McCain is depicted as a man of integrity, as one who
commands an inner core of strong values, a man of principles. But, he has
veered to the right to gain the GOP nomination; he changed his mind on several
key policy issues (e.g. on extending the Bush tax cuts). But all this is not
nearly as revealing of the true nature of his political character as his call
to lift the tax on gasoline (albeit, for now only for the summer). It is a very
revealing move.
As I –and for once I am hardly alone—see it, the United States
must impose a hefty tax on oil. Before I list the obvious reasons (often
enumerated by Tom Friedman in The New York Times) that such a tax is
vital, I should note that McCain is not alone. Not a single politician running
for major office has called for raising the tax on gasoline, although McCain is
the only one who favors lowering it. Other major candidates suggested various tax
cuts (or “incentives”) that they would introduce, designed to get Americans
to use more Ethanol, buy hybrid cars, and other wise go “green.” These may all be good ideas, but they are not
going to get the job done. A tax on oil is crucial both to discourage the use
of oil and to finance other goodies.
A five dollar tax on every oil barrel would enhance our
security by reducing our dependency on our enemies and adversaries. It would
reduce the scores upon scores of billions of dollars the United States is now
sending each month to Putin’s Russia, to Ahmadinejad’s Iran, to the mother of
all 9/11 terrorists, Saudi Arabia and other such good friends. These nations,
in turn, use the oil funds to counter US policies overseas, to shore up their regimes
at home, to purchase arms, and—in Iran’s case—to finance terrorists groups.
Also, the higher costs of oil will encourage the development
of alternative, renewable sources of energy and curtail global warming. In other
words, a five-dollar tax will do wonders for the environment. To ensure that
the poor can afford to purchase heating fuel and gasoline, some of the
resulting tax revenues should be dedicated to provide energy stamps to those in
need, so that they could purchase oil at reduced costs.
In addition, the scores of billions such a tax would
generate can be used—take your pick and mix—to reduce the deficit, to finance
social programs, or to make Social Security whole, among other goodies.
What is particularly distressing about the across-the-board
failure of our politicians to tell the truth to the voters—to explain why a tax
on oil is essential and overdue—is that it does not take nearly as much courage
as it at first seems to. A good part of the tax will, in effect, be paid by the
oil producing countries, because there are limits to the ability of oil
producers to pass the tax burden along to the consumers.
I guess at the end of the day one has to hold one’s nose and
vote for someone. They are not making this choice easy. Not even the so-called
Mr. Integrity, Senator John McCain.
Comments