[Mb-civic] Real relief on gas prices - Joan Vennochi - Boston Globe Op-Ed

[William Swiggard]

  Real relief on gas prices

By Joan Vennochi |  April 27, 2006  |  The Boston Globe

LET THEM eat cake -- or wait in line for a Prius.

The high price of gasoline is the talk of the nation. But there is 
little talk about government's piece of the action -- the revenue 
collected from federal and state gas taxes.

Why not temporarily roll them back? That would provide instant consumer 
relief -- not the future, fantasy relief suggested this week in Washington.

''Gasoline price increases are like a hidden tax on the working people," 
President Bush said in a speech that called for a federal inquiry into 
possible price-gouging, an easing of environmental rules on gasoline 
production, and a halt to new purchases for the nation's energy reserve.

Bush conveniently ignored one built-in cost: Government levies include a 
federal 18.4 cents-a-gallon tax on gas; and the states tax on top of 
that. In Massachusetts, the gas tax includes a 21-cents-a-gallon excise 
tax and a 2.5-cents-a-gallon fee to reimburse gas stations for 
environmental cleanup.

Lowering the gas tax is disputed as a disincentive to conservation. 
However, by that logic, government should do nothing to address the 
rising gas costs. Just let them rise and conservation will follow -- or, 
what is the more likely scenario, the rich will drive state-of-the-art 
hybrids and the poor will hitchhike.

And of course, there is the eternal argument that government needs more 
taxpayer money to do its job.

According to the conservative Tax Foundation in Washington, D.C., 
federal and state gas taxes ''pumped more than $54 billion into federal 
and state coffers last year alone." Now, it would be nice if those 
billions were actually used to repair and upgrade US roads and bridges. 
However, they seem to be going elsewhere -- maybe to Baghdad? A 2005 
report card for America's infrastructure issued by the American Society 
of Civil Engineers found little improvement from the ''D plus" issued in 
2001. It found that 34 percent of America's roads are in poor or 
mediocre condition and 27 percent of bridges are structurally deficient 
or obsolete. In Big Dig-consumed Massachusetts, 71 percent of roads are 
in poor or mediocre condition, 51 percent of bridges are structurally 
deficient or functionally obsolete.

But politicians, including tax-cut-loving Republicans, get twitchy when 
gas-tax rollbacks are proposed.

Last fall in Massachusetts, when prices started to spike, state 
Representative Bradley H. Jones Jr., a Republican from North Reading, 
called for a three-month holiday from the state's gasoline tax. Governor 
Mitt Romney initially dismissed the idea, calling it ''an additional 
incentive to use gasoline and energy." He later amended his comment to 
say the proposal made no sense as a long-term solution. This week, Jones 
proposed to exempt municipalities from the tax when they purchase gas 
for public vehicles; the proposal was blocked by Democratic legislators. 
''There is a limited amount we can do at the state level," said Jones. 
''This was not a panacea or long-term solution. But to ignore the short 
term is a mistake."

Ignoring the short term is what Bush did in his four-point plan ''to 
confront high gasoline prices." Mary Anne Marsh, a Democratic consultant 
and Fox News commentator, offers this alternative four-point plan: Call 
upon Congress to temporarily suspend the federal gas tax; call on 
governors across the country to temporarily suspend state gas taxes; 
tell the Saudi Arabian ambassador that the United States wants lower oil 
prices in return for protecting Saudi production plants; and call in 
every oil and gas industry CEO and ask them to forgo a percentage of 
profits for reasons of national security.

When it comes to raising an issue to a national security level, 
''Republicans do it for lesser things than oil," she said. As for 
Democrats, she said, those who really want to help working men and women 
should also support temporary suspension of the gas tax.

All the talk about conservation and hybrid cars ignores some basic facts 
of life in America. The wealthier, more highly educated consumer has 
more flexibility to work from a laptop at home -- and more income to 
purchase the new, more fuel-efficient vehicles. The working poor often 
commute long distances, often from rural areas and the exurbs, with 
little access to mass transit. When you clean homes for a living or work 
in restaurant kitchens, you need a sure way to get to work. Often, the 
only choice is an older car that runs on too much high-priced gasoline.

Yes, America is addicted to oil. But government is addicted to taxes. 
Conservation is a two-way street.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/04/27/real_relief_on_gas_prices/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20060427/7f0d06eb/attachment.htm