Billary Clinton is trying to scam the low information, uneducated segment of voters in Indiana and NC.
Is there anything this woman won't do in her quest for power?

Here's a State by State breakdown of the Jobs and Federal Highway Funds that would be lost during this 15 week "Gas Tax Holiday" proposed by John McCain and Hillary Clinton.

State Jobs Federal Highway Funds:
----------------
North Carolina 7,071 Jobs $203 Million
Indiana 6,390 Jobs $183 Million
Oregon 2,881 Jobs $82 Million
Kentucky 4,298 Jobs $123 Million
Montana 2,348 Jobs $67 Million
South Dakato 1,623 Jobs $46 Million
West Virginia 2,691 Jobs $77 Million
==================================================
America 310,750 Jobs $8.9 Billion

John McCain and Hillary Clinton have suggested suspending Federal Taxes on all Gasoline/Diesel sold between Memorial Day (5/26) and Labor Day (9/1) this year. According to this study by the American Road & Transportation Builders Association, this "Gas Tax Holiday" will lower tax revenue for infrastructure by roughly $9 billion and potentially cost 300,000 highway construction jobs. The highway trust fund that the gas tax finances provides money to states and local governments to pay for road and bridge construction, repair and maintenance.

To speak out against this bad idea, 150 economists have written a letter opposing the gas tax holiday.

An Open Statement Opposing Proposals for a Gas Tax Holiday

In recent weeks, there have been proposals in Congress and by some presidential candidates to suspend the gas tax for the summer. As economists who study issues of energy policy, taxation, public finance, and budgeting, we write to indicate our opposition to this policy. Put simply, suspending the federal tax on gasoline this summer is a bad idea and we oppose it.

There are several reasons for this opposition. First, research shows that waiving the gas tax would generate major profits for oil companies rather than significantly lowering prices for consumers. Second, it would encourage people to keep buying costly imported oil and do nothing to encourage conservation. Third, a tax holiday would provide very little relief to families feeling squeezed. Fourth, the gas tax suspension would threaten to increase the already record deficit in the coming year and reduce the amount of money going into the highway trust fund that maintains our infrastructure.

Signers of this letter are Democrats, Republicans and Independents. This is not a partisan issue. It is a matter of good public policy.

Henry Aaron, Brookings Insitution
Gilbert Metcalf, Tufts University

Senator Clinton is at her Republican best, when she is pandering to the voters!! Come on, Senator, be honest with the voters and tell them the tax " holiday " is a gimmick, of the worst kind. It gives the voters false hope, false comfort, and in the end, disappointment, but what does Senator Clinton care, with her and her husband's 109 million dollars. After this election, watching her try to bamboozle the voters, I'll need a shot and a beer, a few times over!!!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE. NOW.

Who is right on the gas tax suspension - THE SMARTEST, WISEST CANDIDATE IN THE RACE - BARACK OBAMA! Vote for intelligence and sensibility - vote OBAMA! Clinton and McCain don't have the stuff...

I live in Brooklyn where many people work as Liberty Cab (car service) drivers, and many more depend on them for their service. The suspension would save the drivers well over $300, a cost they would not have to pass on to working class consumers. This is as much as the tax 'rebate' that would do nothing for the economy, but isn't "pandering" because Mr. Obama supports it. The savings on diesel would be twice as much and directly assist truckers. The consumer tax would be replaced by a corporate tax on oil companys by HRC, as has been well publicised, so there would be no loss of funds as Mr. Aaron incorrectly states. Why is it the people least affected always claim to know what is best for the ignorant common folk?

The consumer tax would be replaced by a corporate tax on oil companys by HRC, as has been well publicised, so there would be no loss of funds as Mr. Aaron incorrectly states. Why is it the people least affected always claim to know what is best for the ignorant common folk?

Posted by: Daniel Gentile | May 5, 2008 2:42 PM

Because the oil companies would just raise their prices to make up the difference and Billary Clinton already knows this but yet she continues to lie anyway hoping that the voters are to dumb to notice.

I suppose " Daniel Gentile ", you think that you can speak for the " ignorant common folk? "!!! I know a lot of misguided Democratic voters who have been fooled by the tax " holiday ". To compare President Bush's innovative idea of economic stimulus package with the tax " holiday ", is like comparing Senator Obama with Senator McCain!! There is no comparison! It's unfortunate that I can't say the same about Senator Clinton and Senator McCain!!! One could almost say that they could be mistaken for Republicans!!!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE. NOW.

BREAKING NEWS - Senator Hillary Clinton's campaign today announced that they are initiating legislation that will eliminate all fatal diseases and end world hunger by Memorial Day so that people can have a disease-free and well-fed summer.

She plans to pay for this with a "windfall profits" tax on health insurance companies and grocery chains. She assures us that in spite of the fact that those elite economists tell us it can't be done, that she is very sure this will help so many of those people that want to vote for her that she felt there was no time to wait in rolling out this innovative and courageous platform.

This was announced after her plan to push a bill through creating a "gas tax holiday" including a massive tax increase on oil companies through the legislature and any potential presidential veto that might occur.

Those voters who cannot see how this incredibly simple and courageous plan would work are simply elitists and totally out of touch.

Re:
Because the oil companies would just raise their prices to make up the difference and Billary Clinton already knows this but yet she continues to lie anyway hoping that the voters are to dumb to notice.

Posted by: John E | May 5, 2008 3:12 PM

This is not correct. Retail prices on fuels are regulated by law and based on prices of already purchased fuel stock. Retail prices could not legally be raised as a result of tax suspension. The poster is less informed than the average consumer.

I support a Clinton free holiday.

Right on, John E.

And guess what else?

When workers get paid, they get taxed. And that tax is recirculated back to the government and into the economy or to help pay other bills.

Thirty-Eight extra summer dollars, on the other hand, gets you one seat at a MLB game. You can leave the wife and kids at home. And don't forget to ride a bike to the game and bring your own sandwiches. You might be able to drink some dirty water from the men's room to wash down that fine meal you just ate.

Game Time.

I'm more conditioned to seeing democrats call for higher taxes, never less, on energy, earned income, capital gains, home ownership, and of course anything else that would have a discernible pulse. The higher energy taxes would presumably discourage consumption. Ted Kennedy, the Lion of the Senate, thinks this needs to be in the $5 per gallon neighborhood, I believe that I have heard him say. It would also help us with our "Be more like Europe / Less like America" problem. No true democrat is going to be for lower gasoline taxes unless there is a political advantage to be had.

In that World wide supply is barely keeping pace with demand, the improbable hope that I would have, is that the pols' will at some point come to the perspective that this really is a supply problem, as in 'lack of'. More supply shifts the Supply curve to the right, gains some time for developing alternatives, the consumer gets a real break, not a summer time gimmick. Well, that's me and my Wingnut Economics thinking, I suppose, and I'm capitalizing Wingnut.

Hopefully, Sen. McCain will do some tacking and take counsel from someone that really understands these sort of Economic angles. Price Inelastic Demand would translate to: No Ceiling on the cost of energy. Who amongst us would really be prepared for that. On second thought, there probably are some folk that do like the idea of unaffordable energy.

Your Energy Friend in Tx,

Frankly, natural resources like gas, oil, coal should be taken out of the private sector and made public energy. Natural resources should be belong to all the people, not to warmongers, heavy-handed CEO's and Wall Street. If oil and gas were distributed equally to all states, at a consistent rate and the profits used to pay the workers and repair the infrastructure, we would not be the victims of the oil gouging CEO'S of the oil companies who sat arrogantly in front of Congress boasting of their billions of dollars in profits while the hardworking middle class of this country struggle.. I say not only Universal Healthcare, but UNIVERSAL ENERGY!!! No more BP, no more Citgo, no more Texaco, no oil franchises; all of nature's bounty should belong to the American people, not belong to the few who squander it on their elitist lifestyles and the perpetuation of corrupt politics like we have experienced these past 8 years.

OMG did it ever occur to any of you that if Clinton ends the war we'll have billions of dollars that can be distributed accordingly.. like perhaps COVER THE INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS !!

Nobody knows what will really happen if this tax is eliminated. I watched Obama's commercial ridicule this plan but what was most importantly missing from his commercial was, Whats he going to do about the high cost of gas??? Again no solutions just rhetoric.

Obama says eliminating this tax will save the average person only $30 bucks, um excuse me Mr Elitest, but $30 bucks buys a lot of milk! And how did he come to this number anyway? AS I figure it, I would save $20 bucks a week. I'll take it!

Call the economists! Hell why not the astrologers--they're more accurate!
Thank all the godheads that Hillary focused us on the real problems---the OIL COMPANY piggies!
AND REMEMBER--OBAMA HAS DONE NOTHING SINCE REV. WRIGHT BUT ATTACK HER FOR DOING SO.
WHATSTHATTELLYA?

"This is not correct. Retail prices on fuels are regulated by law and based on prices of already purchased fuel stock."

I drive by a gas station on the way to work. When I return home, gas is 15 cents higher than it was in the morning. The same gas is in the tank, so I'm assuming that it's already purchased, right? The company paid a price for the gas that is in the tank. So why would we pay more for the same gas already there? You're saying that there are laws to support this increase on already purchased gas?

Retail prices of must be set by oil futures, not the price of the fuel they already bought. Can someone further explain this?

How is Clinton going to reduce the gas tax for summer 2008, since the election is not until November? Or, did I miss something and she already was elected president based on results solely from MI and FL?