It doesn’t matter how long you’ve been writing about and covering politics in Washington. Just when you think you’ve seen the most ridiculous, silliest, most desperate ideas ever to float through a news cycle, some politicians’ survival instincts suddenly surprise you.
The Democratic Party’s political warriors are evidently soiling their armor over their most recent round of internal polls.
Not only are they abruptly repealing the very mask mandates they recently reimposed on their voters (mandates they insisted until just five minutes ago were scientifically necessary to prevent mankind from perishing), but now they are doing something that would normally cause Democrats to break out in hives: They are offering a massive tax break that benefits the fossil fuel industry.
Sens. Mark Kelly of Arizona and Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire (both of whom face reelection and have job disapproval ratings higher than their approval ratings) are now floating the idea of a gas tax holiday. It would begin now and last until they are safely reelected — sorry, until Jan. 1, 2023.
This has to be just about the most transparently desperate gimmick in recent political history.
It demonstrates not only that Democrats don’t really believe all that global warming claptrap, but also that they have no principles on the issue of taxation and will do anything to avoid losing their powerful positions.
We love tax reduction as much as the next editorial board, but the ideal tax policy is consistent, broad-based, and avoids creating perverse incentives.
Even the most hardened libertarian understands that there are legitimate functions of government that need consistent funding sources.
Moreover, tax laws should not create weird, esoteric ways of avoiding taxes that distort markets and thus stunt the economy.
This was the genius of the 2017 tax reform bill — it lowered taxes for the many while eliminating tax loopholes for the few.
This gas tax gimmick is exactly the opposite of a good tax policy. As a temporary measure, it is not consistent. It only offers tax relief for one retail commodity, so it is not broad-based.
And as for perverse incentives, there are probably many, but here’s a few: Why adopt a tax policy that encourages people to hoard gasoline this coming December for use after the tax is reinstated? Is this intended to be a favor to companies that manufacture gasoline cans?
Turning a blind eye to climate implications — don’t Democrats usually tell us that fossil fuels are destroying the world? — this is just plain gimmickry.
Gas taxes are levied for a reason. The funds they raise go into something called the Highway Trust Fund. The money is hypothecated — that is, earmarked for infrastructure.
Besides, Democrats could do much better if they want to buy the voters’ affection. Sure, a gas tax holiday will save people a few bucks in the coming months.
But if Democrats really want to please the voters and give themselves a better chance in November, they ought to cut income tax rates again or increase the standard deduction.
This would allow workers to save and invest, and it would allow small businesses to devote more of their profits to expansion.
Alternatively, if this is solely an attempt to ameliorate the effects of high gas prices on their popularity, Democrats should drop their opposition to building more pipelines.
The problem of high gas prices is a supply problem, not a tax problem — the gas tax, after all, has remained consistent at 18.4 cents per gallon for nearly 30 years now.
Besides, it makes a lot more sense to drive gas prices down with additional supply than it does to have government temporarily forgo the revenue it needs to keep up the nation’s road system.
We hope as much as anyone that Democrats have an epiphany on issues of taxation and suddenly want to lower taxes instead of increasing them.
Even if it is just an insincere election-year effort to stop the bleeding, at least Kelly and Hassan are being forced to think of their constituents and not just the major special interests that donate to Democrats.
But we are at least heartened to see how scared and panicky they must be to propose something this gimmicky.
Read more at Examiner
