Showing posts with label Pandering. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pandering. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
McCain's McContradictions
There is a scathing new article up on the conservative New Republic that unloads on John McCain for his contradictory promises over the last week. It's a must-read.
John McCain's fantastical pledge on Monday to balance the budget by 2013 through massive tax cuts and unidentified budget reductions deserved the bad reviews it received. But the most unfortunate element of his incoherent promise is that it's representative of his policy agenda these days.
While the McCain campaign is trying to paint Barack Obama as a flip-flopper, the Arizona Republican is making diametrically opposed policy promises to different audiences at the same time. The contradictions are often in the details, but their obscurity is evidence of the campaign's cynicism.
Read More
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
More 'Psychological Benefits' from McCain on Energy
On the heels of McCain's admission yesterday that his support of President Bush's proposal to open up the US coastline to offshore drilling would have ZERO short term effect on gas prices and would only give Americans a "psychological benefit" (read: voters think it sounds nice), here's another doozy.
Today, McCain pledged that America would have "strategic independence" from foreign oil by 2025.
Doesn't that sound nice? Do you have any idea what that means? Neither do I.
It sounds an awful lot like McCain a couple months ago:
My friends, I will have an energy policy that we will be talking about, which will eliminate our dependence on oil from the Middle East that will — that will then prevent us — that will prevent us from having ever to send our young men and women into conflict again in the Middle East.
If "strategic independence by 2025" is the same as "eliminat[ing] our dependence on foreign oil", here's the big problem with that (via the Carpetbagger Report):
[T]here isn’t an energy expert in the world — not one — who thinks we can “eliminate our dependence on oil from the Middle East.” It’s a child’s fantasy, but McCain spouts this stuff as if solving our problems really were just that easy. It reminds me of his solution to the fighting in Iraq: “One of the things I would do if I were President would be to sit the Shiites and the Sunnis down and say, ‘Stop the bullshit.’”
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Bush/McCain Offshore Proposal Saves 8 Cents/Gallon 10-20 Years Out
I really can't figure out which thing to be more angry at.
Should I be more angry at John McCain for proposing to open up offshore drilling, which even he admits would have ZERO short term effect?
OR
Should I be more angry at much of the mainstream news media for not doing the math and reporting the g.d. truth about the b.s. that McCain is peddling.
Well, here's the math, from Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, D.C.:
According to the NYT, the Energy Information Agency estimates that the total amount of oil in the offshore zone in question is about 16 billion barrels. If we assume that it would take about ten years from the day of authorization to get to peak production and that most of the oil is pumped out over 30 years, this would translate into a bit over 1 million barrels of oil a day.
That would be equal to about 1 percent of world production in a decade. If we assume a long-run demand elasticity of 0.3, this would imply a drop in world prices of approximately 3 percent. In today's prices, we would be looking at a drop in the price of a barrel of oil from around $135 to $131. If this were passed on one to one in gas prices (this is long-run story), we might expect to see a drop in the price of a gallon of gas from around $4.00 to around $3.92 a gallon.
That's a savings of only 8 cents per gallon after full drilling production started up and refining capacity kicked in 10-20 years down the road!
McCain Admits Offshore Drilling is BS
Here's a nice quote for you. Faced with a nearly unanimous consensus of energy experts and economists who say that McCain's 180-degree flip-flop on opening up offshore drilling would produce ZERO short-term impact on gas prices (not to mention that fact that it would at most drop gas prices about $0.15 in 10 years), McCain basically admitted today that his proposal is just so much feel-good bulls**t:
"I don't see an immediate relief... [but] exploiting those reserves would have psychological impact that I think is beneficial."
Hmm, to what psychological impact are you referring, Senator McCain? Perhaps to the nice feelings it would engender in the "low-information" electorate who, through ignorance, won't realize that you're peddling a substantially useless and environmentally reckless proposal?
Feh. Here's what The Carpetbagger Report had to say:
McCain believes we have to focus on “practical ideas,” which in this case aren’t actually practical, and won’t have a pragmatic effect. At the same time, we have to worry less about practicality, and consider what might have a “psychological impact” on the country, whether the policy makes sense or not.
What?
...
The incoherence here is breathtaking. McCain believes drilling is part of a short-term solution. He also believes drilling offers no real short-term solutions. McCain believes a gas-tax holiday will produce big savings for consumers. And no savings for consumers. McCain believes we need pragmatic policies that work. He also believes we need psychic policies that make people happy whether they work or not.
I have no idea what John McCain is talking about. The real question, though, is whether John McCain knows what John McCain is talking about.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Quote of the Day: McCain - Offshore Drilling
This is a gem from an article at the Huffington Post that tries to find a single energy analyst or economist that supports McCain's claim that his flip-flop on offshore drilling will have any short-term effect:
Obviously McCain's people know this is kind of a joke. But they have the media frame that they want. They have Obama sitting there whining about the environment and he is there doing something about five-dollar gas, when in essence there is nothing his plan does for short term relief. -- Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research
Friday, June 20, 2008
Quote of the Day: Obama on Coastal Drilling
I am proud of Obama for standing up against McCain's latest ineffectual pander.
Just like McCain's absurd "gas tax holiday" proposal (which all economists agree would save Americans either nothing or $28 on average), McCain's recent proposal to open up America's coastal waters to offshore oil drilling operations (which is, to boot, a 180-degree flip-flop from his earlier position) is a shameless, useless sop to voters that assumes that Americans are too stupid or ill-informed to realize what crap it is (according to recent polls, Americans may indeed be just that stupid ill-informed).
Here is Obama on the latest McCain silliness:
Believe me — if I thought that there was any evidence at all that drilling could save people money who are struggling to fill up their tanks by this summer or this year or even the next few years, I would consider it. But it won’t. And John McCain knows that.
Friday, June 13, 2008
McCain Versus Economists (and Common Sense)
McCain is continuing to dig himself deeper into a hole over this whole "gas tax holiday" stupidity.
Here's the latest from The Carpetbagger Report:
Read MoreAt an event in New Hampshire, asked about his gas-tax holiday proposal, McCain lashed out, angrily saying, “If you want to call it a gimmick, fine. You know the economists? They’re the same ones that didn’t predict this housing crisis we’re in.”
First, I don’t know what McCain has against economists. He’s hired a whole team of them to try to rationalize his ridiculous economic policy.
Second, it’s not just economists who realize McCain’s gas-tax idea is absurd, it’s common sense. We have a fixed supply of gas, so even a little critical thinking shows that “the tax cut really goes to the oil companies.”
And third, blaming economists for failing to predict the housing crisis is especially inane, since the opposite is true.
Monday, June 9, 2008
McCain To Resurrect Absurd Gas Tax Holiday
McCain is at it again. He is planning to resurrect the absurd "gas tax holiday" that he proposed back in March, which was so completely and unequivocally excoriated by every notable economist and commentator who could be reached for comment those many weeks ago.
As a refresher, here are my earlier posts on how ineffectual, wrong-headed and intellectually dishonest the whole proposition is. Barack Obama has routinely spoken out and called this idea out for the shameless pandering that it is.
Here's the word out on McCain today:
John McCain is planning to resurrect his call for a national gas tax holiday, which became a staple of his stump speech in late April and early May. A McCain aide told CNN's Dana Bash on Monday that the Arizona senator planned to plug the gas tax holiday in public statements throughout the day.Here's the Carpetbagger Report's take:Along with Barack Obama, many economists largely dismissed the notion of a gas tax holiday as a political ruse that would do little to lower prices, but McCain has repeatedly said he does not believe the proposal would be a panacea for America’s energy woes.
Instead, McCain argued, low-income families could save some extra cash to pay for their children’s school supplies this fall, or perhaps treat themselves to a nice dinner.
Most economists have estimated that a gas tax holiday would save Americans nothing at the pump, because retailers would simply raise their prices to compensate. Even if we took McCain at his word that it would save some money, it would only save the average consumer $25-30!McCain believes “low-income families could save some extra cash to pay for their children’s school supplies this fall, or perhaps treat themselves to a nice dinner.”
This is just too ridiculous for words. McCain wants to eliminate the 18.4-cent a gallon federal gas tax over the summer. This would cost the Highway Trust Fund between $9 billion and $11 billion. McCain hasn’t said whether he’d just increase the deficit to make up the difference, or just let the transportation money disappear, costing thousands of jobs.
And what would consumers get in return? Nothing. Putting aside the volatility in oil prices, and the fact that the cost of a glass of gas will probably go up over the summer regardless of federal taxes, Americans won’t actually be in a position to save any money if the gas tax is temporarily repealed. McCain may not be the sharpest crayon in the box, but he almost certainly realizes this.
Great, by that logic, how about a $25 gift card to Office Depot (you know, for the school supplies) or McDonald's (for the "nice dinner" that $25 can buy a family of four)?
At least that way we could waste the same amount of money giving out worthless freebies to people without depleting the state infrastructure renewal funds that are funded by the federal gas tax.
Monday, May 5, 2008
Be careful of prophets bearing false gifts
Quote of the Day:
Be careful of prophets bearing false gifts.
-- Miles Mogulescu, in an article discussing the lunacy of the McCain/Clinton "gax tax holiday".
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Obama Releases New Gas Prices Ad
Ah, this new Obama ad that calls out McCain and Clinton for their shameless "gas tax holiday" pandering reminds me of the reason why I fell in love with Obama. As Obama says at the end of the ad: "You deserve someone who is going to tell you the truth."
Read more about the McCain-Clinton gas tax proposal:
Newsweek Lists Why Gas Tax Pander is Ridiculous
Johnathan Alter at Newsweek lists many of the reasons why the gas tax pander proposed by McCain and Clinton is so ridiculous:
Read More* It's a direct transfer of money from motorists to oil companies, which are getting ready this week to again report record obscene profits. If the federal excise tax were lifted, oil companies would simply raise prices and pocket most of the difference. Clinton's proposal to recover the money with a windfall profits tax on oil companies sounds nice but won't happen. That tax was easily blocked by the Senate in December and would likely be blocked again.
* It offers taxpayers only peanuts. The Congressional Budget Office says the average savings to motorists this summer would be a total of $30. Did I miss something, or was that measly number somehow not included in Clinton's explanation of her support?
* It sends more hard-earned money to the Middle East, which is terrible for our national security. Remember, 15 of the 19 terrorists on 9/11 came from Saudi Arabia. How did they get the terrorist training? The madrassa indoctrination? Oil money.
* It worsens global warming by encouraging gasoline consumption. When you flee your house in 2020 because of flooding, remember which politicians pandered.
* It makes it more likely you'll have a car accident or will waste even more time in traffic. The proceeds from the gas tax go for highway construction and upgrades. Because the tax (24.4 cents a gallon on diesel fuel) was last raised 15 years ago, our infrastructure is a mess, with potholes and dangerous crossings practically everywhere. Thousands of repair projects will be further delayed.
* It will cost 300,000 construction jobs, according to the Department of Transportation. Makes it kind of ironic when Clinton starts her rallies saying she wants "jobs, jobs, jobs."
* It will cost the U.S. Treasury at least $8.5 billion and probably much more, according to state highway officials. For McCain that's no money at all—merely one month in Iraq. For Clinton it's money she's already spent. She has said in the past that any proceeds from a windfall profits tax would go for renewable energy. The $8.5 billion figure assumes the tax would be reapplied after Labor Day. Fat chance. The one-year costs are probably closer to $30 billion.
* It won't happen anyway because Congress isn't usually quite that stupid, and if it is, President Bush would veto the bill.
Ludicrous "Gas Tax Holiday" Panned
The last couple of days have seen political "silly season" rise to new heights, with John McCain proposing, and then Hillary Clinton endorsing the most brazen, ineffectual and fundamentally pander-laden proposal to come out of this election contest thus far.
John McCain (and then Clinton) proposed lifting the 18.4 center-per-gallon gas tax during the summer. If you think through the numbers, guess what this would save the average consumer? As Obama said:
This is an idea that, when all is said and done, will save you - at most - half a tank of gas over the course of the entire summer. That's about $28.
The blogging and news media intelligentsia have reviewed this proposed gas tax "holiday" and have unanimously and scathingly excoriated the proposal for the pandering, worthless voter payoff that it is.
Here's a roundup from the Huffington Post:
Tom Friedman (NYT columnist)
It is great to see that we finally have some national unity on energy policy. Unfortunately, the unifying idea is so ridiculous, so unworthy of the people aspiring to lead our nation, it takes your breath away. Hillary Clinton has decided to line up with John McCain in pushing to suspend the federal excise tax on gasoline, 18.4 cents a gallon, for this summer's travel season. This is not an energy policy. This is money laundering: we borrow money from China and ship it to Saudi Arabia and take a little cut for ourselves as it goes through our gas tanks. What a way to build our country.
Jonathan Alter (Newsweek columnist)
It will cost the U.S. Treasury at least $8.5 billion and probably much more, according to state highway officials. For McCain that's no money at all--merely one month in Iraq. For Clinton it's money she's already spent. She has said in the past that any proceeds from a windfall profits tax would go for renewable energy. The $8.5 billion figure assumes the tax would be reapplied after Labor Day. Fat chance. The one-year costs are probably closer to $30 billion.
Greg Mankiw (former Bush economic adviser)
"Score one for Obama," wrote Greg Mankiw, a former chairman of President George W. Bush's Council of Economic Advisers. "In light of the side effects associated with driving ... gasoline taxes should be higher than they are, not lower."
Jonah Gelbach (Obama supporter)
One point that has gone largely unreported in the regular media is that a brief gas tax holiday would likely do little to reduce prices for consumers simply because in the short run the supply of gasoline is relatively fixed (in econese, the short run supply curve is close to vertical). As a result, a cut in the gas tax of brief duration will simply cause the pre-tax price of gas to rise. This would mean that the price paid by consumers would change relatively little, if at all (tho James Hamilton's post, linked below, suggests the consumer price might fall by as much as half the gas tax, which I think would be about 9 cents). Instead, the price received by oil companies would simply rise, providing them with windfall profits."
Federico Peña (former Clinton energy secretary, Obama supporter)
"Today we're seeing another example of Washington politics at its worst. Senator Clinton is running TV ads and launching repeated attacks on Barack Obama for not supporting the gas tax holiday she's supporting, but today her own aides told the Washington Post that they know that this is a questionable plan and that they are using it to make it appear they're against big oil. The Clinton gas tax gimmick does little to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and will actually increase oil prices. It is the kind of pandering that insults people's intelligence. With energy prices skyrocketing, we're looking for real solutions--not political posturing to get elected."
Robert Reich (Obama supporter)
So what else can we do? McCain and HRC are proposing a tax holiday on gas - so this summer you wouldn't pay the 18 cents a gallon that would otherwise go to Uncle Sam. Talk about dumb ideas. This will only encourage Americans to drive more, thereby increasing demand and causing gas prices to rise even higher. Driving more will also put more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, which fuels global warming. And this will cost taxpayers some $10 billion. It's a cheap political gimmick that does nothing to stem the rising price of oil.
Paul Krugman (NYT columnist)
Why doesn't cutting the gas tax this summer make sense? It's Econ 101 tax incidence theory: if the supply of a good is more or less unresponsive to the price, the price to consumers will always rise until the quantity demanded falls to match the quantity supplied. Cut taxes, and all that happens is that the pretax price rises by the same amount. The McCain gas tax plan is a giveaway to oil companies, disguised as a gift to consumers.
Is the supply of gasoline really fixed? For this coming summer, it is. Refineries normally run flat out in the summer, the season of peak driving. Any elasticity in the supply comes earlier in the year, when refiners decide how much to put in inventories. The McCain/Clinton gas tax proposal comes too late for that. So it's Econ 101: the tax cut really goes to the oil companies.The Clinton twist is that she proposes paying for the revenue loss with an excess profits tax on oil companies. In one pocket, out the other. So it's pointless, not evil. But it is pointless, and disappointing.
Len Burman (Tax Policy Center)
For a moment, forget about whether encouraging fossil fuel burning makes sense during a time of global warming, whether we should raid the highway trust fund when bridges are collapsing for lack of maintenance, or the disconnect between the proposal to cut gasoline taxes and the candidates' endorsement of "cap-and-trade" limits that would raise gasoline prices.
Even in this alternative reality, there's a problem. Refiners run near capacity every summer as families rack up miles on family vacations. That's one reason why gas prices jump in the summer. If McCain's excise tax cut translated into lower prices, we'd all want to drive more, which would push up the demand for gasoline. Since the refiners can't produce much more without building new refineries, the price has to go back up.
American Society of Civil Engineers
The nation's roads and bridges are already overburdened and any "gas tax holiday" -- including the one proposed by Sen. Hillary Clinton -- would only delay much needed transportation projects the American Society of Civil Engineers said today. A moratorium on the gas tax poses a significant threat to the U.S. economy, and could potentially increase the cost per driver caused by traffic congestion and poor road conditions. It will provide no tangible benefit to the American people, and any plan for restoring the $8.5 billion in lost transportation funding is unlikely.
James Hamilton (Economist, UC San Diego)
"I don't think that a gas-tax cut would result in a really big drop in gasoline prices," said James Hamilton, a professor of economics at the University of California San Diego. It's simple economics: Without a corresponding increase in supply, he added, the price would rise again.
Lawrence Goldstein (Energy Policy Research Foundation)
"You don't want to stimulate consumption," said Lawrence Goldstein, an economist at the Energy Policy Research Foundation. "The signal you want to send is the opposite one. Politicians should say that conservation is where people's mindset ought to be."
Lee Schipper (Visiting scholar, UC-Davis)
"Higher demand just pushes the world price a bit higher, giving a sizable share of the tax refund to oil producers," said Lee Schipper, an energy expert and a visiting scholar at the University of California at Berkeley.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
