Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Gas Prices Squeeze Indiana Voters

Note: Please upgrade your Flash plug-in to view our enhanced content.

Indianapolis drivers share their thoughts on the price of gas and what the candidates can -- or cannot -- do to ease the burden. (Francine Uenuma / washingtonpost.com)

By Web Politics Editor  |  May 5, 2008; 1:23 PM ET
Categories:  Primaries  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Clinton, Obama Stress Unity in Indianapolis
Next: Economists Release Letter Opposing Clinton Gas Tax Plan

Comments

If you're a Mac user and having trouble with this page, send an email to the Post via this link:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/admin/help/popup/frame_page.html

Every time my cursor hovers over the text of this or any other post on The Trail, it becomes a live link to today's Howard Kurtz column. This has been going on all day and the Post Web gurus are apparently all out to lunch right now.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 5, 2008 6:19 PM | Report abuse

How can Hillary run as the anti-Republican if she's so eager to agree with John McCain. Both McCain and Clinton got this one way wrong. This is political ploy. Drivers won't even see the 28 dollars (which means cents). The oil companies won't pass the savings to the consumers. They'll just pocket it as profit and thank Hillary and McCain with an extra campaign donation. As for Clinton's proposal that the oil companies pay the tax: that's what they do now. It's incorporated in the price. BIG FAT GINORMOUS DUH! We're not stupid, Hillary.

Posted by: dcp | May 5, 2008 5:25 PM | Report abuse

If Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, won't allow "gas-tax holiday" legislation to be passed before Memorial Day, I'd say that's about the last straw:

RUN, CINDY, RUN!!!

http://www.cindyforcongress.org/

Posted by: JakeD | May 5, 2008 4:50 PM | Report abuse

ManUnitdFan:

Did you read Scalia's law review article?

SteelWheel1:

Hopefully, you are not voting in any upcoming primaries ; )

Posted by: JakeD | May 5, 2008 4:48 PM | Report abuse

Well, the President is not shooting the "gas tax holiday" idea down completely:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/04/20080429-1.html

"Q Thank you, sir. You have said that we need to wait until the first stimulus has taken effect to act again. But since it was passed, gas prices have gone up, foreclosures have gone up, there have been layoffs, news just this morning that consumer confidence is down yet again. Isn't it time to think about doing more?

And on another issue, would you support a summer moratorium on the federal gas tax?

THE PRESIDENT: First of all, the money is just now making it into people's bank accounts. And I applaud the Speaker and the Leader of the Senate and minority leaders there for working together to get this done. And now, after a period of time, the money is beginning to arrive, and we'll see what the effects are.

And we'll look at any idea in terms of energy, except I will tell you this, that if Congress is truly interested in solving the problem, they can send the right signal by saying we're going to explore for oil and gas in the U.S. territories, starting with ANWR. We can do so in an environmentally friendly way. They ought to say, why don't we -- I proposed, you might remember, taking some abandoned military bases and providing regulatory relief so we can build new refineries. I mean, if we're generally interested in moving forward with an energy policy that sends a signal to the world that we're not -- we're going to try to become less reliant upon foreign oil, we can explore at home, as well as continue on with an alternative fuels program."

Posted by: JakeD | May 5, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

JakeD wrote:

Even if it's only $28 in relief, I think most drivers in North Carolina and Indiana would be in favor for it.

--------------------------------------------
You would be wrong! I grew up in Indiana and currently live in North Carolina. The voters I've been in contact with are insulted. We are talking about a $28 savings over a stretch of three months, which we all know will be recouped via some other form of tax because the money is already accounted for.

Senator Obama is right when he says the oil companies will only maneuver a way to benefit from the the tax holiday. So lets just leave it along and get back to figuring out a long term solution to the fuel problem.

Posted by: SteelWheel1 | May 5, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Jake:

My point is that there never was a single, unified intent by either those who drafted the Constitution or those living at the time. For instance, the previously discussed Necessary and Proper Clause. Who is to say what "necessary" or "proper" means? Even when the Constitution was drafted, intelligent minds could disagree on that point. How is a Supreme Court justice to rule using original intent on the definition of a subjective word?

Posted by: ManUnitdFan | May 5, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

It is not going to happen, why discuss fantasy? Ok, Hillary will give them all free fuel and pay off the notes life on their rigs for their vote. This a amazing a intelligent people discussing about fantasy.

============
How about all the businesses that use fuel that will save hundreds of dollars with Hillary's tax holiday plan. The big eighteen wheel rigs, the dump trucks, business cars, delivery trucks, concrete trucks, excavating equipment, taxis, fishing boats, farm tractors, etc.

The media cannot see past their nose, and Obama is very elitist to say that only thirty dollars per month will be saved.

If this is politics then we need some more politics as this is a hell of a good idea. What does Obama have but opposition.

Posted by: J Carney | May 5, 2008 4:31 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 5, 2008 4:39 PM | Report abuse

ManUnitdFan:

I would NEVER say anything like "Supreme Court rulings are irrelevant" -- like it or not -- until they are overruled, they are the law of the land. As for your question, I am also going to go with the "original intent" (or, at least, what the reasonable person living at the time of ratification would have understood these words to mean, if there really is no consensus as to intent) of those who drafted the Constitution. See, Antonin Scalia, Originalism: The Lesser Evil, 57 U. Cin. L. Rev. 849.

Posted by: JakeD | May 5, 2008 4:35 PM | Report abuse

How about all the businesses that use fuel that will save hundreds of dollars with Hillary's tax holiday plan. The big eighteen wheel rigs, the dump trucks, business cars, delivery trucks, concrete trucks, excavating equipment, taxis, fishing boats, farm tractors, etc.

The media cannot see past their nose, and Obama is very elitist to say that only thirty dollars per month will be saved.

If this is politics then we need some more politics as this is a hell of a good idea. What does Obama have but opposition.

Posted by: J Carney | May 5, 2008 4:31 PM | Report abuse

Art. I, Section 7. Clause 1: "All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives ..."

Posted by: JakeD | May 5, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Jake:

By your logic, all Supreme Court rulings are irrelevant. But as long as you're going to go down the "ORIGINAL INTENT" route, who's original intent are we talking about? The Framers? They were heavily split during the drafting of the Constitution, and there's evidence that even they didn't agree on the interpretation of what was written.

Posted by: ManUnitdFan | May 5, 2008 4:25 PM | Report abuse

This whole thing is very weird. Both Clinton and Obama are debating something that is nothing but fiction, the gas tax when there are serious issues to talk about. What the F is going on here.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 5, 2008 4:25 PM | Report abuse

She will promise every one a new Prius to help them with the price of gas. What's the difference, it will never happen they are both fiction so why not say it.
===========
Of course HRC's supporters are in favor of her not-so-clever plan to save $10 a month while 300,000 people lose their jobs in the transportation industry. They are after all the uneducated blue collar workers the media contends. I really hope they have enough wisdom to see past her lies. Still no bill has been introduced. I wonder what her promises will be in Kentucky, Oregon and Montana.

Posted by: fmlndn71 | May 5, 2008 4:13 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 5, 2008 4:21 PM | Report abuse

Perhaps you should start here: http://www.schoolhouserock.tv/Bill.html

Posted by: JakeD | May 5, 2008 4:20 PM | Report abuse

fmlndn71:

Last I checked, the HOUSE (not Senate) is responsible for introducing tax-relief Bills.

Posted by: JakeD | May 5, 2008 4:19 PM | Report abuse

Of course HRC's supporters are in favor of her not-so-clever plan to save $10 a month while 300,000 people lose their jobs in the transportation industry. They are after all the uneducated blue collar workers the media contends. I really hope they have enough wisdom to see past her lies. Still no bill has been introduced. I wonder what her promises will be in Kentucky, Oregon and Montana.

Posted by: fmlndn71 | May 5, 2008 4:13 PM | Report abuse

John:

The difference, of course, is that neither Clinton knew Procanick was molesting children. Obama knew about Wright and DEFENDED him ("I could no more disown him than I can disown my white grandmother").

dcwsano:

So, you were against the Economic Stimulus package too?

Posted by: JakeD | May 5, 2008 4:09 PM | Report abuse

The Stimulus package gave every family a minimum of $600.00 in tax relief. the Hillary/McCain gas tax plan would only give a maximum of $28.00. Its a phony proposal, Hillary knows it. When confronted with the news that the paln wouldn't work, her response is "I don't listen to economists." Right, she only listens to the political hacks running her campaign.

Posted by: dcwsano | May 5, 2008 4:05 PM | Report abuse

IF A PASTOR IS KNOWN BY THE COMPANY THEY KEEP!
When the Rev. William Procanick put his hand on the Bible during his
sex-abuse trial in Oneida County Court earlier this year, he swore to
tell the whole truth And nothing but the truth. But as the former
Clinton Pastor was sentenced Friday to three years in prison for
Inappropriately touching a 7-year-old girl at his Home last March, Judge
Michael L. Dwyer said Procanick Sacrificed his honesty the day he
testified.
Okay, so now that Bill and Hillary Clinton's pastor Has been convicted
of child molestation, will we see the Same furor directed at Hillary
that Obama has had to Endure these last few weeks?
IF A CANDIDATE IS KNOWN BY TH E PASTOR THEY KEEP ......
Then you u need to email this article to everyone you Know. Here the
CLINTON'S Pastor is convicted of child Molestation. So, if Obama bears
the guilt for his pastor's comment; then Hillary has to be equally
tainted by this man's crimes.
GIVES NEW MEANING TO SHOE ON THE OTHERS FOOT...

Posted by: John | May 5, 2008 4:04 PM | Report abuse

AJ:

I probably won't vote for McCain either.

ManUnitdFan:

Well, the Supreme Court got Dred Scot and Korematsu wrong too -- those have never been judicially overturned -- I don't need any "authority" besides ORIGINAL INTENT to argue un-Constitutionality.

Posted by: JakeD | May 5, 2008 3:57 PM | Report abuse

The Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 (Pub. L. 110-185, 122 Stat. 613, enacted February 13, 2008) was sponsored, in the House, by Speaker Pelosi and the following Congressmen voted in favor:

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carter
Castle
Castor
Chabot
Chandler
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Conyers
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Lincoln
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doolittle
Doyle
Drake
Dreier
Edwards
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Fallin
Fattah
Feeney
Ferguson
Filner
Fossella
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gordon
Granger
Graves
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hobson
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Hulshof
Inglis (SC)
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Jordan
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lamborn
Lampson
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lucas
Lynch
Mack
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul (TX)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Musgrave
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Neugebauer
Nunes
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Platts
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Richardson
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Sali
Sánchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Space
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Tauscher
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velázquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Wexler
Whitfield (KY)
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman (VA)
Wolf
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth

In the Senate, all three remaining Presidential candidates voted for the Bill.

Posted by: JakeD | May 5, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

Jake:

If the Necessary and Proper Clause has been used by the Supreme Court to validate actions like the creation of the Federal Reserve for nearly 200 years, on whose authority is the creation of said body unconstitutional? Besides a very vocal superminority.

Posted by: ManUnitdFan | May 5, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Two bad ideas don't make one good one.

footyfan:

If $145.50 tax relief for a family of five is "shockingly bad policy" what was the Economic Stimulus package (voted in overwhelmingly by both sides of the aisle)?

Posted by: JakeD | May 5, 2008 3:34 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 5, 2008 3:48 PM | Report abuse

Sorry JakeD...I will have to demote you a lot more since you must be a McCain supporter. That's even worse, at least Hillary tried to lie about her "gas tax holiday" being paid for by oil companies with a "windfall profits" tax. Poor McCain just said America needs to make spending cuts elsewhere in a federal budget that is already operating with a deficit. In other words, McCain wants America to pay for the "Gas Tax Holiday" by borrowing more money internationally from countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran and China, and then offer to threaten them with military action to "jack up" the price of oil more.

Brilliant reasoning! NOT!

Posted by: AJ | May 5, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

AJ:

For the last time, I am not a Hillary-supporter, but since you feel so comfortable with the ad hominem attacks, I will fully expect to see nothing less from you. Have a nice life ...

Posted by: JakeD | May 5, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

Lawrence Kudlow was educated at the University of Rochester in Rochester, New York and was graduated in 1969 with a degree in history and Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs in Princeton in central New Jersey, where he studied politics and economics but left before earning his degree. Kudlow began his career as a Staff Economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. He worked in a division of that bank that handled open market operations, which involve buying and selling bonds to help control inflation and interest rates.

During the first term of the Reagan administration (1981-1985), Kudlow served as Associate Director for Economics and Planning in the Office of Management and Budget.

Sounds like enough qualifications for me ; )

Posted by: JakeD | May 5, 2008 3:37 PM | Report abuse

footyfan:

If $145.50 tax relief for a family of five is "shockingly bad policy" what was the Economic Stimulus package (voted in overwhelmingly by both sides of the aisle)?

Posted by: JakeD | May 5, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

Also, $9 billion divided by 97 days, divided by 300 million Americans = $0.30 per day. So, a family of five gets $1.50 per day = $145.50 over 97 days (unless there's a zero off somewhere there). I know it's not as much as the Economic Stimulus package (where's THAT tab going?) but every little bit helps.

Posted by: JakeD | May 5, 2008 2:25 PM
*******************************************

Oh my JakeD! I hope Hillary doesn't add and reason like you do, perhaps so. First and foremost your calculation of $0.30 per day is reasonable. That $0.30 per day is a best case scenario provided the oil companies don't raise prices because gasoline and diesel consumption increase with the "gas tax holiday".

Where your math breaks down is that family of 5 number! You don't multiply by 5 to boost your $0.30 per day savings. That $0.30 per day savings is for a family of 5!!!! I guess if 2 parents have 3 children (ages 1, 4, and 7), you are saying that they all drive equally to get that $1.50 per day savings.

What a joke! I see a lot of your postings JakeD and disagree with them. This is the first time I feel sorry for a Hillary-supporter trying to defend Hillary's "me too" (following behind McCain original proposal) "gas tax holiday".

I guess the Hillary-supporters will call me an elitist, because I know how to multiply and divide.

Obama in 08!

Posted by: AJ | May 5, 2008 3:33 PM | Report abuse

ManUnitdFan (or anyone else who wants to actually discuss it):

The 'Necessary and Proper' Clause has, indeed, been used to justify many un-Constitutional actions ever since McCulloch v. Maryland. Suffice it to say, in general, that Clause cannot "save" an otherwise un-Constitutional action by the federal government.

Phylan (or anyone else who wants to actually discuss it):

I will have to double-check, but isn't Lawrence Kudlow an economist too?

Posted by: JakeD | May 5, 2008 3:31 PM | Report abuse

i a week where we had our first opportunity to evaluate clinton & obama on substantive policy approaches that affect multiple generations, i'm annoyed more analysis, media attention isn't on these substantive issues.

i'm was not an obama supporter, but the moment clinton proposed this 3 month gas take "holiday" she lost my vote. we are facing serious issues and we need serious people who are strong enough to avoid political gimmicks disguised as sensible policy, and an multi-millionaire ivy league educated lawyer who wont dismiss economists as 'elite' when the tell her the truth.

regardless of who you 'support' this gas tax 'holiday' is just shockingly bad policy.

Posted by: footyfan | May 5, 2008 3:23 PM | Report abuse

Of course she does and from what I see on TV has good reason to. Have you seen some of these people interviewed? Forget gas, she should be promising free teeth and beer, she would win in a landslide. This whole thing is sad. Read some foreign papers, they are looking at us like we are a nation of morons, and they may be right.

Hillary must think the good people of Indiana and North Carolina are lacking in intelligence and common sense to fall for a plan that will never work. The oil companies are greedy,will never pay for the Clinton plan, the President and congress will never have any plan in place for this summer or any other summer.Please listen to all the economist who have explained the gas tax plan as presented. Obama is being truthful for a very good reason,he concerns himself with the false information being sent your way that is not coming your way. The results of a survey that was done. CARING/Hillary Clinton/14%. There is no caring for you and the dissapointment you will experience, the only caring is for herself and the vote you gave to her for her dishonesty. Save your vote for Obama the truthful candidate who does care for you.

Posted by: Phylan | May 5, 2008 3:02 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 5, 2008 3:16 PM | Report abuse

Jake:

I'm going to let someone else do the rebutting for me, since that's a lot to go through:

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/3616/flaherty3.html

The interpretation of the Constitutional Ron Paul uses, I think, is entirely too strict. There are too many vague words littered throughout the document that are never properly defined, and too many modern developments that the Framers could have never imagined.

Posted by: ManUnitdFan | May 5, 2008 3:16 PM | Report abuse

Hillary must think the good people of Indiana and North Carolina are lacking in intelligence and common sense to fall for a plan that will never work. The oil companies are greedy,will never pay for the Clinton plan, the President and congress will never have any plan in place for this summer or any other summer.Please listen to all the economist who have explained the gas tax plan as presented. Obama is being truthful for a very good reason,he concerns himself with the false information being sent your way that is not coming your way. The results of a survey that was done. CARING/Hillary Clinton/14%. There is no caring for you and the dissapointment you will experience, the only caring is for herself and the vote you gave to her for her dishonesty. Save your vote for Obama the truthful candidate who does care for you.

Posted by: Phylan | May 5, 2008 3:02 PM | Report abuse

ManUnitdFan:

First of all, the Federal Reserve (as Ron Paul points out, supported by the Austrian Business Cycle Theory, instead of containing inflation, the Federal Reserve, in theory and in practice, is responsible for causing inflation). In addition to eroding the value of individual savings, this creation of inflation leads to booms and busts in the economy. Thus Paul argues that government, via a central bank (the Federal Reserve), is the primary cause of economic recessions and depressions. He believes that economic volatility is decreased when the free market determines interest rates and money supply. Rep. Paul opposes inflation as an underhanded form of taxation, because it takes value away from the money that individuals hold without having to directly tax them. He sees the creation of the Federal Reserve, and its ability to "print money out of thin air" without commodity backing, as responsible for eroding the value of money, observing that "a dollar today is worth 4 cents compared to a dollar in 1913 when the Federal Reserve got in." In 1982, Paul was the prime mover in the creation of the U.S. Gold Commission, and in many public speeches Paul has voiced concern over the dominance of the current banking system and called for the return to a commodity-backed currency through a gradual reintroduction of hard currency, including both gold and silver. A commodity standard binds currency issue to the value of that commodity rather than fiat, making the value of the currency as stable as the commodity.

He condemns the role of the Federal Reserve and the national debt in creating inflation The minority report of the U.S. Gold Commission states that the federal and state governments are strictly limited in their monetary role by Article One, Section Eight, Clauses 2, 5, and 6, and Section Ten, Clause 1, "The Constitution forbids the states to make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debt, nor does it permit the federal government to make anything a legal tender." The Commission also recommended that the federal government "restore a definition for the term 'dollar.' We suggest defining a 'dollar' as a weight of gold of a certain fineness, .999 fine."[96] On multiple occasions in congressional hearings, he has sharply challenged two different chairmen of the Federal Reserve, Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke.

He has also called for the removal of all taxes on gold transactions. He has repeatedly introduced the Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act since 1999, to enable "America to return to the type of monetary system envisioned by our Nation's founders: one where the value of money is consistent because it is tied to a commodity such as gold"; it has received virtually no mainstream news coverage. He opposes dependency on paper fiat money, but also says that there "were some shortcomings of the gold standard of the 19th century ... because it was a fixed price and caused confusion." He argues that hard money, such as backed by gold or silver, would prevent inflation, but adds, "I wouldn't exactly go back on the gold standard but I would legalize the constitution where gold and silver should and could be legal tender, which would restrain the Federal Government from spending and then turning that over to the Federal Reserve and letting the Federal Reserve print the money."

(Even a broken clock like Ron Paul is right twice a day ; )

Posted by: JakeD | May 5, 2008 3:00 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton, who jumped on the gas-tax holiday bandwagon posthaste, wants to pay for it with a windfall profits tax on oil companies. This makes her plan much more fiscally responsible. Not only does she balance the books, she turns a proposal that was unlikely to ever get passed into one that could not make it through the Senate if Ronald Reagan and John F. Kennedy both rose from the dead and hand-carried it there.

There are few things more satisfying than taking a strong stand in favor of something that is never going to happen. Free pander!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 5, 2008 2:57 PM | Report abuse

===========================================
osd


Have you heard the latest pipe dreams,

"I WILL CHANGE WASHINGTON, WE ARE BETTER THAN THAT, A GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE, ACTING FORCEFULLY ON IRAN IF ISRAEL IS NUKED, ...."

This guys is all over the map, and I'm not sure what he's standing for. Are you confused, don't worry, you're not alone!


Their at it again, the Obama Spin Doctors.
We love ya!

osd

===========================================

Posted by: obama spin doctors | May 5, 2008 2:47 PM | Report abuse

The point is, offering what you know you can't deliver.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 5, 2008 2:33 PM | Report abuse

Lets call the $28.00 what it is, a bribe.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 5, 2008 2:32 PM | Report abuse

I'd like you to elaborate on what about the U.S. Government is "un-Constitutional." And if it's too big, why would you be in favor of creating more debt for future generations to pay off so consumers today can get $28 for gas?

Posted by: ManUnitdFan | May 5, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

Her spokesperson just said on CNN "We know it will never be signed, but at least she is offering something". Wait, offering something you know will never happen. Is she in some kind of Bizarro world. Are they so desperate they just hope people are that incredibly stupid?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 5, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

I wouldn't mind getting rid of all federal income taxes. BTW: I say "expert" Lawrence Kudlow over the weekend saying that he thought the "gas tax holiday" was agreat idea!

Posted by: JakeD | May 5, 2008 2:28 PM | Report abuse

She can just a well say, "starting today no more income tax and we are also giving everyone a new free car" . What does it matter what she says, it is not going to happen so she comes back and says, Well I tried, so vote for me".
What a F'n joke

Posted by: Anonymous | May 5, 2008 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Also, $9 billion divided by 97 days, divided by 300 million Americans = $0.30 per day. So, a family of five gets $1.50 per day = $145.50 over 97 days (unless there's a zero off somewhere there). I know it's not as much as the Economic Stimulus package (where's THAT tab going?) but every little bit helps.

Posted by: JakeD | May 5, 2008 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Either way is fine with me. The federal government is too big, and un-Constitutional, as it is.

Posted by: JakeD | May 5, 2008 2:19 PM | Report abuse

Jake:

How would we then fill the $9 billion hole in the Highway Trust Fund? Cut other government programs so everyone can get a free half-tank of gas? Or just put in on the US' tab? Either way, no thanks.

Posted by: ManUnitdFan | May 5, 2008 2:07 PM | Report abuse

AJ:

As I think I have told you, I am not a Hillary-supporter -- wouldn't vote for her in a million years -- Edwards was my first choice.

Posted by: JakeD | May 5, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse

There are 97 days between Memorial Day and Labor Day. If the "average" savings is only $28, that works out to just under $0.30 per day (but what about big rig truckers who pay over $1,000 to fill up?). What if it's $28 per month? Would that be worth it? I know that's not a lot of money for the Obamas, but I feed an entire family in Africa for that much.

Posted by: JakeD | May 5, 2008 2:02 PM | Report abuse

JakeD...you and other Hillary-supporters seemed to be economically challenged. When Barack HUSSEIN Obama says Hillary RODHAM Clinton's "Gas Tax Holiday" is a political ploy that at most can save the average driving American $28 over three months, he is giving a best case scenario.

In actuality, the savings if any will be alot lower. First and foremost, getting Congress to agree to suspend the gasoline tax within 3 weeks prior to the Memorial Day weekend (the official kickoff to summer driving gasoline season) won't happen. Secondly, suspending the tax encourages people to buy more gasoline. If the price of gasoline dropped by 18 cents per gallon on May 31st, people would start increasing there consumption of gasoline. As an Obama supporter, I know I would. But oil refineries, physically, won't be able to meet the increased demand for gasoline. So to prevent from being the main story on main stream news that say, Chevron gas stations ran out of gasoline in New York or California, oil companies will raise prices to curve demand in a matter of days.

Econ 101...Obama for President!

Posted by: AJ | May 5, 2008 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Claiming that one opponent "ignore[s] reality" making a "stupid gas tax proposal" instead of "fix[ing] the problem, let's make everyone think we're doing something" is NOT the way to Party Unity:

Dems Ramp Up Attacks

Barack HUSSEIN Obama and Hillary DIANE Clinton hit each other hard today, the day before contests in North Carolina and Indiana that could break the deadlock over who will be the Democratic nominee for president. full story:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/05/campaign.wrap/index.html

Posted by: JakeD | May 5, 2008 1:43 PM | Report abuse


Hillary Clinton - I proposing this?
"Well, No. 1, I am absolutely convinced that these record profits of the oil companies are a result of a number of factors beyond supply and demand. I think there has been market manipulation. In fact, Exxon Mobil official testifying under oath before the House of Representatives committee said that if it were just market factors, then the price of oil would be like $50 or $55 a barrel."

Do you believe that the vast majority of price increase in the barrel of oil is due to speculative market manipulation by energy traders?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=2345

.

Posted by: Frank, Austin TX | May 5, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

Even if it's only $28 in relief, I think most drivers in North Carolina and Indiana would be in favor for it.

Posted by: JakeD | May 5, 2008 1:38 PM | Report abuse

How do you spell Bamboozle? Clinton/McCain. Let's just ignore reality and send a message. Let's not fix the problem, let's make everyone think we're doing something. I am so tired of Politicians 'sending messages'.

It's like trying to fix the health care problem by handing out free- bandaids! Then saying that your opponent wants your cuts to get dirty and infected. The headlines should read, Clinton still insists on stupid gas tax proposal!

Posted by: thebob.bob | May 5, 2008 1:31 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company