First, today's political climate -- or any day's political climate -- is not a fact of nature. It's created by political action and discussion. Speculation about political viability should play no part in discussion of policy proposals. If the policy promises social benefits it will change the political climate -- not the other way around.

So as to the tax itself: I think the principle is sound, but what the Gazette is pushing has two problems. First, it is statewide when it should be national. Otherwise you get issues with crossing state borders to buy gas and political pressure based on comparisons with other states' rates. Second, the tax they advocate is way too low to have much effect on either consumption or income.

An effective gas tax plan would show a lot more gumption. It would bring US gas taxes closer to the European level and enable significant new revenues for non-fossil energy research and subsidies.

Here's a bolder idea: a one dollar/gallon tax nationwide. The revenue is used for two purposes: a rebate for every adult American, plus funding for alternative energy, public transportation, and related moves toward energy independence and environmental sustainability.

For example, where I live, a dollar tax would bring the cost of a gallon of gas to about $4. A vehicle that uses 20 gallons/month would now pay about $80/month. A vehicle that uses 50 gal/month would now pay $200. And so forth. Those who have no vehicle would pay nothing directly, as usual.

Out of the tax revenue, each individual would receive a tax rebate or check (at their option) of $30/month. Now the 20 gal/month person is paying $50/month, or about $2.50/gallon. If two people are using the vehicle and use their rebates for fuel they end up paying $20/month. The 50 gallon/month vehicle pays $170/month for gas, or about $3.40/gallon, or less if there are more people contributing their rebates. Those who use public transportation or other means come out ahead, except for price increases of public transit, cabs, etc, which are more than covered by the rebate.

Unlike some timid 10-cent tax increase, a dollar/gallon tax would actually move us toward the goals we claim to desperately want to reach: incentives to drive less in more efficient vehicles; incentives for car companies to cater to a much more fuel-cost-conscious consumer; dedicated funding sources for research and development on technologies that promise energy independence and all the global economic/political improvement that goes with it.

Global climate change and peak oil are realities. We will either deal with them through mildly painful measures like the gas tax/rebate or we will wait until catastrophe strikes and brings far more radical change that threatens the very existence of our societies, especially in the "developed" countries. Right now the threat is also an opportunity to initiate changes that offer long-term economic and social progress. The choice is refreshingly simple: relentless pain or peace and progress. We don't have much more time to decide which we want to work for.

I've been wondering for years now, why it's always the smokers that must pay for things the State of Federal government want. Why not the drinkers of America. They are sinners too.

They call a tax like this a Sin tax.

Gas prices have already more than doubled since Bush took office in 2000 - raising the price even more is going the extreme.

Read my article on How High Will Gas Taxes Go here: Coonsey's View: http://www.freewebs.com/coonsey/

Coonsey's View

HTTP://WWW.FREEWEBS.COM/COONSEY/

I predict that people will pretty much quit driving when gas hits 575 dollars a quart...
they'll be too busy shooting each other long
before that....