House GOP Challenges Pelosi On Gas Prices
Written by Sam on April 23rd, 2008House Republican leaders on Tuesday challenged Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to release a plan to lower gas prices that they say Democrats touted when they were in the minority.“Two years ago this week, you stated that House Democrats had a ‘commonsense plan’ to ‘lower gas prices,’ ” the letter said. “In light of the skyrocketing gasoline prices affecting working families and every sector of our struggling economy, we are writing today to respectfully request that you reveal this ‘commonsense plan’ so we can begin work on responsible solutions to help ease this strain.”The letter is signed by Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio), Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), Conference Chairman Adam Putnam (R-Fla.), Policy Chairman Thaddeus McCotter (R-Mich.) as well as other members of leadership: Reps. Kay Granger (R-Texas), John Carter (R-Texas), Tom Cole (R-Okla.) and Eric Cantor (R-Va.).
It’s nice to see some resemblance of a spine back in the Republican leadership.
So let’s have it, Dems! Where is your big plan to lower gas prices for all Americans? One of the big issues you put forth in 2006 was how you were going to resolve the problem of high gas prices that are hurting working families. In September of 2006 the average price of gasoline was $2.62. Now, the average is about $3.50. That’s almost a dollar increase since the Democrats have taken control of Congress.
I guess we can mark this down as one more broken promise on a long list from the Democrats.
23
AM
Its amusing to me that democrats have said for years that they want higher gas prices to “curb consumption” and “reduce greenhouse gas emissions”. That was always their plan to save the world…..tax the crap out of it. Remember the taxes for CO2, taxes for SUV’s, the scaling taxes based on your car’s MPG rating? Remember “Well, gas is three times as expensive in England”?
Well, now we have high gas prices, and it turns out america hates it! This is exactly what the democrats have wanted for years, and of course, it is exactly what we dont need. At these levels, americans have 1.1 billion dollars PER DAY LESS to pump into the economy. Yet another liberal dogma utterly destroyed. This is getting so old, I am getting bored of it.
23
AM
It’s always good to go back and look at those old campaign promises …
23
AM
Bush also promised economic expansion, surpluses and an end to nation-building.
23
PM
Good point, Dave. I have heard many liberals advocating hiking taxes on gas to force more people to use public transportation and speed up the pace to develop alternative sources. In fact, my parents’ Congressman, John Dingell, just recently advocated raising the Federal gas tax by 50 cents a gallon to force people to use less.
23
PM
Publius, Bush is a failure on many fronts, but that doesn’t excuse the Democrats to follow the same path. After all, they campaigned on all of this change and reform and they have shown to be even less effective than the GOP.
And Bush delivered on the economic expansion, by the way.
23
PM
Doesn’t the failure of these high gas taxes to accomplish their goal of people using less gas provide evidence against the “Laffer curve”? Despite the tax rate being higher, people aren’t being less productive (i.e. being less gas), so the government is earning MORE money.
23
PM
Apparently, you are getting ripped off at Duke!
23
PM
“That’s almost a dollar increase since the Democrats have taken control of Congress.”
Yeah… but under Bush, gas has *tripled* in price.
And about the concept of taxing gas to encourage energy independence: I have a feeling that if Dems had pushed such an agenda, they would have simultaneously put forth plans to fund research into alternative energy sources. At least, that’s what I would *hope* would have been included. So it’s not exactly the same thing as oil prices skyrocketing without, you know, a plan, right?
23
PM
Hello Bellvue? I need a table for one. First name becky….
Hey Sam….I overcooked a steak tonight for dinner….I never did that when Bill Clinton was president…I hate BUSH he is so ANTI-MEDIUM-RARE!
24
AM
Just once I would like to see ChemistryDave actually argue a point like a civilized person instead of name-calling like a grade school bully. Apparently anyone who even slightly disagrees with him in an idiot or just plain insane- and he’s gotta be running out of stupid puns on these topics by now. Even when he is confronted with cold hard facts that directly contradict his points, he always refuses to admit that he is wrong. How mature.
He criticizes liberals for talking down to those who disagree with them- admittedly a problem for more than a few of us- and then he does the exact same thing, but worse.
I don’t even know what he’s for, only that he’s against anything “liberal”. His kind of posts are not debate, they are not helping anything, and I would like some of the regular conservative contributors to condemn him for it.
Langley, Sam, Zach, Mark you have all on several occasions praised me for not being an “unthinking” liberal, for being willing to admit when I’m wrong. I would like to think that this means that you value honest, open, respectful debate and not that you’re just happy to see a liberal slightly shamed. If the former is correct, please demonstrate it and criticize Chemistrydave for his actions. I’d be happy to do a copy/paste summary of some of his more ridiculous instances of being directly confronted with irrefutable facts and name-calling instead of admitting he was wrong if you’d like.
Neither side is completely right overall. If one was, then when that side was in power, all our problems would have disappeared. Sometimes the conservative argument is right. Sometimes the liberal argument is right. I’m willing to admit that my side isn’t always right and I’d like for Dave to admit that his isn’t instead of calling me stupid or insane.
24
AM
Shiffman, when you make stupid statements like the simplistic gas tax argument, what do you expect? Did you really think about how our economy works and how that fuel prices factor in to that? Our economy is entirely service/consumer based. So when you take 1Bn per day out of consumers pockets, what does that prove about the laffer curve? Most of this country does not live in cities. They cant walk to work. They cant bus to work. Most of our economy REQUIRES driving and flying. NO OTHER OPTIONS.
Quite frankly, Im tired of your crying about people criticizing your absurd ideas (i.e. republicans didnt vote for civil rights (wrong), welfare is great (wrong), competition has nothing to do with tuition prices (wrong), families taking a 20% paycut due to gas proves that taxes are great (wrong). I am one random guy living somewhere in the US who is not interested in dallying with foolish liberals and half-entertaining their silly ideas. If sam wants to boot me from the site because it should be more like Hallmark, then fine. YOU were the one brandishing your Duke education like it was some big deal (which it isnt). Why should I have to sit and pretend to understand people who clearly have no clue what they are talking about? Take, for example, becky relating the price of gas to Bush. There is one simple word for that: STUPIDITY. Why would I waste time calling it something else? Have people ever heard of the NYMEX? How about the CME? Does any understand how oil and gas prices get set? Do you know what the term “crack spread” is? Do you understand how many gallons of gas comes from one barrel of oil? What about blends, JP4, diesel, and sulfur removal from petroleum? Or transport issues, filling the SPR, recovery, refining, and the difference between light sweet crude and sour crude?
See, the world is more complicated than Keith Olbermann would have you believe. Personally, I dont entertain stupidity for fun. We have serious issues in this country, and the policy arena is not one well suited to amateurs.
25
AM
” Did you really think about how our economy works and how that fuel prices factor in to that? Our economy is entirely service/consumer based. So when you take 1Bn per day out of consumers pockets, what does that prove about the laffer curve? Most of this country does not live in cities. They cant walk to work. They cant bus to work. Most of our economy REQUIRES driving and flying. NO OTHER OPTIONS.”
See? Reasonable, articulate, and proves your point without having to resort to calling everyone who disagrees with you stupid or crazy. It can be done.
“Apparently, you are getting ripped off at Duke!”
Probably so, but I didn’t take any economics classes here, so we can’t blame my lack of understanding of the laffer curve on Duke. I’ve heard that we have a pretty good econ program, I just never availed myself of it. I’m a marine bio guy personally. Economics sounds boring and hard, and I would much rather play with sharks.
“YOU were the one brandishing your Duke education like it was some big deal (which it isnt)”
I brought up Duke only to mention that without federal loans, none but the super rich could afford elite schools like Duke. Going to an elite school certainly doesn’t make me better than you, but you can’t seriously think that an average community college grad gets the same type of job as an average elite university grad. My original post was about liberal federal programs that help pull people out of poverty, such as loans that allow the poor to attend elite schools and get good jobs. I mentioned that I attend one not to brag, but to demonstrate personal experience in what I was talking about, and I truly apologize if it came across any other way. One problem with text-only conversations is the lack of tone.There are many here at Duke who believe that attending this school makes them better people than those who do not, and I find that view quite distasteful.
“See, the world is more complicated than Keith Olbermann would have you believe.”
I hate Keith Olbermann, just as I hate Hannity or O’Reilly, because all of them turn politics, which is important and, as you say, “no place for amateurs”, into insult and shouting competitions without getting anything helpful done. Not all liberals are vegetarian hybrid-driving flag-burning Keith Olbermann watchers. Some are, sure, but not all. Just like some conservatives bomb abortion clinics and beat up gays, but most do not. Judging a group by it’s most extreme members is not a solid strategy.
Incidentally, I also wasn’t the one who said that Republicans were against civil rights. I think that was Becky or Publius.
“Quite frankly, Im tired of your crying about people criticizing your absurd ideas”
I’m not crying, and it’s not the criticizing of my ideas that I’m upset about. It’s the lack of respectful debate. You dismiss anyone who disagrees with you at all by calling them stupid or crazy, and that’s not going to help anything. Even if you do happen to have all the answers, you’re not the one in charge, so you need to politely convince those who disagree with you what the right thing to do is. If my liberal colleagues who you detest so much annoy you when they talk down to you, why are you using their strategies?
Ok, looking at the “recent comments” links makes it appear like I have no life, so I think I’m gonna go watch “Lost” and go to bed. Have a wonderful evening, all.
25
AM
chemistrydave: I’m just going to say, that my comment about gas prices having tripled, was self-consciously an observation about a correspondence, not a cause-effect argument (though I think good arguments could be made for the latter, but I’m not the one with the research to do it properly). That’s why I said *under* Bush. I did exactly what the original poster did, who observed that gas prices had continued to go up since Dems took control of Congress. But for some reason, you didn’t dismiss the original poster as crazy or stupid.
I second David’s post. If chemistrydave’s comment that policy debates aren’t suited to “amateurs” isn’t elitist and condescending (and the tone of the entire post, for that matter), then I don’t know what is. Concerned citizens *should* be talking about policy and politics, and asking honest questions — otherwise, I’d like to know why we even bother with calling ourselves a democracy. Last I checked, we all get to vote, even if we don’t memorize fun trivia facts like how many teaspoons of oil are in a barrel.