The "gas tax holiday"* has been in the news again as gas prices have risen above $4 per gallon and Senator McCain has pushed a suspension of the gas tax. Press coverage has mostly focused on a few angles.*
*I have a reason for putting this in quotes, which I'll get to shortly. And while I'm at it, in case you're not familiar with the acronym, "MSM" = mainstream media.
*You may notice these asterics and italicized sections that are now peppering my blog posts. Think of them as footnotes. Joe Posnanski (sp?) is a sports writer whose blog I read, and who uses these italicized footnotes for long amusing digressions. I'll try to keep them short, but I think they're interesting and effective.
One type of story is about how the areas hardest hit by high gas prices are those in states that might be important in the general election. These stories focus on the politics of the "gas tax holiday." The conventional wisdom seems to be that Americans want their politicians to do something, and no one in their right mind would oppose the "gas tax holiday" because to do so would be to ignore the plight of the downtrodden driver. There's an enormous "but" that sometimes appears in the midst of these articles, but that sometimes doesn't.
The second kind of story is the one that explores the "but." For example... But, no one can find an economist who thinks the "gas tax holiday" would do anything to lower gas prices for consumers. These articles explain that the gas tax that would go on holiday* is really a tax on the production of gas paid by the oil companies.
*Is anyone else picturing a big dollar sign lying on the beach with sunglasses and a drink with a little umbrella in it?
Now here's where I start to get a little peeved to the point where it becomes necessary to write an angry indignant blog calling for the heads of media personalities. Where did the term "gas tax holiday" come from? McCain, and Clinton, and the media insist on calling this a "gas tax holiday," which implies that the holiday is for the consumer of gas, i.e. the driver, rather than for the producer of the gas, i.e. the giant wealthy corporate gas company. I can understand a proponent of the "Tax Break for Oil Companies" to want to name it something palatable, like "gas tax holiday," but for the media to acquiesce to such a loaded terminology in the absence of any real relationship between the term and its meaning is another sorry example of the media relinquishing any claim of independence.
You may notice that I gave the tax break a new name: "Tax Break for Oil Companies." This is what I'm going to call it from now on to anyone who mentions it. For example, if someone were to say, "Hey, how about that "gas tax holiday," I would reply, "I'm not familiar with this gas tax holiday of which you speak; wait, you must be referring to the Tax Beak for Oil Companies."
Hopefully this will catch on. There's really no reason I can think of for the media to continue to call this a "gas tax holiday." Not only is "Tax Break for Oil Companies" more accurate, it has the benefit of taking the political advantage away from McCain while cementing the fact that the "Tax Break for Oil Companies" won't help consumers. Perhaps, it will catch on and the MSM will start using it. I'm waiting for the day when Mr. McLoughliStephonapaMatthews asks Senator McCain: "You've called for a Summer Tax Break for Oil Companies. How does lower taxes for Oil Companies help drivers at the pump?" And maybe Obama could say something like: "Rather than give a Summer Tax Break to Oil Companies, I'd like to require that whenever gas prices rise by an $.10, Oil Companies disclose how much profit is made on the backs, or wheels, of the American consumer.
Refute the idea that the tax break helps? Done. Take away political advantage? Done. Do something that might actually lower prices? Done. I don't think this is such a crazy idea. And if its not crazy, why I am the only one I know who's mentioned it.
Really, MSM, what is wrong with you?
