The power to tax is the power to destroy. You sound like a democrat by using tax law to change behavior.

Here's a simple story even a child can understand;

"A man and his wife had the good fortune to possess a goose which laid a golden egg every day. Lucky though they were, they soon began to think they were not getting rich fast enough, and, imagining the bird must be made of gold inside, they decided to kill it. Then, they thought, they could obtain the whole store of precious metal at once.but when they cut the goose open, they found it was like any other goose.

Those who want too much lose everything"

The democrats plan to increase taxes to fund their socialist agenda will destroy this country.

Price point on environmentalists
When gasoline exceeds $100 per gallon, we should allow oil drilling in the ice field portion of ANWR that was set aside for oil drilling. I flag as offensive Charles Krauthammer's entire argument for more taxes and more government. http://www.poorgrandchildren.com

Tax Floor
I know one floor you'd have to vacate if you proposed that plan as a congressman.

If four-bucks is what it takes to make them rational, I'm for at least five- or six- before November.

leap of faith??
I have no faith that a tax on gas (I am fine with that IF) would yield a similar decline in federal income tax. There is the dilema: feed the beast from a different bowl and hope we can replace the one it has been feeding from with a smaller one??
My faith in my governemnt does not extend that far.
Shocking Charles!!

Drill More!
I agree drilling more is the answer, however 85% of the coastal out of GOM is off limits set by the government. But, on the other hand Americans want to cry about salaries and profits of oil companies, indicating they should be penalized. Crazy! Incentives should be given to oil companies to drill more, as much as they can.

Americans need to practice "restraint" and refocus themselves. It is time to cut the apron strings from the government and quit relying on Washington to help them through everything.

Unbelievable!
Dr. K., I can't believe that you, a conservative, could write such a stupid article. Why on earth would you suggest that more taxes would solve anything? It would only increase the discomfort of Americans who have no choice but to drive and pay the fuel prices that are exorbitant already. Why wouldn't you condone more domestic production that the stupid enviornmentalists and democrats have stopped, instead of sounding like a liberal and suggesting more taxes? Have you lost your mind?

Tax on gas
Try raising the tax on gas and the howls and screams from Town Hall columns would have been deafening. NO TAXES on anything is the mantra of the conservatives. You'd be dead as a conservative politician to even suggest such a thing. Instead we we wait and enrich the Saudi's, the Russians, and the Venezuelan leaders, not the people of those countries as they never see any of the oil revenues.

But we should all breathe a relief that oil is running out and hiking the price. It will reduce more C02 emissions than any thing we could have done to try to convince people to drive less. Now don't you wish we had those electric cars that California had. Too bad the technology for the batteries, that lasted for 100 miles, for those cars was bought up by Chevron and they aren't about the start making them or sell it back to the car companies again.

Shockingly poor column by Krauthammer
Based on the premises that:

1. Americans should not be allowed to send a certain amount of dollars overseas in exchange for a certain product.

2. Americans should not be allowed to sell oil and gasoline below a price set by the Price Control Nannies.

3. Everyone else is doing it.

I was under the impression that Krauthammer favored freedom - freedom of commerce, of foreign trade, and from excessive and coercive taxation. I was clearly wrong.

First he mocked Congress for distorting the markets by attempting to impose stricter arbitrary fuel efficiency standards, then he proposed that Congress meddle in the oil and gasoline markets by imposing arbitrary price controls. The internal contradiction is so silly that I'd swear Loyal Democrat wrote this column.

This abomination of a column gets one star and some choice words hurled at my PC monitor.

I say get it up high enough
The people finally get tired of being robbed and abused and we see another rebellion against a corrupt government.
Course they are very sensitive as to how far to push things, and wise in how they can get by with it, just take it slowly towards total tyranny.
And people will keep suffering the outrage coming out of DC almost daily.

Hurts the poor
The Krauthammer Tax would disproportionately hurt the poor and middle class. Twice. First, lower income earners spend greater percentages of their incomes on oil and gasoline than higher income earners. Secondly, Krauthammer would take some of the new tax on the poor and give it to those making more money - the bottom 50% of earners pay no federal tax, so they wouldn't get any income tax savings to offset the gas tax. All the "refund" would go to the top 50% who pay all the income taxes.

Bush was right about one thing
Oil will pay for Iraq. It is just wont be Iraqi oil.
Print and spend inflation at its best. We are going to get owned by China and the credit will go to the Muslims.

Great job Neo Cons and you Bushmaster Messiah.

Hurts the poor
The Krauthammer Tax would disproportionately hurt the poor and middle class. Twice. First, lower income earners spend greater percentages of their incomes on oil and gasoline than higher income earners. Secondly, Krauthammer would take some of the new tax on the poor and give it to those making more money - the bottom 50% of earners pay no federal tax, so they wouldn't get any income tax savings to offset the gas tax. All the "refund" would go to the top 50% who pay all the income taxes.

MORE TAXES ??

Mr. Kraut Hammer, please check your links. You got lost on your way over to Daily Kos t.

Ratas y Ratones
I have my arms crossed in front of my face as i say this, but i agree with the thrust of Krauthammer's proposal. The high cost of gas, due to taxes, makes transportation costs a much lower part of doing businss through out Europe. People use mass transit, or live closer to work. A car is a luxury, and passenger miles per person are much lower than here. This does not lower, the quality of life, it raises it. The power to tax is the power to destroy. Some things SHOULD be taxed to the point of diminishing returns, and other taxes, like taxes on capital gains, which hamper business, should be lowered. Ooops. My sentences are getting longer. I'm going to have to watch it. :-D I realize there is a left-wing moonbat element in this type of thinking. All too often, raising any tax does not result in lowering a more onerous one. The poor taxpayer merely gets both.

Department of Redundancy Department
Like you, I felt in 1973 that we should increase the (already existing) tax on gasoline, but with the proviso the uptick be used to fund research into alternative energy sources. Well, the technology wasn't within reach then, but is now. Ethanol, BAH! What lunacy.

How entertaining to read the tax-averse screed that passes for thoughtful conversation in response to this article. Do Commentators actually believe that extant tax policies do not direct behavior now? That such is not the warp and woof of Congessional negotiations, or the recent tax rebate checks? Oxygen, please.

Central to this discussion, whether in Congress or at the 7-11, is the tension between the need for effective policy relating to markets and reflexive resistance to any contact between government and markets at all. The latter is not a policy option but naked denial.

Take heart: Your Annual Exercise in Futility struck oil (as it were) in the soil of one heart.

The resources are here.
Drilling in the Gulf Of Mexico. Drilling in Alaska. Conversion of coal to oil. Build Refineries. Nuclear Energy.
These are the things that would save our country. My gosh!!! Why do we rely on other countries? Why do we let radical environmentalism cripple our country? All the things I mentioned above would give jobs to Americans and supply us with an abundance of energy and bring down the prices at the pump.
This whole carbon emissions or "green" stuff is such a freakin' farce. 20 years from now we'll look back at this like we look back at pyramid power. STUPID!!!! Don't blame anyone for what they choose to drive. That's none of your business. It's their right. They are free to do as they will. Land of the FREE...REMEMBER???
It's time to roll up our collective sleeves and say enough is enough. Our country. Our resources. Self Reliance. This is what will make or break us as a Republic.
Who's with me? Let's do it!!!

MORE taxes?
Charles Charles Charles - I am surprised that one who claims to be a conservative would advocate another tax. What we need to do is to drill here - drill now - pat less, and do a US Marshall Plan for building Nuclear, building new refineries (Pres, Bush has agreat idea, used closed down military bases) and open up federal (that is OUR) land for immediate drilling and exploration. That will generate the revenue needed by the Feds without a new TAX. We conservatives are already unrepresented, the Republican Party is becoming more and more warmed over democrat party - hence - they got their butts kicked in 2006 and will get it kicked again this year. God help our Nation, the Republican Party surely is not.

Gas
Thomas Friedman. a liberal has been saying the exact same thing for 2 years and I said that makes complete sense. Of course Congress cannot grasp anything that is simple and makes perfect sense.NMor could they see the obvious if it hit them in the eye. They are all idiots!! Your idea to use the excess revenue to reduce the payroll tax is original and outstanding and not too late to be implmented! Maybe a bipartisan introduction by the 2 of you might be an idea!!

Mike
So your brilliant argument (as opposed to our mere "screeds") is that our gov't already tries to control our behavior with taxes, therefore it's OK to expand that intrusiveness.

Nice try with the straw man. Do you have any idea how many regulations currently apply to the oil and gasoline industries at every stage from exploration to the gas pump? The discussion is not about "reflexive resistance to any contact between government and markets at all," but resistance to greatly expanding the existing taxes on oil and gasoline.

Try a little honesty about your opponents arguments before you start with the self-congratulation.

The Power of Four Dollars
WHY OH WHY OH WHY does ANYBODY think the BLASTED, FOOL GOVERNMENT has to do a DAMNED THING? Get the hell out of the MANIPULATION business, PERIOD! Let market forces, supply-and-demand, you know, FREE ENTERPRISE be the "DRIVER" of it all. Let the oil companies DRILL/EXPLORE for new oil and just let the CHIPS fall where they MAY!!! Krauthammer's idea of taxing our way is as insane and replete with FRAUD/CORRUPTION potential as any other COCKAMAMIE U.S. idea/enactment. I sometimes think I'm living in a dream world of lunacy in virtually every ENDEAVOR the U.S. and the world is engaged in!!! Jim in Missouri

why not canada
i have yet to see anyone write about the price of oil and gas who even mentions canada. they are the number one supplier if oil to the united States. they suppy alomst one. half of all our oil imports. their price is exactly the same as the price charged by arab ciountrie and OPEC and venezuela. etc. why no mention of canada? their prime minister said last month that the canadian wells are operating at 80 per cent of capacity, which means that if they wanted to they could immediaely increse the suopply availabkle. why dont they do it? perhps its because majority stockholders in all but a few small oil companies in canada are basically americans and english. anybody smell something fishy figure this out. canada ships oil to the united states, it gets counted as an oil inmport in our stats. this oil is stored for a short while and then shipped back to canada to be refined. this counts as an oil export for the united states and an import for canada. refined oil in the form mostly of gasolene is then shipped back to the US for sale . . another imoprt this thime of refined oil. what is the deal> any guesses.. why the seeming conspiracy. i think this is basicaaly a pretty good article by krauthweirer (a rare event for me) but why doesnt he say something about our major supplier?, perhaps increasing their output, only OPEC and a couple of others.
seems wierd to me

The power of peak oil
Crude oil production peaked in 2005, and the gap has been made up with "unconventional" sources - ethanol, tar sands, biofuel conversion, etc.. That is why gas prices are high. Unconventional sources are expensive. The laws of supply and demand work, and if the government does nothing other than fund research, and gets out of the way, alternative energy will eventually take care of itself.

Lestat, payroll taxes
Just to be clear, "payroll taxes" refer to Social Security, not the federal income tax. The payroll tax is paid by every worker and because it is capped (for now), reducing it would disproportionally help the "working poor" and the middle class.

"Clum"

If Mr Kraut Hammer would get on the bandwagon to drill for our own oil, I would forgive him this 'clum' (I can't call it a column).

Would the price go down? Maybe not, at first, but at least, we would not be the victim of foreigners who hate us for our success, and non-islamic beliefs.

If we do not start building Nuclear Power plants, refineries, and extracting our OWN oil, we will, within the next few years, slide back to a 1900 style of life.

I will survive. Many will not. I lived off the land for years, while growing up.

We used nature's bounty. Our only utility was electricity. We cooked on a wood stove, and got our heat the same way.

Water was from a hand pump. A bath was in a #3 tub, behind the stove.

Hey, anybody want a recipe for fried Groundhog?
~~~

And, Savage99. Please take the map of Europe, and superimpose it on the map of the USA.

Do you now see why mass-transit works for them, and not for us?


Zarubbabel
I own a gas guzzling 4 wheel drive pickup and love it. But I am not a truck driving cowboy yahoo. I always pictured myself as more a truck driving cowboy google.
Your welcome.

Auto Sales
Unfortunately, U.S. carmakers haven't sold new cars in any kind of numbers for years...higher gas prices simply drive buyers to imports and will ultimately cost U.S. jobs as automakers struggle to build a car that Americans will actually buy...

The Energy Non Crisis (A must see)
Long but very informative...............................


Subject: The Energy Non Crisis (A must see)

This is a video of Lindsey Williams. It will answer all your questions! We always knew something was going on, but not exactly what. Apparently we are doomed and just playing out the final chapter. This video runs a little over an hour but it is worth it. Put it on and do something else so you can just listen to it. The one thing I hate more than anything else is being manipulated, but there is nothing we can do about it! I guess we can never say anything about the third world countries, because we are about to become one. This was done last year and he knew about the $4 to $5 dollar gas. Please take the time to listen.



Click on this link
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=334027469716701114 7


Taxing gasoline, then
returning it to consumers in the form of reduced payroll taxes? Has Mr. Krauthammer considered what impact this would have on retired seniors, on small fixed incomes, who are no longer subject to the payroll tax?

andrewpurdy Could you verify that point
I really liked your point about the production of oil worldwide peaked in 2005 and the shortfall in supply has been made up by alternatives since then. IS this true. I hadn't been aware of that but it makes sense. It puts some more perspective on the recent surge in the price and also in the scrambling to find alternatives.

If we paid more
for gas due to a gas tax, and got it back in less payroll taxes, isn't that a wash? How will that encourage us to use less gas? Because if we then conserved gas, we would get less of a break in payroll taxes, right? Somebody help me here.


shilohbus29
If gas were taxed, you would pay the tax "voluntarily." You might manage to take fewer trips. Your taxes would drop.

However, ain't no one gonna lower any other tax, so that part of the equation doesn't matter.

good idea with risks
It is dangerous to feed the federal monster, because it will only get bigger and stonger.

Funneling money via gas taxes into the federal gvt risks the expantion of their programs that destroy the faberic of the nation.

Krauthammer's has merrit... but there are also dangers.

Charles, You've Got To Be Kidding?
Host for morning show on Grainsville, Fl. WSKY.FM went balistic over your idea of upping Fed. Tax of gasoline.....that you would actually believe our gov., which already spends what it does not have, would return money to us. Callers-in as well as myself firmly believe that you have lost your mind. Absolutely lost your mind. Bob Rose (WSKY F.M. has touted your intelligence, before this bit of evidence that your train has jumped the tracts!

Fly in the ointment
Is anyone naive enough to think the politicians would give us one cent off payroll taxes regardless of how much they raised the gas tax. Politicians don't give, they only know how to take.

Spoken like a true Neocon
There is just one BIG problem with your solution. American law makers are much more addicted to money than the American consumer is to oil.

Those corrupt politicians would NEVER lower payroll taxes, especially now that Congress has the Dems in control. What they would do is use that money to bankroll more mandates that would increase the size of government and buy them more votes.

I don't know which is worse, being a slave to the Arhabs or being a slave to Washington. It's all the same.

Not deep thinking
I've got a ton of respect for Dr. K but don't think he's thought this issue through.

1) Where in the Constitution is the authorization for the government to involve itself in manipulating supply/demand on commdodities

2) Nothing good comes from the government siezing more power (high taxes). Does Dr. K honestly believe these funds would truly be rebated via payroll tax reductions? more likely spent on more vote buying schemes (giveaways to seleted special interests)

3) If the gov had added a $2 tax first, why would this mean our gas prices would be $4 now. Obviously, they'd be $6, because the market forces that drove us from $2 to $4 would have happened anyway.

4) Underlying factors such as the plunge in the value of the dollar and demand increases due to the developing third world (China/India) drive the price of oil

More oil exploration, less government power (lower taxes), nuclear energy, and a halt to monetary policy of "just print money" - these are the ways out of dutch

Gasoline
I think the US has come this far in a short period of time because we have had decent prices on energy. If something isn't done shortly we will have another depression. Look how bad things have gotton in a short period of time.

Mike
You, Krauthammer, and i, at least are on the same wavelength.

Crazy
I usually agree with the doc but not this time. Let the people who have brought us the tax code, social security, and a ban on drilling manage the price of gas. How about this, just tax the vehicles themselves?

Last week on Cavuto I saw a fla representative answer his question about drilling offshore with this "We can't allow offshore drilling as tourism is our #1 industry and we must protect it". She is so stupid that she does not realize that if I can't fill my tank or my stomach that a vaction to fla is not going to happen.

We don't need no stenkin gas tax.
What Mr. Karathammer is describing is a basic Economic principle that every freshman Economics student learns: Elasticity of Demand. The price of gas finally got so high that the rubber band of demand simply popped. This was a phenomenon of simple market economics. Let supply and demand take care of it. We don't need no stenkin gas tax. If people would leave the free market alone, everything would work like it should.

Ratas y Ratones
The bulk of mass transit is used to get workers from home to work. Consider what percent of the miles you put on your car is between cities. Very few people exceed 25%. But its not a big deal. Market forces can be evaded, but eventually they take over. Govt could maintain the purchase of gas guzzlers by making money spent on gas an income tax deduction. But govts rise and far by the totallity of their decisions. The USSR govt collapsed. China and India are altering govt philosophies long cherished by the rulers because it could be seen socialism and economic control from the top does not work. All govt control is not bad, just most of it.

Based upon this article...
...and many of the comments; it is now safe to conclude that our American republic is dead. Long live The Socialist States of America!

Here's a thought, Charles
Why don't we do this instead: 1) Shut down the futures trading in oil commodoties. 2) Start drilling for out own freaking oil.

More taxes for the government? Have you lost your mind? I thought everyone knew about how good the government is with managing the money they already extort from us. Or is the unimagineable debt the Washington sinkhole is increasing daily just a figment? Along with the pork barreling and the rape of the SS fund.

Power of $5
$3 was ho-hum
$4 is wakin people up
$5 will be pitckforks and torches marching on D.C. to demand that congresscritters tell the environuts to shut the h*ll up and DRILL DRILL DRILL....I hope
Dr. K has gone off the deep end.
Soniq has it exactly right, and I would add that everything that politicians get involved with turns into a boondoggle. Can't wait for that "free" universal healthcare.

Huh?
mr Kraut Hammer.

Sadly. i used to think you had intelligence.

Sorry.

No more.

What a sad case.

I Prey fer yul...

Damn. A man with a brain.
That's why we have a market system. My 22 year old son drives a 25 year old Cadillac my dad left him. He rarely works. The other day he needed to go over to a friends house. He grabbed his brothers bike. Get it?

Neocon = Left-Wing Taxer + Endless War
The neocons really should be a third party -- but they'd only have a few hundred members.

Big-Government

Green

Tax tax tax

Spend spend spend

War war war

Taxes
Taxes can be a good thing if they are in the hands of wise agents which Washington is NOT. Taxes collected by Washington and then returned to the people, right. Good in theory, but Washington never gives back that which it takes (and if you think these recent "economic stimulus" checks will not be returned to Washington in some way, well..."naive" is too simple a word for you); what Washington giveth with one hand, it taketh with the other.
Having said these things, I'd endorse Krauthammer's scheme if there was some way to guarantee that these tax funds would go only toward retiring the Federal government's debt to the Social Security Trust Fund and an absolute legal wall be constructed to prevent the use of the Trust's funds for anything other than free market investment and the payment of its obligations. The tax would hit those already retired and retiring, but the use of gas at the pump for this segment of the population is mostly discretionary.

Volunteer
Mr. Krauthammer. I already don't like the way the federal government manipulates this populace through the tax system.
So, you propose yet another tax. Thanks! If you want to give more money to the feds, cut 'em a check. You are free to do so, they'll gladly take the money. Put Department of the Treasury on the pay to the order of line.

I want them to leave me the HELL alone.
They already confiscate too much money from us.

Between energy inaction and money giveaways, the federal government continues to ensure that we remain slaves to the rest of the world.

Chicaree, oil is not running out. If you want to buy an electric car, go ahead. If you want to buy one of those tiny cars that get high mileage, go ahead. They are dangerous, and I don't want one. Would you have the government force me to live the way you want?

Asleep at the wheel?
Charles -- too many of my liberal friends & some conservatives have been asleep at the wheel. For those folks -- YOU'RE BEING SCREWED AND ARE TOO STUPID TO SEE IT! Taxing us, by any other name, is exactly what our ultra "Nanny State" liberals have been doing for a long time -- just painting it a different color so you won't notice the taste when it actually arrives. And now cap-n-trade? Maybe y'all should study up a bit unless, of course, you have several hundred to several thousand more $$$ to spend on damaging taxes. Sure am glad I wised up and started investigating. When things sound too good to be true, there is usually a rat. When something starts going wrong and fingers atart pointing, the the pointer is usually that darn rat. When you're made to feel somehow responsible for XYZ, you can bet that rat has had babies and is eating away at you in your sleep. Time to rise and shine.

Point of Order
This is not the Socialist States of America. It is the Fascist States of America. Fascists have no problem allowing the illusion of private ownership of businesses and other property so long as the government controls all major policies and procedures. Since the revival of fascism, many of our industry groups are in deep trouble. For examples, energy and health care.

More taxes and more controls will not solve the problem of too many taxes and controls. Obambi Krauthammer's article is dangerously wrong. http://www.poorgrandchildren.com

You savage !


Dear sir, although I agree with many of your ideas, I totally disagee with this one !

I live 20 miles away from my place of work. I chose this, because I DO NOT WANT to live in a Ghetto. I would like to choose my neighbors, rather than they, choosing me. I AM NOT A RACIST, NOR A BIGOT !

If I lived in a City, I would be forced to comply with THEIR standards.

OK, That sux! Now, I am starting to be concerned about you.

Do you live in a large city? Would you share the city name?

In Rural areas, mass transit is NOT an option !

I responded to you on another column... Take a map of Europe, Superimpose it on the USA, and even you, will see, MASS TRANSIT AIN"T THE answer!

Anyway, I know you have 'some' good ideas, let us continue to converse.



poorgrandchildren is right
Anyone who thinks of themselves as a property owner in this country is deluded.


Only one trouble with your plan
I agree with most of what you say over the years and this, on the surface, is not a bad idea. But, inasmuch as there is no Social Security 'lockbox', there would never be a 'refund' to the american taxpayer of these excessive taxes.

A legislator has never met revenue that he did not like. In Virginia, we have defeated two initiatives to increase gas and other taxes to pay exclusively for road construction, because we do NOT trust our representatives to do as they promise. (Read my lips...)

But... having said all of that, I would rather put windfall profit in our country than in the pockets of the Venezuelans, Russians, Norweigans, British, Nigerians, Arabs and speculators.

As usual, there are only answers, no really good ones. (I hope Obama realizes what he is in for. At least his hair won't go grey :)

More on fascism in the USA
Anyone is a possible fascist who uses the phrase, "There ought to be a law..." Krauthammer qualifies. http://www.poorgrandchildren.com

Apollo Speaks - Wow
Wow, no mention of 666, the number 19, Area 51 or the Book of Revelation. Impressive.

Gas tax argument is flawed
Taxing gasoline to reduce demand might have some merit if we could count on the Federal government to to do the right thing with the proceeds, for example plow the funds back into Social Security/Medicare. But sadly our politicians will almost certainly squander the money on more entitlements, especially given the ideologically corrupted state of the Republican party.

Federal Government Functions
Nowhere in the U.S. Constitution does it state that a function of the Federal Government is to legislate, or executive mandate, automobile emissions, gas milelage, or safety standards. Get the government out of the auto business, rescind the ethanol requirement, and eliminate all federal taxes on petroleum products.

Dear Mr. Krauthammer...
Your answer to the problem, "Why have the extra $2 (above the current $4) go abroad? Have it go to the U.S. Treasury as a gasoline tax and be recycled back into lower payroll taxes.", has another problem that would go right behind it. Government never gives back once it takes.

Cutting fuel consumption via taxes or "cap and trade" schemes will have terribly bad effects on all Americans, but mostly on the working poor. There is no mass transit in rural America and even if there was it wouldn't be feasible. What about the folks who cannot go out and pay $30K plus for a fuel efficient car? Maybe they can wait for 5 or 6 years and buy a used one, assuming it is still running. Most of the cars being made today are falling apart long before they are paid for and repairing them is cost prohibitive when they are out of warranty.

The rise in food prices today can be directly blamed on high fuel prices. Shipping costs are passed on to the consumer.

Charles K WHAT the *%%#@% ?
I normally agree with 99 % of what Charles K. says but he is a DC belt way SMALL WORLD man .
Charles K. is a Multi Millionaire who lives within 11 miles of the Washington Post and Fox news IN DC . Not only that he is picked up by a Limo so his gas taxes would be meaningless BUT not to AVERAGE AMERICANS .
WHAT ANY HIGH TAXERS DON'T MEANTION IS USING OUR OWN MORE THAN ABUNDANT OIL , COAL ,SHALE AND NATURAL GAS SUPPLIES UNTIL ''ALTERNATIVES ARE FOUND .BUYER BEWARE .

Wrong Charles
I usually agree with you Charles, but not this time. The answer is not having the government find a solution to this problem because the problem is the government. No tax will solve this problem, drilling will.

A REAL STINKER

.....Why would we want to wean ourselves off oil? ...a commodity that we have in abundance if the Green Goons and their cohorts in Congress would just let us just go get it? ...

.....I have a better idea ...instead of the Government using taxes to socially engineer behavior ...just get the h*ll out of our way ...free markets are self regulating .....COLOSSUS

A ban on drilling?
There's no ban on drilling in this country. Anyone who has recently braved the somewhat desolate federal lands of Wyoming, Colorado and Utah knows that drilling for oil and gas, as well as the ramping up of oil shale production, is booming.

Does that mean every square foot of land that might produce a barrel of oil should be degraded so that our gluttonous consumerism can be satisfied?
Conservatives seem to have forgotten that the root word is conserve.

There are over a thousand race tracks in this country, numerous travelling Monster Truck shows, numerous recreation areas where ATVs, boats, waverunners, etc. do nothing but drive around in circles for our amusement, and many campgrounds don't have a tent in sight, replaced by behemoth "recreation" vehicles that bring all the creature comforts of the city into environs that once were places set aside for the enjoyment and appreciation of nature in a somewhat undisturbed way.

Taxing is not the answer. We know what happens the government gets its hands on our money. But if you cheer when the winner of a NASCAR race does his celebratory doughnut circles dedicated to the worship of waste, then you are as big a part of the problem as the radical environmentalists who don't want any domestic drilling.

Charles
You have lost it. We need alternative fuel, and cars that will run on this fuel.

CHICKPEA

.....I could blow your hot air away with logic and facts but why bother? ...

.....It is feeding time ...your keepers are looking for you .....COLOSSUS

Drilling for Oil
For those of you who believe we should be drilling oil in our own country, Newt Ginrich has a petition out - AmericanSolutions.com. When will citizens stop complaining and simply take back our government from traitorous, inept politicans on both sides of the isle. We need to vote them all out and once again, go for term limits. This congress is pathetic, yet the ignornant in this country seem to be sleeping.

Good answers will take time
Krauthammer's proposal would create more incentive (above the already high price) to decrease our consumption of gasoline, but relief from high oil prices will not be realized until we approach energy independence AND a stable dollar. And as many here have commented, it is extremely unlikely that our 536 dwarfs in DC would legislate a fair reduction in other taxes to offset a higher gas tax. I don't think it is worth taking the risk.

We are probably left with high and volatile energy prices until we can significantly increase domestic energy production. Unfortunately, the 536 dwarfs and a large segment of our voters are blocking nearly all ways to do this. And the roadblocks will likely be even greater after the 08 elections with either Obama or McCain and a larger Democrat majority. The voters will have to stop electing dwarfs in order to solve this problem (or insist their current dwarfs grow up, which is not probable). This will take a long time and rise of leaders who have good answers and an ability to bring voters on board.

Price Point
The assumptions and conclusions of Mr. Krauthammer in the article are absurd. There is no benefit to the fact that people are forced by the enormous price of gasoline to purchase hybrid roller skates to meet their transportation needs. It only satisfies some emotional perceived necessity by radical environmentalists and plays to the increased control of government over our personal lives.

The notion that "taxing" gas to meet the same end is even more asinine. It only works if you are a radical environmentalist or a Congressional power freak. Pricing the people out of their desired lifestyle, to meet an objective the people refuse to accept, is called extortion and borders on dictatorship.

I once satirically suggested that members of Congress be embedded with their constituents to actually learn the language, culture and hardships of the people they represent. I now think that notion is closer to reality than satire.

I Can't Drive 55!
Why don't we pump our own again? Why are we so quick to allow other countries to tax us? Why should we allow our own country to tax us as much as you suggest? Get with the program. We have oil resources. Let us use them. The environmentalists can step aside along with the Bone Fish. In fact, you may step aside as well sir for not making mention of such an alternative. No. Why would you? $6.00/gallon please? I'm very interested in such a thing as long as the bill is sent to your house.

more tax on gasoline ?
I generally find the writings and ideas of Mr. K refreshing. However adding yet another tax is absurd it’s a WRONG IDEA! I find it obscene to read socialist ideas on Townhall.

Sure it makes sense to keep more money here, as opposed to overseas, however the error in Mr. K’s is that we will continue to buy oil as we presently do and just add increased income to the government bank while depleting our wallet. That is the reality of his plan.

The answer is a combination of practical common sense solutions.

Drill, Drill, and Drill some more in the USA where vast amounts of oil exist.

Nuclear power for our electric grid. ( France obtains 80% of its power via nukes)

Natural gas – we have enormous reserves

Include alternative energy platforms where feasible, continue to investigate renewable energy. All of this needs to be handled / accomplished in a logical manner, reasonable manner.

neocon Krauthammer "cons" conservatives
So now a radical tax hike is good for Americans.

According to Charles Krauthammer, anyway.

Not only that, but Charles thinks Americans are retards for wanting to drive suvs and big pickup trucks.

And they deserve their pain at the gas pump.

What a guy.

The truth is Krauthammer, and some of his brethren at "Faux News" have been conning your conservatives for years.

And you still lap up the neocon slop.

Hilarious.

Iraq was anything but a conservative venture.

Bush/neocon Iraq venture wreaked not only of a messianic, naive, leftist approach in thinking Islam and values undergirding democracy were compatible, but it was breathtakingly arrogant in its presumption that it knew how best to reorder ancient Muslim societies on proper governance.

Well, whether Krauthammer's arrogant prescription on weaning you Americans off of the types of vehicles he thinks you ought not drive(thru nanny-state govt confiscatory tax policy), or the grand delusion of establishing democracy in Iraq, you conservatives have been "conned".

Just keep slurping up the neocon slop.

Big Irish
I agree with you. Posters intent on returning to the 55mph speed limit are disconnected from reality. City driving, not highway, is the largest gas consumption concern. Moreover, 55 is no longer the "sweet spot" of speed vs efficiency on car engines. Those who disagree can simply drive 55 voluntarily.

Shrimp
That we are taxed is a given. How we are taxed is the essence of political discourse. To bring an entire interstate highway to a stop in order to collect a 50-cent tax is absurd when that tax could have been paid at a gas pump instead.

Cigarettes are worth no more than 50 cents a pack. Why do we tax them so heavily? No one cares about the cigarette tax except for smokers. Non smokers quietly like it because then they have to pay less tax.

The same here in this thread. Those who howl with umbrage most likely drive monster trucks and SUVs. Just like the fat guy who took all of the shrimp at a buffet, he will complain about the kitchen not cooking more while those around him look at his plate piled high with shrimp. As the monster truck cowboy complains at the pump, I wonder aloud if the law of supply and demand has anything to do with it. “Of course it does, Drill here. Drill now!”

The fat guy at the buffet and the monster truck cowboy at the pump both need to look in a mirror.

Wait until it's $5.00
Oh wait, it has already hit $4.99 for regular at several places here in Los Angeles County. It's very funny seeing ads still running on TV for the Escalades and other SUV's. Apparently, GM hasn't sent the memo to the marketing department.
ps. Jerabaub is absolutely correct. Wasn't a fringe benefit of the Iraqi war to secure favorable petroleum pricing and supplies? Another conjob by neo cons. Where's Barry Goldwater when you need him.

Dan
“Pricing the people out of their desired lifestyle, to meet an objective the people refuse to accept, is called extortion and borders on dictatorship.”

Is this how you feel about the cigarette tax also?

gas tax?
Wow, What planet could anyone be from to think the US government will do anything but squander a gas tax? Having said that, if the tax was used solely to derive alternative fuel sources and cars and trucks that could use it, it might not be a bad idea. The quicker we become independent from Arab and Venezuelan oil, the less likely they will cripple our economy as an act of war. Right now, no oil and our economy would cease to function! This is a dangerous position to be in!


Rata y Ratones
You Rodent!
Goodness you seem to be in a testy mood this morning. We are in agreement but talking about different things. I suspected this would happen if i supported a govt solution. don't you understand they are here to help? :-D

$10 dollar gas and mass transit as we know it are not the solution for high gas prices for you, nor for anyone in the short term. My take, and where i agree with Krauthammer is in a long term solution involving basic life-style decisions. You based a perfectly logical life style on a cost/benefit analysis. Major changes in costs have a nasty impact. There are places now where rural living is compatible with relatively cheap transit. When i was in DC, they opened a high speed train to Harpers Ferry. Property values along the route blew through the roof as a cheap 70 mile commute became feasible, taking very little more time than my miserable 12 miler. Being a rookie in commutes i didn't see it coming, or i would have bought in a more convenient location. If you were to change jobs now, $10 gas would be a big part of your decision, and you would arrange to use less gas by choosing a job/home location that made this possible. Everybody would, which is why i see this as a long term improvement. Continued

My apologies.

Sorry, Charles... I usually agree with you. But you really missed it on this one.

I do, however, share your outrage and your frustration bacause of the absolutely insane amounts of petro-dollars that are going overseas. But that's no reason to impose a gas tax, a tax that would indeed hurt some people really bad.

And besides, our honorable politicians being who they are... would just earmark another "bridge to nowhere".

No, my friend... market forces are already at work and making a difference. Simply because of affordability, driving is and will continue to slow. And at this price, and certainly at tomorrow's prices, the march towards alternative fuels has already begun to accelerate. And at some price in the future, the forces for domestic drilling will simply become too strong to hold back.

But tragically, and practically... there's not a whole lot that anyone can do at the pump today.

Everyone
seems to be coming down a little hard on Mr. Krauthammer. He is exactly right, however. I believe Charles believes in free markets as much as most of us. His point is simply that a gas tax is simple, direct, and effective while 40 years of CAFE standards, ethanol subsidies, and cap & trade schemes are far far worse manifestations of government. He is not arguing that we need more taxes but, simply making the point that, without it, congress will take much more and spend it less efficiently because it will be hidden. I agree with him. Bring the policies out in the open. Shine some light on them and let people know the true cost. Then, maybe they will rethink the policy.

The Power of four dollars
Krauthammer...You sound like another stupid beltway elitist a-hole "planner" with your tax proposals to control consumption and behavior. What about the tens of thousands of independent truckers being put out of business because of your $4 gas?? What about the tens of thousands of families with breadwinners that must commute back and forth to work and now unable to feed their children and make the mortgage payment because of your $4 gas. And what about the tens of thousands of single moms trying to work, feed their kids and pay the rent that can no longer do so because of the work of FARKIN geniuses like yourself who by one means or another have driven the price of gas to well over $4. Very few of these folks can solve their particular problem by running out and
purchasing a new economy car. What's your answer for them Krauthammer?? Let the kids starve? Just die? The answer is threefold: first, cancel all perks for elected officials on capitol hill and all senate/house retirees with taxpayer funded gas cards and leased vehicles. Let them provide their own transportation and fuel. Second, increase domestic fossil fuel production by every means available including every option heretofore denied us by the beltway elitists... exploration/drilling, new refineries. Third, implement immesdiate relief to the single moms, families and independent truckers most severely impacted by our mindless energy polisies. Fourth, round up and incarcerate all of those elitists responsible for the present dilemma.

More, more. We need more, more.
We, the land of monster trucks and SUVs, are burning energy the way a drunken sailor spends money. Now that we can’t afford that next scorpion bowl, the thought that we have money in the bank but can’t get at it because the banks are closed is just killing us.

Oil in the ground while people want me to drive something little? Why this is absurd!!! Who is that oil benefiting while I pay $6 a gallon?

Ahhh … Well maybe your great grand children will find use for it.

Tax As Incentive
What's wrong with using tax policy to shape behavior? We conservatives (albeit less than Libertarian) agree with tax write offs for capital expansion, depreciation, etc.. Why not use it for reducing demand if the receipts are "returned" in the form of lowered payroll tax for example? The biggest obstacle is no doubt a concept called "incumbants' need to be re-elected" from which all inertia originates.

Ratas y Ratones
I live in Brevard County Florida. Before i retired i had a 3 mile 6-7 minute commute, depending on how i hit the stoplight. Now i drive 17 miles to gainful employment, mostly on I-95. I do it for the fun and satisfaction, when it becomes work i will quit. My 8 year old little Honda still gets 36 mpg, but gas price is onerous since my wages are low.

Back to AGW, Cap and Trade, Arab extortion supporting terrorism, and $4 gas, and govt intervention. Short term, drill here, drill now and implement the best off the shelf shale oil recovery and gasfromcoal technology available. These last cost somewhere in the area of $70/bbl if i remember correctly. They have never been put in place because of the high initial investment which can be wiped out by the A-rabs by merely selling fo$65/bbl. Nevertheless, as a strategic/security move our govt should have put this floor under the cost of oil after the 73 debacle which proved 2 things. The A-rabs hate us and are perfectly willing to use oil as a weapon. Continued

A leap of faith
Even if I agreed with the proposed tax floor concept, it would require that I trust the Congress to use the new tax funds as promised. I am not ready to take that leap of faith.

Ratas y Ratones
More refineries, more storage, and nuclear power would also alleviate the situation. Long term, solar power has great potential. At the rate technology is advancing, the curve of solar power vs cost may well intersect the energy curve in a relatively few years. I've heard some smart people say it might be as quick as 8 or 10. What ever, it would be another rafter in the ceiling for the price of oil energy. If carbon footprint is a real problem, and i doubt it for now, solar power has none.

For the record, if all or most of these available and practical engineering moves are implemented, i do not favor govt intervention. Actually, it is govt intervention which is preventing these common sense moves. Failing to do something useful, i favor life style changes to get us out from under oil blackmail. Krauthammer discusses this possibility. I agree with his ideas. I do not agree they are ideal. Govt uses taxes to reward/punish behavior. Sometimes they get it right, as in mortgage deductions which tend to put people into owning their own homes. More often they get it wrong, as in welfare payments sent to an address. Worst of all, these rewards/punishments can be bought by lobbyists which leads to both bad govt and corruption. I am in favor of a simple 2 tier flat tax with few to no deductions, but that's another sto-ree, as the incomparable Louie used to say.

Reply to KinAZ
What's wrong with using tax policy to shape behavior?

The enumerated powers clause of the constitution (Article 1, Section 8) forbids it.

Over the years the rationalization process has been used to expand the function of the federal government well into many prohibited areas.

Essentially, public opinion (and apathy of the voters) have failed to prevent or even slow this process.

We need to educate the majority to the actual function of the constitution. I'd rephrase KinAz's question. Why do the politicians insinuate themselves into every nook and cranny of our lived? Answer - Because we let them.

So much crazy talk!
Governments are instituted among men to secure our natural rights.

The idea of using tax policy to modify behavior is completely un-American.

Charles has joined the ranks of the rankest people on earth by promoting such dumb and dangerous ideas.

Krauthammer a closet Dem!
Advocating for higher taxes is truly an "exercise in futility" for Krauthammer, the would-be enlightened despot. Is he secretly vying for the job of energy czar in the Obama Administration?

Kraut errs when making this reckless leap of faith: "Instead of hiking the price ourselves by means of a gasoline tax that could be instantly refunded to the American people in the form of lower payroll taxes...we let the Saudis pocket the money."

With deficit spending out of control, does any conservative seriously think that Washington would lower payroll taxes as the quid pro quo for raising the gas tax? It's a fools paradise to think that govt will return this money to the taxpayer instead of funding new programs.

As Nobel prize-winning economist Milton Friedman warned, new taxes have always created a new class of beneficiaries who lobby in perpetuity to preserve their entitlement.

It's obvious that Krauthammer--like every tax-and-spend do-gooder--thinks he's got a the most intelligient fiscal policy up his sleeve. Krauthammer should get in line at the DNC hiring office--they'll be looking for eggheads with creative schemes to pay for Obama's promises.



Want another Whiskey Rebellion?
A high tax on gas might be OK for the Krauthammers of the world who live in the East where distances are short and public transit is everywhere. The Whiskey Rebellion was started by a tax on whiskey, a tax that fell disproportionally on the (then) West. Does the West have to be the fall guy again?

Wait a minute Krauthammer
What is this big government solution called "more and higher taxes"?

How about less government, say, by allowing oil companies to drill off shore, out west, and in Alaska? How about more nuclear power and more refineries?

If prices are too high, then go out and buy a smaller car. Why does the government have to tell us to do that? If you have the bucks, then keep your SUV, how is it anyone else's business?

Another GOP elitist, big government idiot!

This country will be totally lost if we elect another elite from either party as President! Visit my website, JOEOLIVAFORPRESIDENT.ORG, and find a list of 15 candidates you can vote for.

Also, check out FireSociety.com, a totally independent grassroots site where you can start your own discussion thread or write your own article. You will also find a large group of very thoughtful and concerned fellow citizens. Check them out, thanks, Joe.

common sense ain't common
I'm old enough to have survived the original gasoline panic, in 1973, and am somewhat bemused at many of the comments above re: taxing gasoline to approx. $6 per gallon. Would that or sainted Senators were debating that this week rather than the insane cap'n'tax proposal before them. Our own candidate for canonization, Mr. Specter, has taken time from his vitally important investigation into steroid use in baseball, to remain utterly silent on this subject. Or mayber he is kmore concerned with how Roger Clemens gets all the babes and he doesn't. Either way, the Senate isn't going to do anything tough with this subject, especially after seeing the absolute chaos created by the federally mandated ethanol production standards. Why would ANYBODY want to bepresident in the next four years? We may never recover from the tragedies of the last 8 years.

Are you Crazy?
Charles K---you must have lost it? OIL Solutions via TAXING the people to get them to live a reduced life and be happy about it? I might remind you where that tax money will go..not to some Treasury account but to more Earmarks/Pork..same as Social Security has been tapped against the intent and will of the people. DRILL NOW AND NUCLER NOW are immediate actions..which both parties have stymied forever (yes our Republican owned Congress and the Exec Branch recently and squandered it. Please spend your time intellectualizing how we might move rapidly via Executive Emergency Order to increase supply (Gulf, Anwar, and Nuclear mandates)and not play the Jimmy Carter role to REDUCE YOUR STANDARD OF LIVING FOLKS..AND LIKE IT. That is BS and you know it.

Sedonaman
How is Oak Creek doing?

My recollection is that the whiskey Rebellion was the result of tax policies that fell on farmers who were making whiskey out of their corn crops because the lousy to non existent roads of the day made it more efficient to transort whiskey than the much higher weight of the corn in the whiskey. But this all took place in New England. Would that be "western" New England?

BO knows!
He knows we want our trucks as well as our guns, etc...
I've given up heating my home so I can pay for gas to get to work so I can pay my other bills! (Yes, it's summer, but it's cold up here in the Northwest corner!!)
Next on the list of luxuries I'll have to give up is Eating - it's jsut a habit - right? (no, I don't smoke or drink!)
Well, the government's now doing as George Harrison once sang: Let me tell you how it will be, there's one for you, nineteen for me - cause I'm the Tax Man!!

Horrible column
So now you want the government to tax us even more so you can get the results YOU think are good for us?

I think the talking head types spend too much time in New York or the Beltway, talking to people who are just as insulated from reality. Maybe they should spend some time slumming among the hoi polloi for a while.


Great comments
No trolls and no BS. A great thread. Good points abound, but though most are true, some are shallow to theoint of knee jerk.

It is perfectly true a new tax would be wasted. They waste the current taxes, it would be crazy to think anything else in the future. But taxes alter behavior for good, or bad, and i believe this tax would move energy use in a positive direction. This is philosophical speculation because as has been pointed out, such a tax would be so visible and unpopular it would never be implemented.

Those who oppose a gas tax just because it is another tax or because it is govt intervention are in shallow water. The govt intervened on Ruby Ridge. That was murder. The govt intervened and shot Dillinger. Probably a public benefit. Govt actions should be evaluated, not routinely opposed.

As for life-style changes, it looks obvious to me they are in the process of change right now. The market is operating. We have $4 gas, and people are reacting. The fact that govt foolishness is impacting the market does not affect its power. The Arabs can get $120/bbl so why charge less. They will always elevate the price to the point of diminishing return. Already, the reduced amount of summer driving has increased oil availability in the US and prices are dropping in many areas. Further drops are predicted IF DEMAND stays low. If we can implement shale oil recovery for $70/bbl, the cost of Arab oil will be $65/bbl overnight.

ApolloSpeaks
Numerology is great fun. Phrenology is even more interesting. With computer driven ability to examine huge data bases for correlations, there might even be something to it.

Taxes are for liberals
And I thought Krauthammer was a Conservative. Shame on me. No true Conservative would ever advocate higher taxes, for any reason, because taxes just feed the government and let it grow. Taxes are for liberals. Starve the monster and let it die.

economic reasoning may support CK
There is a bit of economic reasoning that supports, in part, CK's idea. Hal Varian and others have argued, with justification, that given the relevant low prices elasticities in the current range of prices, there is good reason to
believe that the "incidence" of the tax would reside primarily on the supply side--OPEC.

Charles, you made the wrong turn.
Sorry Charlie, but your theory is fatally flawed! We don’t need to make energy more expensive for consumers to use to force conservation; we need to make more energy readily available! The oil is out there, we need to drill and refine it, that’s all! There are plenty of sources that were not profitable to tap at $50/barrel that became viable when oil hit $100/barrel. Our shortage problem is self-induced.

The greater the portion of disposable income spent on an inelastic necessity like energy, the less disposable income that remains available to “grow the economy”, it’s as simple as that. All taxes do is convert individual discretionary income to entitlements, in other words the government decides where to spend more of our money and we get to decide less. If you haven’t heard, rising gas prices are putting thousands of Americans out of their jobs in the auto and airlines industries, please explain to me how that is helpful in maintaining a robust economy?

Of course we should encourage technology to find more efficient ways to use the energy we have, but such development needs to follow a natural course and not be forced by bureaucrats! Individual personal wealth has already been diminished in this country due to declining real estate and investment values along with the shrinking dollar. Now you propose we further reduce individual wealth by enacting further taxes? All this will accomplish is putting us on the same road the Europeans have been driving for decades, and those roads are lined with $9.00/gallon filling stations! No thank you.

Go to Americansolutions.com and sign the petition!

We'll conserve when the price is right
The painfully high price of energy is an important signal to consumers. Supplying this commodity is very difficult and very expensive (drilling for American oil in protected and restricted areas - the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and detrimental political relations or concessions to foreign governments) so, use it sparingly. Don't waste it. If the American consumer had faced these prices 10 years ago we wouldn't have gas guzzling SUVs, Hummers and Pick-ups or such inefficient (non-existent) public transportation in most areas of our country. You're "right on" Charles.

Nanny-state neocon Krauthammer.
Krauthammer's arrogance in getting the coercive government to use its power to effect change in behavior is NO DIFFERENT than Obama's recent speech in San Francisco, I believe, where he said Americans are simply going to have to get used to idea of not driving suvs and pickup trucks.. get used to the idea of turning their therostats up.

Krauthammer's prescription reminds me of Jimmy Carter's pessimism, Jimmy Carter's "malaise affecting America", where Americans were urged to lower their horizons, lower their ideas of what it means to be American.

Leftist elitists and pundits, such as Krauthammer or Thomas Friedman, presume to tell the heartland that the government has an obligation to use its authority to dictate change in the behavior of its citizenry.

And suckers fall for it.

This is similar to Major Bloomberg in NYC, banning trans-fat, smoking, in restaurants.

Neocon Krauthammer has snookered many who claim to be conservatives.

Conserve money
As a political Conservative, one of the things that I like to conserve is my money. As a result, I have never understood the love affair between the American soccer mom (and dad) and the gas-guzzling family truckster. Large SUVs and vans cost more than smaller cars, use much more gas, cost more to maintain, lose their value faster, and are much less fun to drive. The only argument possibly in their favor is safety, but I maintain that a possibly lower incidence of injuries in a crash is counter-balanced by more accidents (including rollovers) because the truckster is harder to handle. As far as space, you can fit four decent sized adults into any compact.

If everyone parked the truckster and drove a smaller car, fuel demand would decline dramatically.

Markets Determine Price
Why do we indulge the illusion that, if only we would open up our reserves for drilling, we'd have cheap gas? Global markets are driving the price of oil. Would American oil companies be forced to produce and sell at below-market-prices? I hope not! Would we so flood the world market with American oil as to significantly affect world prices? I doubt it. With China and India as buyers, adding U.S. oil to the pot will not create sufficient supply/demand disparity to materially affect pump prices. What it would do is stabilize prices and create a more secure supply, thus freeing us from dependency on terrorist supporting governments. This - not lower prices - is the reason we should be a)taxing gasoline more heavily and b)creating an independent supply for ourselves.

The price is already being manipulated
The Saudis and the rest of OPEC, speculators, and the government are already manipulating our prices.

The American economy can handle $4 gallon gas. What is difficult to handle are 400% increases in prices in 10 years. That's out of control.

While I'm not usually a fan of regulation and taxation, I would appreciate it if the government took some steps to make the price of gas more stable.

While Kraut thinks it's "too late". I think it's the perfect time. We ought to open up the coasts and start filling up our reserve. We also should open up refineries and standardize (as much as we can and makes sense) our fuel mixtures. The US Gov't can pretend that they are the white knight saving the day, when really they are letting the market do it's thing. As prices go down, the citizens will rejoice. Once the price hits $4 the gov't can start implementing supply controls, tariffs, excise taxes... whatever they want to keep prices at $4.

On a slightly related note. I think energy independence is silly. Energy sovereignty ought to be what we're after. We should never say, "We aren't using Saudi oil." What we ought to be able to say is, "We don't NEED to use Saudi oil if we don't have to... but so long as you want to sell us your oil, we're happy to sit on our own." However, we can't say that if our oil is untapped. We need to be able to access that oil in a moments notice, which means tapping those reserves and stockpiling the oil.

Andy
I assumed Krauthammer meant income tax, not SS (many people incorrectly use the term "payroll tax" to mean income tax). It makes no sense to "refund" anything via SS taxes because the worker's SS benefits are somewhat proportional to what he paid in. Reduce SS taxes and you reduce benefits, which means you haven't really "refunded" the gasoline tax.

And "payroll taxes" also includes Medicare taxes. It makes little sense to reduce Medicare taxes because then they'd have to make up the revenue elsewhere. That would make this nothing more than a shell game in which voters are duped into believing they are receiving a "refund" for what is really an additional tax. If the shortfall is made up by increasing income taxes in the high brackets, then this is an income redistribution scheme (socialism).

Any way you look at this, it is just another way for nanny-statists to tell everyone else what to do.

So nice
So nice of a conservative to advocate increased taxation. What dream world do you live in, Krauthammer? You speak about a gas-for-payroll-tax exchange...uh, who is going to go for that? They'll take the increased gas tax and maintain the high payroll tax. Why do you mention such a pipe dream and then say you've had it right all the time?

Your solution would have us paying $6 dollars per gallon right now instead of in two years. I'll take the increase then, and save my money now. But thanks for such a generous offer from you noble government types.

Nate
I agree with most of your logic, but goven your arguments, what is the benefit of higher taxes?

I also would not want to force American oil companies to sell below world prices, but that move is probably not as bad as the Democrat plan for windfall profits taxes.

Sorta' like
the Laffer Curve applied to gas prices . . .
At what point on the curve do people stop laughing?

We've been Had!
I'm old enough to remember when gasoline cost $0.30/gallon and the typical family sedan got less than 10 miles/gallon, so I know it's a farce to think progress can only occur with government intervention in the form of more tax!

I also recall a time in this country when we were forced to shut-down drilling rigs in Texas and Oklahoma because the cheap imported oil made thos operations unprofitable, where was the government then, when they may have been able to help?

If you would like to see where your $4.00/gallon is going these days I suggest you go th You-Tube and search "Dubailand"

Soniq, InsightingTruth
“What's wrong with using tax policy to shape behavior?
The enumerated powers clause of the constitution (Article 1, Section 8) forbids it.”


“The Congress shall have the power to collect Taxes … for the general Welfare of the United States”

The general welfare of the United States includes, IMO, our subjection to antagonistic foreign countries because of our oil gluttony.

Spot on---sort of
I luv ya, Charles. You have a great mind. You are absolutely correct that the free market will drive energy conservation. We are seeing it as we speak. I don't even leave my car running to keep the a/c going when I go into the convenience store anymore. A $65 fill up will make you aware. (obviously, I don't drive an SUV)

Your argument for the taxation over the floor is just a little too far advanced for the common folk. Your faith in the government to actually return on the taxpayer's investment wen out my door when they unlocked the Social Security "lock-box" and looted the funds to subsidize ADM for growing corn for ethanol, etc.

The solution to this problem is to let the market drive our habits and to drill here, drill now, and write in Newt's name for Prez.

shilohbus29
I don't approve of this scheme, but I think the idea is similar to what happens with health insurance, but in a different direction. We consume more health care than we otherwise would because the marginal price to the consumer for each doctor visit is below the true price (insurance makes up the difference). Consumers do not take into account that this behavior raises health insurance premiums because that is an aggregate effect. There's no direct relationship between the purchase and the increased premiums - at least it's not readily apparent to the consumer.

The gas tax would increase the price of gasoline at the pump, but I doubt there would be a direct refund that is proportional to the amount of gas the taxpayer purchased that year (it would be an aggregate effect). To structure the scheme any other way would not have the desired impact on gas demand.

Unlike Polly, my answer assumes that the tax really is refunded in some way. I don't believe that will happen, but your question deserves a hypothetical answer.

Charles
You are appealing to logic and reason. You even intimate that form should follow function. That doesn’t work here in America. Here the consumer buys an image.

Concerning the safety advantage of the soccer mom or truckster driver I will just say that that is only had at the expense of the other. That you can see better being up high is only because the other in a car can’t see. That your 6000 lb head on survivability improves is only because the other in the 2000 lb car looses.

Zerubbabel
There's nothing unconstitutional about the federal gov't taxing certain products. How do you think the federal gov't obtained revenue before the income tax?

That the tax has an ulterior motive does not suddenly make it unconstitutional. That does make it coercive and oppressive, but that's a matter for the voters to decide.

Tax and reduce?
How about let remove regulations, let the oil companies drill in ANWR, offshore and North Dakota, build many nuclear power plants, build many new refineries and let us determine our own supply and demand - to hell with the Arabs and Venezuelans holding us hostage!

What does Charles propose be done with the taxes he proposes? More entitlements?

We are Americans - the greatest inventors and builders of the greatest economy and enjoyers of the greatest standard of living the world has ever seen! Why do we need to go back to the stone age? Just because Marxists the world over are jealous of our ability to build a toilet? To hell with them and the carpet they flew in on!

Does anyone have any capacity to think any longer?

Urban Elitism
Tax hikes on gas to force people to drive less (and presumably use public transportation) are a popular cause for the urban elite. In rural areas there is no public transportation and never will be because it is impractical. I do not drive any more than is absolutely necessary, but I do have to get to work, and to the grocery store, and, yes, to the golf course occasionally. Perhaps Mr. Krauthammer can ride the bus and subway to make up for my sins.

There is NO option to drilling
This article is pure foolishness.

Tax our way to a solution? Wean us off oil? I don't think so.

Look at the energy equivalent by weight for 20 gallons of gasoline and you will see why no other energy source comes close to the energy capability of gasoline. A gallon of gasoline produces 39 kilowatt hours (kWH) of energy. A typical US house consumes 800-1000 kWH of electrical energy per month. So stored in a 20 gallon gas tank is about enough energy to provide electrical power to your house for the better part of a month.

Until we an find an alternative energy source that is equivalent to this weight to energy ratio, we should be continuing to produce as much oil from all domestic sources as possible.

American free enterprise can reduce the price of gasoline to $1.00/gallon if allowed increased access to our domestic oil.

Increased Energy + Less Taxes + Less Government Market Interference = Continued Prosperity.

Any other solution just doesn't add up to anything except a fast decline back to the Stone Age.







neocon comes through
no conservative would have written the above article. Kraut is a conservative for one reason and one reason only: the anti-war crowd took over his home party and he was afraid they would no longer protect the country he really loves - Israel.

dumb!
That's the dumbest idea I have heard. You must not have to pay for your own gas.

Not practical
The problem with massively raising the gasoline tax is that it will affect everybody. The Unites States is a democracy. You can't cause economic pain to practically everybody in the electorate and expect to keep your office. Whoever enacted such a tax would be handing their opposition a sure fire winning issue. Even Bill Clinton, when he raised taxes only did it on the richest 1.2% of Americans. This idea is a fantasy.

Truth is so hard to tell and hear
"Truth is so hard to tell, it sometimes needs fiction to make it plausible."
America loved the best seller "Let Someone Else Do The Drilling." Now, we have little oil of our own. Never mind that titanic reservoirs of oil and vast coal deposits sprawl beneath entire territories. Please, just ignore that for now.
"Here! Take this large pill and the pain of not having affordable, clean power will fade away. First though, drink this fictitious solution that will lubricate your throat to make it easier to swallow." America was numbed to the bone when we swallowed that one and now we are desperately behind in building new Nuclear Power Plants. Desperately! We didn't feel a thing. Did we?
"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds."
America, reject these pitifully, tiring arguments and people who that have set our minds ablaze and caused us great harm to our great shame. Make good, resolutely sound choices from today. Your friend! Jim.

TAX?????????
You idiot, as if any of that tax would be ever used to assist with the payroll tax!! It would simply be rolled into the socialist coffers to buy even MORE votes for leftists like Obama. Your premise is wrong, you discuss private industry reponding now, altogther too late. I agree with incentive for industry, significant tax breaks for purchasers of greener autos, etc. Private industry should have been allowed to drill in locations which would prove to be viable oil producers. We have been screwed by environmentalists and their wacked out lobbing efforts for 35 years. It is time to realize nobody voted the Sierra Club (or any other self-sanctifying group)into office.

"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last". Winston Churchill


Trade
I am willing to trade Krauthammer to the Obama campaign (where he belongs) for a gallon of gasoline. Boycott Fox News!

US supplies can affect prices
The US accounts for about 25% of daily global oil consumption. Estimates vary, but it's safe to say that opening ANWR and our coasts (just currently known oil fields) to drilling would provide enough oil to completely supply the US for decades. And some of you think that would have a negligible effect on worldwide aggregate supply and price? That's absurd.

Dependency
The Socialists do not want to solve the energy shortage, at least with respect to private automobiles. Public transportation is the ultimate Socialist Utopia, where everyone is reduced to the lowest common denominator and their mobility is controlled by the government. The Socialists want high oil prices and fewer private automobiles (except their government limos). As an example, see Al Gore flying around on private jets while lecturing us for breathing.

Krauthammer
This column requires the willing suspension of disbelief. The Feds using tax money responsibly? Returning already-collected taxes? Bwahahahahahahahaha. Ain't happening,Dr. K. Sorry.

The $4.00 Gallon:
Want to reduce our usage by another 4-8%??? Get the trucks off the Metroplex freeways during rush hour!!!

Commie
Charles you are a piece of work!!!! How about the Millions of Americans that cannot afford a new car, how about business people that cannot make do with a small electric car, every try to build a roof and use a car.....How about the poor truckers you think they can move 80k pounds of freight with an electric car... If you think this move of breaking our economy just to curve our dependence on foreign oil was a good idea you are a Marxist PIG!

Zerubbabel:
To start with the government is not supposed to tax beyond the absolute minimum necessary to perform the few functions that are assigned to the federal government in the Constitution. Taxing for the purpose of behavior modification violates the covenant between the government and the governed.

Second, taxes are extracted by force. No government functions within its lawful bounds when it uses force against non-criminals.

Many more or less arcane reasons could be cited, but no others are necessary. The idea of using tax policy to modify a people's behavior violates basic human rights, that alone is reason enough to abhor the concept.

Who spiked Krauthammer's coffee?
The normally wise and learned Charles Krauthammer advocates for Nixonian lunacy.

When your bad trip is over, read "Basic Economics", by Thomas Sowell.

I have been
enjoying the reduced traffic, the reduced amount of SUV's, and the reduced amount of near death experiences i have had with soccer moms on cell phones. I ride a motorcyle to work everyday..and this has been a blessing for me. I do feel bad for the people that have been impacted severley, to the point of having their food budget cut into. For all the people driving Tahoe's, Escalades, Suburbans, Excursions etc...no one is shedding a tear for you. 40k worth of SUV...you will find a way to manage.

Multiple Personality
Does Krauthammer suffer from multiple personality disorder, or did his evil twin write this garbage? Please, Charles, tell us this is a joke or you will lose all credibility on everything. I really like you, but this is just plain stupid.

And the Terrorists Dont Get the Money
$130 a barrel is making wealthy the people that hate us.

Oil Shale
There is more shale oil under some of the western states than has yet been consumed since the history of oil refining. We are not about to run out of oil. We are being banned from getting to it due to the Church of Global Warming. These bans can and do have real-world human costs.

Small economical cars
Have a 1997 Honda Civic and a 1989 Acura Integra. Both get 27-28 mpg in traffic and 35-40 mpg on the road. Purchase price of Acura spread over 19 years is less than $700 per year. The fools who lease a new truckster every 2-3 years have nobody but themselves to blame.

In the Land of Confusion...

During periods of Upheaval and Confusion, a certain type of personality thrives. Instead of reacting with emotions, this personality absorbs emotions and spins them into a Web of Power.

Unlike Conservative and Liberal operators, this personality holds no values, holds allegiance only to himself, and has no moral compass. This personality cannot understand these human traits. Boundaries of right and wrong are meaningless.

Although Allied with the Liberals, this person has but one purpose... Absorbing Power in a selfish attempt to fill his hollow soul.

He is The Global Narcissist.







Oil Shale
It is true that there is a large quantity of oil shale, but it is difficult to mine, and the environmental problems are much more significant than for ANWR or offshore drilling.

Drill domestically, use more efficient cars, and ban OPEC petroleum.

zero sum
Is this and over simplification? Raise the price of gasoline $2 a gallon. Send the money to Washington who will send it back to the people who sent it to them in the first place. What about the Washington "service charge". This is worse than a zero sum gain. Come on Charles. As the kids say, get real and let the free market continue to work.

Carlos:
Your's is the best description of John McCain I've seen yet.

Stupid People make the Simple Complex
As a read through this thread, I am amazed at the dumb comments. Some of the dumb comments show That Stupid people make the Simple Complex.
The solution is very simple. Uncle Sam needs to do the following:
1. Get his hands out of my pockets.
2. Get off of my back.
3. Get the out of my way.
If I feel this way as a small business owner, I KNOW the oil companies feel this way also. If the fed Gov't did this, gas prices and the rest of the Free Market will take care itself.


insightingTruth
“The Congress shall have the power to collect Taxes … for the general Welfare of the United States”

My post #114 is verbatim from your “covenant,” article 1 section 8. I don’t know if you lived through the gas crisis of 73 but that definitely effected the general welfare of the country.

“Second, taxes are extracted by force. No government functions within its lawful bounds when it uses force against non-criminals.”

LOL So what are you saying here; taxes should be voluntary? Wow, what an insightful truth.

“The idea of using tax policy to modify a people's behavior violates basic human rights”

So obviously you are adamantly against alcohol and tobacco taxes and home buying incentives. You live in an insightfully idealistic world.

Gasoline Price Insanity
The sheiks and mullahs are laughing at us all the way to the bank. Our policies by our politicians of both parties, but mainly Democrats, are to blame. The environmentalists and their henchmen in congress are digging our graves. It's time to throw out every politician of whatever party who perpetuates prevention of drilling off our coasts and ANWAR and who prevent the building of more refineries. Ethanol is a joke. Wind and Solar are jokes. Right now, fossil based fuels are needed and to hell with the politicians who put up roadblocks that inhibit drilling and building of new refineries and nuclear facilities.

Zerubbabel:
The framers concept of the general welfare did not include punishing individual citizens for their lawful choices.

I remember 1973 very clearly. The so called gas crisis was the result of the intentional restriction of supply by a cabal of oil producers called OPEC. The impact of OPEC was minimal until our government exacerbated the problem. The largest single cost to Americans was the result of the federal mandate to lower the speed limits. That stupid move cost every American dearly, even those that didn't own a car.

Yes. Taxes should be voluntary to the largest extent possible. Perfection in this, and all other things, is elusive, but we should still have that as our goal.

Yes. I do not think adamantly is the right word, but I oppose them in principle.

There is nothing idealistic about my world. If their was I would not be spending my precious time here.

Krauthammer
"Want to wean us off oil?"

What we must be weaned of is ever bigger government, because that's the source of the higher prices we are paying for gas and everything else. It's inflation, stupid. It's a dollar problem, not an oil problem. But you being a neo-con, you couldn't agree with that, or probably understand it, for that matter.

InsightingTruth...

McCain's included :)

Actually the majority of Congress fits quite well here. Ignorant self-orientated ninnies.

If we having a real G-D Crisis, why isn't Congress acting?

The "Sane" man would immediately Vote to open drilling across the USA. But not our over-educated and under-qualified leaders. No, they just pop on the nearest private jet and head out on summer vacation.

Let them eat cake, says the Congress.

I say, stuff a shove a Twinkie in their mouths and a Roman Candle up their a**es!

In adjusted dollars...
...a barrel of oil now costs a little over $46. A relatively modest increase over the $38 price of oil in 1979. The rest of the price of a barrel of oil is the direct result of the Federal Reserve recklessly printing un-backed dollars.

Don't blame the oil producing companies.
Don't blame the oil companies.
Don't blame the refiners or the distributors.
Put the blame where it belongs: bad government!
And blame yourselves for electing the jerks who caused this mess.

Carlos:
Agreed.

I fail to see the purpose of the Twinkie.

no thank you
When gas skyrocketed to $2/gal I parked what the kids call "the big blue man truck" and purchased a used Saturn to drive to and from work. The problem is that now it costs almost as much to fuel the Saturn as it did to fuel the truck when I made the switch. How the heck is another tax supposed to help me after I've already done the responsible thing and reduced my consumption as much as I reasonably can? I don't know what the definitive solution is, but I definitely know it's not more taxation.

Today's news:
"Crude oil prices have crossed the 138-dollar-mark for the first time. This represents a jump by more than ten dollars as the market reacted to a sharp decline in the dollar. The dollar slumped after the Labor Department reported that the US unemployment rate had jumped unexpectedly by half a percentage point to 5.5 percent in May, the steepest increase in more than two decades."


I hope everyone can read this. It is not a partisan political message. Unemployment rates for May were released today (the "steepest increase in more than two decades"). This effected the dollar, which effected crude oil prices (it would be nice if someone on the thread could succinctly explain the connections between unemployment and currency and crude oil). At any rate, crude prices jumped by $10.75 in a single day.

Predictions are that crude oil will jump to $150 a barrel by July 4th. And that's practically a conservative estimate.

We are now looking at gasoline at $5 a gallon this year. I live in California. The cheapest gas at the gas station around the corner from me is currently at $4.49/gallon.

$6.00 a gal.
Don't the powers-to-be see what is happening? And can't they read your column too, Mr. K. ???

Insighting Truth
Carlos is obviously expressing a subtle reaction to the famous quote "let them eat cake". Its high time that congress is returned to the condition of reaping the results of the grief they dole out to us peons. Every now and then, some irate poster mumbles of torches and pitchforks. My reaction is to bring the tar and feathers. The Sons of Liberty in the 1770's didn't pussyfoot around. When they thought a tax was unfair, they tarred and feathered the taxs collector. When the Army appeared, they sniped at the uniforms until they retreated. After 6 years of shooting and another few of anarchy, a congress of the best and brightest wrote and ratified our constitution. If current trends continue, it will take another shakeup to bring us back onto the track. Or we can lapse into irrelevance. The French get 6 weeks vacation, what is so bad about that? Nothing if one has the US as a world policeman protecting you. Maybe India will step up for us.

InsightingTruth
“The framers concept of the general welfare did not include punishing individual citizens for their lawful choices.”

If taxes were idealistically meant to be voluntary then it wouldn’t be punishment, it would be a privilege to pay extra for that lawful choice.

The framers concept of the general welfare also did not include the civil rights of slaves or the unborn, a definition of marriage, control of wire or airway communications, the right to create an air force or to explore space… more on point is the general welfare of all Americans in their ability to drive their cars (in jeopardy in 73) … this never crossed the minds of the framers.

A more ambiguous term one could not find than “general welfare,” yet you seem to be able to idealistically tell us what is and is not meant by that term.

BTW is you handle meant to imply inciting truth? Insight is not normally used as a verb.

Krauthammer Is Right
The Dems who control Congress will never agree to anything that gives any credence to the power of free markets. They need to design the most destructive, ham-handed giant government solution possible. As Boris Johnson said, "There are no disasters, only opportunities. And opportunities for fresh disasters." That should be chiseled in stone over the entrance to the Capitol Building.

Thank Again
Your idea has the merit of advancing conservation, but many faults also. We need additional transportation tax revenue to fix our aging freeways and roads, and create jobs in the process. We can use more fuel efficient cars and trucks as well. That's fair enough. But we don't need to cripple our economy in the process. The answer is to increase supply, by drilling offshore, in ANWR, and wherever else oil is to be found. We need nuclear power and refineries as well. If we do these things, which we can't because of the environmental radicals and their Democrat clients, we can help our own economy, reduce income to terrorist states like Iran and Saudi Arabia (don't forget that most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis), and generate enough tax revenue to fix our transportation system. We can live with $4 gasoline, but not $5 or $6 fuel without major damage.

As we increase supply, and prices fall, we can use the difference to increase taxes, but only for transportation purposes. If prices get too high, we can cut the taxes; if too low, we can increase the taxes. It could work, but the key is to increase supply, and we can't do that because of the Democrats.

Tell me what's wrong with this approach.

To Old_Blue
Nothing wrong with your approach. If we had any "honest" leadership in the country, that's what we'd have been doing 40 years ago. Unfortunately our only leadership has been the pied piper pretending to lead while "dipping" his hand in petro-bucks. Nothing will change with the current crop running for president.

If and when America regains control of its government and energy policy, begins credible development of its domestic energy resources, I believe we'll see a remarkable shift in OPEC oil policy...once they see the handwriting on the wall...that they will soon be pounding salt.

as of 06/06/08
Oil prices made their biggest single-day leap ever Friday, dragging the Dow Jones industrials down nearly 400 points and raising the once-unthinkable prospect of $150 oil and more record gas prices by the Fourth of July.

The meteoric rise of nearly $11 for the day piled atop an increase of almost $5.50 the day before, taking oil futures more than 13 percent higher in just two days, easily a record on the New York Mercantile Exchange.
…………………………
Things are now changing almost daily; “IF” BBC TV was correct when they reported the high price of oil is due to foreign forces on ME soil, well do you think they have raised it high enough to get the forces out yet or must it go higher?

Old_Blue
The sad truth is we are way past the point where "increasing supply by drilling offshore and in ANWR" would matter very much.

We would not see results for 5 to 10 years, and, trust me, gasoline will be mostly out of the reach, cost-wise, for the average american by then. As it is in Europe. The problem is: this country has had a fairly dismal record of creating mass-transport systems. We have made our bed (so to speak), and now we must lie in it.

Have more taxes ever been the answer?
Incredible that Krauthammer believes more government intervention in the market via more taxes is the answer. Congress would not give a penny of it back by reducing payroll taxes! They would simply use it to further expand government. The reason we are in this situation is too much government already. Too many regulations on new refineries, nuclear plants; closing off enormous oil and gas reserves; and most recently monetary policy that has driven up the price of oil more than any other factor. The reason we are shipping trillions of petrodollars abroad is because we are not producing what we could easily and safely do at home - if the government would just get out of the way. I never thought I would hear Krauthammer lobbying to turn America into a mirror of impotent, socialized Europe. Very disappointing.

for Old_Blue
Old_Blue asks: "Tell me what's wrong with this approach."

What's wrong with it is that America can't force the oil companies to sell oil drilled in North America to North American consumers. That policy went out the window 15 years ago.

Right now, much of the oil drilled in Alaska is refined and shipped to the Far East, not to the United States.

There is no "American oil market." There is one big global oil market, and any oil drilled in ALaska just goes into that big pot. It then gets dispensed to whoever on earth pays for the refined products. And in the global scheme of things, the oil drilled in Alaska is just a drop in the total bucket. Hence it will have little effect on WORLD oil prices.

I don't know how many times I have to keep explaining this simple point. ExxonMobil does NOT sell just to the United States.

for John Shaft
John Shaft writes: "1. Get his hands out of my pockets.
2. Get off of my back.
3. Get the out of my way."

Great! I'll handle you at the local level and as free men:

The next time I get an asthma attack from breathing in the smog caused by YOUR gas-guzzling car, I'm going to blow your brains out. Why should you be allowed to make me sick without paying my medical bills for it.

Krauthammer's plan wouldn't have worked
Mr. Krauthammer is full of self-righteousness, but his plan wouldn't helped cut greenhouse gases anyway - it would have increased them.

If government had artificially inflated the price of gasoline, oil suppliers somewhere in the chain would have raised the price to meet the floor, negating the tax. It would have cut demand in the US, but the higher prices would have signaled investors to increase supply. We would have ended up with surpluses of oil. That surplus would have been sold in the international market, driving down the price world-wide, increasing consumption world-wide.

Sure, the US would have produced less CO2, but production by the rest of the world would have increased more than US production decreased. The government wouldn't have collected any taxes. It so easy for elitists to think they can wave a magic wand and change the laws of economics. All they can do is pervert the laws to detriment of everybody.

http://freedomistheanswer.blogspot.com/

Re: My previous post
Obviously I was just speaking hypothetically with that example. :-)

McCain Is as Bad as the Dems
I don't blame the government for taxes as much as the restrictions on drilling. Glenn Beck had Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin on this week. Palin, who wants much more drilling for both oil and natural gas in Alaska, said the area is ANWR where drilling would take place is 2,000 acres (less than the size of LAX. Something the size of Los Angeles Airport in a state as big as Alaska.

And, McCain is against drilling in ANWR because he wants liberals to love his. Palin is the anti-McCain (smart, personable, exciting, sexy, etc.). Running as VP, she just might be able to save McCain's sorry butt.

for compos_mentis
compos_mentis writes: "As Nobel prize-winning economist Milton Friedman warned, new taxes have always created a new class of beneficiaries who lobby in perpetuity to preserve their entitlement. "

You've taken Friedman out of context.

Unlike you, Friedman was NEVER ideologically opposed to Federal taxation per se.

In fact, in his book "Free to Choose," Friedman proposed a pollution tax as the simplest way to deal with damage to the environment caused by industry. The more pollution an industry causes, the higher their tax rate.

But I'll bet you wouldn't like that either.

I always thought of myself as a conservative, but you are a total reactionary. We live with a mixed economy. That's not going to change and we are NOT going to have laissez-faire economics in this country. We can use a mixed economy to implement either a conservative vision of society or a leftist one. But it's here to stay, nevertheless.

Read My Mind - No New Taxes
I am stunned to read the author's suggestion of taxing oil to "stop our dependence" on it. Any time we give additional tax revenue to the federal government, we create a minimum of three problems.

1) The tax will take on a life of its own and become a permanent drain on our pocketbooks,
2) We give the federal government additional power over our individual lives, and
3) It is exceedingly difficult to roll back a tax once enacted.

More taxes are rarely the answer. Regardless of who becomes our next President, we are likely to see additional taxes on a host of issues. I truly hope this pain is the impetus to see conservative leadership regain significant power.

Maybe this article was written as a joke?

Job well done.... 06/06/08...
President Bush is considering new measures to help stimulate the battered economy, the White House said Friday as unemployment and oil prices soared and Wall Street sank…….

Has anyone figured that Big Money and High Society have now totally screwed the economy? Has anyone figured out yet that there is nothing you can now do about it as it is too late? Well done collage boys!

We have soaring home foreclosures,
rising unemployment rates (figures released today), steadily rising grocery costs and gas threatening to hit 5 bucks a gallon by mid-summer, then the sky's the limit (or as one Harvard economist said, "the economy's in a sort of free-fall".

Now, I am to understand that John McCain will get us out of this mess by following Bush's policies over the past 8 years?

(oh, yeah. And that continuing war in Iraq and "on terror" has costed 2 trillion dollars + and McCain is threatening to pour billions & billions more into the endless pit). What a recipe for disaster. It's our own doing. We made our bed. Most of socialist Europe lives better than we do. And the social cons here are worried about gay marriage.

Speed at 55-Silly
No one in California is going to keep their speed to 55 MPH!!
We are on the fast track even now at $4.35 gas. Everyone passes me like I'm standing still when I'm going 65-70 MPH.

To SteveL
Oil is a world market, to be sure, but supply matters very much. Right now, ARCO sells no imported oil at all to American consumers. They get it all from the Alaskan north slope and other domestic sources. But it's still selling for ~$4 per gallon anyway. Why? Because it's a world market.

But if you increase supply, you will lower prices, and it is possible to write legislation prohibiting American oil from being exported. Other countries already do this, and Indonesia just left OPEC because they adopted a policy to consume all of their oil domestically.

As to the 5-10 year agument, a moment's thought will reveal how stupid an argument that is. If Bill Clinton had signed the ANWR bill in 1995, we would have another million barrels of oil per day coming into our economy. Gasoline today would be selling for $3, nor $4.

As JFK said many years ago, quoting an old Chinese proverb, "A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step." It's time to take that step. Delay will just make matters immeasurably worse later.

Simple as this!
One of the things that helped the start of this current mess was simply this; the failure of the HEDGE FUND when FRANCE figured out they were about to be swindled by the American Banks. So, France with held the money they promised. NOW, Big Money has got to recover their money they lost and now they are into Futures and Commodities Exchange to regain it. Oil on the other hand is the blade being held to our necks to get out of the ME and to pay off Big Money to let them alone to do it. Remember it is their money and they want it back.

47.5 Miles Per Hour...

I am telling my Detroit (Democrat) co-workers that they can achieve 40 Miles Per Gallon in "any car" simply by driving 47.5 mph on the local expressways. I just say, "I seen it on Oprah!"

It's starting to work.... Traffic on area freeways is now snarled every rush-hour.

I got the idea after having to pass the same kook driving a Honda Insight every morning on I-94. I followed him once, and to my surprise... He was going exactly 47.5 mph.


The Blame Game
Let's play the Blame Game.
Who do we blame for gas prices?
1.Eco Weenies for blocking every attempt at drilling for oil and blocking construction of nuke plants. This because it might harm the 3 toed purple billed sap-sucking tree trout!
2.The Goverment (Dem And Rep)for giving in to the Tree Huggers on everything.
3.The Goverment again for taxing the crap out of something they know that you can't live without if you don't happen to live in a major metropolitan area. My home state of Obamination Illinois moto is Welcome To Illinois. Now give me your money!
4.My generation (40-somethings) for buying a Ford Expidition to tote 2 kids and one black lab back and forth to soccer practice and then buying an Escalade for the daily commute. Dumb***es!
5.Every Hybrid owner on the planet. Good for you! Your helping the planet but I still need my truck to haul my 8oo+ lbs of tools to fix your stupid Hybrid so shut up. Hybrids aren't the answer for everything.
6.Hollywood. For burning more fuel makin crap movies like Rendition and Lions For Lambs than my big old truck has used in 200,000 miles. Close Hollywood. Bet no one would notice!
7.And finally the real reason gas prices are so high is Al Gore. His pseudo-science of global warming has made normally sane people blithering idiots. Now all you hear is how we gotta save the planet and gotta get off oil. News to Al. When the planet has had enough of the human race it will shrug us off like a bad cold and there isn't a thing we can do about it.
Okay I'm done. Just spent over a hundred bucks filling up my truck so I'm a little on edge.

Roasted pork
I suppose it was inevitable that a neoconservative (a species of Republican who came to us from the left) would be unable to advocate a free market for energy or anything else. A tax on gasoline already at $4! What kind of sickness is this?

You just can't let go of the notion of an altruistic government empowered to benevolently tend to its helpless American flock - or else - can you, Mr. Krauthammer?

We are onto neoconservatives now. Neoconservatism is done. Stick a fork in them.

Thats right..
I should trade in my SUV for a more gas conserving vehicle! Forget the fact my vehicle is paid for and I will have to go into debt to buy the new vehicle and pay twice the insurance rate. Can you tell me how many miles I must drive to make up for the extra $500. a month I will spend in cost for the new gas saver? I know many people who have not seen the savings because they purchase a vehicle that gets double the mileage but wind up driving twice as much so they come out about the same.
Oh, and let us not forget how much I love to be "forced" to give up a vehicle I love to get a vehicle I have to have in order to afford the fuel because the tree huggers are telling me lies about global warming!
I just love being controlled by my counrty which used to be free but no longer is.
Perhaps Charles and his ilk can come to my house soon and tell me how many times I can take a bowel movement and how much. It won't be too much longer and it will happen!

Mass Transit...
Mass Transit...
As I indicated earlier, mass transit is only viable in densely populated areas, such as Europe, and the bigger cities in this country.

Mr Kraut Hammer ~ an alternative solution which I suspect you would like as well :


Pass a new Federal law that Mandates the following :

1. No city is allowed to increase its area from now on.

2. Every city must reduce its total area by 5% for each of the next 10 years.

3. No citizen will be allowed to build any new home outside any city limit.

4. Federal assistance will be provided to build new population centers, with manufacturing, shopping, food, entertainment, etc. all in one large building.

5. Connect every large center with 'Light-Rail'.



Now, that we all live in large Hives, aren't all us worker bees happy?

Aha ! I knew you would love it !



Charles - one star
This is a liberal answer...tax, tax, tax. Do you think the idiots in congress would make this revenue neutral???? If you do you are insane.

If they truly wanted to end foreign oil they would open the U.S. for drilling everywhere, make it illegal to import or export oil, and get the gov out of the energy business altogether.

and BTW, the break point for the Prius hybrid WITH subsidies is $5.00/gal.

Why Exxon won’t produce more oil

Bush and Congress gave money to the oil companies in the energy bill with an opposite interest of solving the energy crisis. And now they are wondering why they took the money and did nothing!

By BusinessWeek

Reports of slackening demand sent oil down another 2.5% on Thursday to $101.84 per barrel. Crude prices have declined 7.6% since the beginning of the week. Not long ago, that would have been an astonishing plunge that shook the trading establishment. These days? Nah, that’s just the ho-hum volatility in the oil market. But how is it that crude can still trade above $100 a barrel, three times what it sold for at the start of the decade, despite a very wobbly economy?

read more

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/why-exxon-wont-pro duce-more-oil

Charles "what-a crock" Hammer is right.
Whether government oppressive tax policy, or other factors, the goal must be to increase price of oil so much as to force change in peoples' behavior.

Given that, I think the price of fuel for passenger and freight aircraft ought to go up radically, too. Minimum 100%.

Instead of John Q. Citizen paying a couple of hundred dollars to fly from Newark to Denver, he should pay pay nine hundred dollars(one way).

In addition, the trucking industry must also do its part. Price of diesel fuel must rise 100% minimum, so that only "serious" trafficking and distribution of goods occurs.

This has the obvious benefit of radically increasing the price to John Q. Citizen for these goods.

But that is a good thing.

And entirely consistent with Krauthammer's proposal in weaning our nation off of dreaded mideast oil.

The great benefit, of course, is it would drive our nation into a deep, prolonged depression, severely reducing consumption and spending, which of course reduces our dependence on dreaded mideast oil.

"What a Crock" Hammer is onto something.

Zerubbabel:
In case you are still on this thread, here is a response to your question.

Actually I began with the idea of inciting insight. Truth is sometimes counterintuitive. Discovering truth then, requires insight. The word insight connotes the ability to perceive complex issues with clarity. It also connotes a sense of self-awareness. The latter is important if one is to keep the objective in sight. The objective is truth unfiltered by personal bias, cultural indoctrination, or blind prejudice. The handle, Insighting Truth, is a play on words. It is also a reminder of the real purpose behind all exposition.

Lestat
Lestat,

My only point is that whatever the merits, or lack thereof, in Krauthammer's proposal here, the "world ends, poor hardest hit" argument is not applicable. Well, not unless you consider michigander's concern for retired people who no longer have wages to be FICAed. (Personally, I have trouble working up sympathy for people who don't have to get up and go to work every day, for whatever reason. Due to the entitlement attitude of the current crop of retirees and the soon-to-be-retired boomers, I will likely have to work until I am dead.)

As for me, I cannot see an increase in the federal tax on gasoline unless the revenues are used to fund projects that are directly related to transportation. But we all know how the government tends to eventually shift revenue into the general fund.

Krauthammer's Last paragraph
Those who think Krauthammer is actually eriously proposing a huge gas tax as solution to the current crunch have not read the column. He knows, and every one who considers for a moment knows, there is exactly no chance of any such tax being applied by our gutless pols. Using a tax to keep the price high in 74, which would have made people adjust their lives over time to high gas costs would certainly be a help now, with far fewer gas guzzlers and long commutes in place to make things worse. The stalwart conservatives protesting higher taxes and more govt intervention are fighting a straw man. Leave us turn to our only hope at this time and try to get some true conservatives elected at lower levels, as we hope to make it through what is going to be a dicey presidency.

It's all so simple
In 1976 a Democrat Congress promised us we'd never pay more than fifty cents a gallon for gas, and extended punitive windfall profits taxes on the people who produced it. The resulting massive shortages inspired a 55 MPH speed limit, which we the people then violated freely, willfully and deliberately, breeding disrespect for all law to the extent that every citizen pretty much became a law unto theirself. Sure enough -- the price of gas went down, albeit to rather more than fifty cents.

By all means, let's do it all again. A heroic figure of Jimmy Carter's stature can't be wrong.

Taxing Gas Problem
Charles K, brilliant as ever, but his "cure" of decreasing consumption via increasing prices is (albeit painfully) already working. I am pained to see his encouragement of government redistributing of a new gas tax. This goes against every experience this conservative has ever endured. I do not believe for a moment this idea would be any more successful that any other of our government's attempts to take from one person to give to another. gene, Longmont, CO

Krauthamer's Serious, Just deranged
Yes Savage99 Krauthamer is aware that his proposal is an "exercise in futility," but he is dead serious in his belief in this absurd proposal.

What is it with these part-time Conservatives? Apparently they have been so thrown off balance by the self-emolation of the Republican Party in choosing a RINO as their nominee; so offended by being ignored by the RNC, that they have become deranged.

What Conservative would ever be so naive as to imagine Congress imposing a new tax and refunding their new found windfall taxes? Just imagine what 'good' they could do with all that tax-payer money.

Just imagine all the new pork-barrel projects the could come up with. Refund the money by lowering the payroll tax?

I regret to say that Charles' infirmity has apparently finally reached his brain.

Worst Idea Ever
While Mr. Krauthammer's plan may work for him, since he is probably living in a nice big city in a nice big house, it will crush the typical American. I don't know many people who just go and jump in their SUV's to drive around for kicks. I know what we use our cars for...the 25 mile commute to work. Raise our gas up to $6.00 per gallon and we need to start finding new jobs or taking the 2 hour bus ride to work. And you must have checked your brain at the door to suggest giving the government more money (in the form of a gas tax) and then suggesting (1) that they would actually be responsible and efficient with it (Bridge to Nowhere, anyone?) and (2) that they would actually reduce any other tax.

Mr. Krauthammer embodies everything that is wrong with Republicans and so-called conservatives.

I will give up my SUV...
When they pull it from my cold dead fingers. Of course mine gets 20 MPG but it does take Premium. Made in North America no less with seating for 7. I will drive it until the wheels fall off because when I was young I drove economy cars. I remember the shock when gas hit $1 and we all were driving cars that got 30-35 mpg mainly because it was what we could afford. (And we could bend in half to get into them.) 30+ years later gas is $4 and my car gets 17-20 mpg but even disabled I can get into it and in reality gas is LESS than it was back then. Back then I was making $1300 a month (wife and I). Now it is $4 and we make over $10,000. Gas would have to be $7.69 to be equal to when it was $1. Or maybe I just worked harder than some so I can afford it.

InsightingTruth
“The objective is truth unfiltered by personal bias, cultural indoctrination, or blind prejudice.”

It is idealistic to think that one can simply jettison personal bias, cultural indoctrination, and blind prejudice. That is the ideal of today’s intellectuals who are probably the most biased thinkers ever. That is the ideal of today’s mainstream journalists, the most biased ever. That is the ideal mandate of being a judge, and yet somehow they fail at it. Nobody escape bias.

I have a better idea
Abolish all the stupid taxes and let the fair market decide the true supply/demand price point. Keep the government out of falsely modifying the demand curve, and let the consumer decide how much they want / need.

To keep the money at home, open up drilling off-shore in Callifornia, Texas and Florida. Open up exploration and drilling in ANWR, and anyplace else where oil resides. Remove the ridiculous controls on new refineries. Let the U.S. free market explore, drill, transport, refine, and sell pure gasoline to the U.S. consumer, and let's find out what the real price might be.

Right now we're in an over-manipulated system of falsehood and deceit, and you've bought into the vision.

Not even a base hit, K
... even with a fielding error. You assume that it is an objectively bad thing for people to drive SUVs, something that ought to be curbed by taxing fuel so it will force people to buy smaller vehicles.

In addition to not accounting for the disposable income offset suggested in your approach (relieve income tax remittances by the amount of the increased gas tax), you don't make any kind of argument for what's so bad about SUVs. If the taxation regime doesn't actually increase the pain on the consumer -- people pay more for gas, but keep more of their income by approximately the same amount -- it's not clear how your jacked-up tax would produce the outcome you're looking for.

But the real question is, why are you looking for it? By what standard is it bad for Americans to drive SUVs? Why must our driving habits be changed? Why shouldn't we drill for more oil, refine more locally, and switch more power generation to nuclear power and coal?

Why, Charles? Huh? Why?

THis is a sound plan
CHarles isn't the first conservative to call for a gas tax either.

The jackasses in congress are absolutely incapable of making a selfless decision. The only decisions they make are backed by hundreds of thousands of dollars in "bribes" or kickforwards. Obviously, there are those who are way ahead of the game, have already figured out how to make a killing on another ill-advised law, and have sent their money men forth with alms for the anointed idiots.

dear semper vigil
Krauthammer is right, we have nobody else to blame. He's talking about gasoline; not overall oil prices.

If you're OK with your SUV, just drive it and pay the going price for your gas. Nobody would bother you, even if the car-maker stops production of those behemoths.

Mine is BMW 325i; I have to give it premium; that's a lot per gallon. But I'm trying my best to conserve. I stay off the freeway as much as possible, on which gas is very wastefully used. In NorCal a speed limit's basically unenforceable; so imaging what your SUV guzzles per freeway mile. On the surface streets my car gets 30 mi. per gallon. Your large SUV would get better mileage on the city street. But, If I guess right; you demand $3 gas so you can cruise at 80mph on the freeways. That's a thing of the past, Pal. I can live with the $4.25 premium price.



Taxed to death already....
What kind of liberal B/S nonsense is this? The point of the article is that we should have already been paying $4 a gallon for the past 20 years with the "excess money" going to the U.S. government in taxes as a way to discourage the manufacture of SUVs and trucks. So now, with the current upswing in oil prices, we would be paying over $6 a gallon at the pump. IDIOT! If you deliberately wanted to ruin the American economy, you couldn't pick a better plan. Cuba is now planning on drilling for oil off the US gulf coast. Brazil is drilling in the Atlantic off the coast of South America to meet their oil needs. But the U.S.? We are so hamstrung by the "environmental movement" that we cannot tap into proven reserves of domestically available oil in order to free ourselves of dependence on the rest of the world to supply our our energy needs. More taxes are clearly NOT the answer... Production of our own oil and building new fuel refinery capabilities here in the U.S. is the ONLY way to bring gasoline prices back down to earth.

Turbo in Houston