Even Cheney Thinks Gas Tax Holiday is a Bad Idea
by Andrew Posner, Providence, Rhode Island on 06. 3.08
Just how bad an idea is the gas tax holiday being proposed most prominently by John McCain and Hillary Clinton? Well, it raised the ire of NY Times columnist Thomas Friedman, but that's certainly no surprise. No, Dick Cheney, the reclusive Vice-President, has actually said that the idea of a gas tax holiday is "a false notion, in the sense that you're not going to have much of an impact, given the size of the gasoline tax on the total cost of the gallon of gas." If Dick Cheney doesn't like the idea of lowering a tax, it must be a truly bad idea.
Of course, Cheney has a much better, more sensible plan. And what is that plan? Why, drilling in places like the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge! Forget the fact that doing so would have an infinitesimally small impact on gas prices (perhaps as infinitesimal as the very gas tax holiday he is deriding as silly?): Cheney thinks he knows what we need to do to solve our energy problems! Fortunately, neither the gas tax holiday (which isn't even supported by the President), nor drilling in ANWR, stand much of a chance of being passed. Still, it says something about the state of the energy debate when people on both sides of the aisle are spending their time discussing ethanol, gas holidays, and drilling in ANWR, none of which are going to do anything to help solve our pressing energy independence/air pollution/climate change issues.
Via: ::Yahoo News
Petroleum Politics
::Survey: Do We Need a Gas Tax Holiday?
::Are Gas Prices High Enough?
::Is the Lieberman-Warner Climate Bill on its Last Legs?
::Obama Says Climate Change is Real, Will Hire Gore
::Obama Gets a Boost From the Crucial Bicycle Swing Vote
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- The US Should Be Denmark: Tom Friedman on Greening the Economy
- Tom Friedman Can't Make Up His Mind
- 5 Natural Blemish Busters
- Greening Gifts this Holiday Season
Satellite Images Show Papua New Guinea's Rapid Deforestation
|
Cornish Sea Salt is Direct From the Sea
|
Hasn't oil exploration defiled enough of the earth!
Of all the harebrained schemes, drilling for more oil in a national park completely defies logic or common sense! Dicks head is the pollution that needs to be capped & traded!
I'm finding myself personally torn on this issue.
On one hand, offshore drilling in CA and onshore drilling in AK might easy the financial suffering of the lower and middle classes in the USA (of which I'm a part of), but then again it will provide less incentive to switch to cleaner alternatives.
I know that as an environmentalist I should hold out for the cleaner alternatives, but I'd be dishonest if I didn't at least admit that current fuel prices are more than just mildly painful at this point.
I like to think of these as labor pains, but I find myself resentful that I can't afford to get a group of friends piled into my Jetta and drive 2 hours west to get to the natural parks in my state (I do miss hiking).
What is going to ease the suffering of the poor and middle class is much better public transit, rail and cycling facilities so people are not forced to drive everywhere.
People have been horribly wasteful for years. It is really hard to feel sorry for them when their wasteful ways catch up with them.
I was going to jump all over Fenix for the oil drilling comment at first but he/she is right. It seems at first like it's just a few more holes in the ground, but, the really caustic and scary stuff that comes out of and into those holes, not to mention the other byproducts, the trucking, the pipelining, the factor of human contamination and you are going to end up with another Love Canal in a currently beautiful albeit lonely place.
If it can be proven that there would be minimal impact to the environment, I would be for it, but we are talking about big oil and I don't necessarily trust them.
Nucular -
As an aside, the Nuclear Option- 'they' say all the time that France generates 80% of its electricity needs from nuclear power and that we should do the same. I don't know where I read it (the beauty of the internet), but I think in raw megawatts, we already produce what France produces via nukes. Due to our larger size, population, and waste, it is a small percentage of our total electric power generation. To produce 80% of our power via the nuclear option, we would have to build hundred(s) more plants? I am not certain of the math.
Hence, we should concentrate more on wind and solar for basic energy and maybe build more efficient refineries to replace our aging WW II technology ones.
vsk
Why not open up the pristine areas for drilling with the caveat that a significant % of the proceeds go directly into accelerated development of renewable energy sources? That way we have a buffer against gas prices while building a foundation of energy/oil independence.