The Next Capitol Hill Battle: The Gas Tax
You thought you'd seen the worst of Congress in July? Oh, you silly American you.
Politico looks ahead to what is likely to be the next big showdown on Capitol Hill when Congress returns for the summer recess, the fact that most of the Federal Taxes on gasoline are set to expire on September 30th:
In normal times, renewing the federal excise tax on gasoline would be another routine vote in Congress.
But as the past month of rancorous and intensely partisan debate about raising the debt ceiling has shown, the times are anything but normal.
And with most of the 18.4-cent tax per gallon of gasoline set to expire Sept. 30, renewing the tax could be the next political controversy to spark a brawl in an ever more deeply divided Capitol Hill.
Congress has already come to the brink of a government shutdown and is only now wrapping up an eleventh-hour compromise to save the country from a first-ever default. A legislative dispute has even temporarily shuttered the Federal Aviation Administration. With the level of partisan vitriol and anti-spending sentiment at an all-time high, some advocates are worried that the nation’s highway fund will be the next victim — while some conservatives sense an opportunity.
“The White House is going to make a move to renew it. We’ll see — but there will be Republicans who will be resistant to that.” said Doug Heye, former spokesman for the Republican National Committee.
Gas prices, said Heye, are “really affecting families. If you have to drive 20 miles to work every day, those are real costs.”
(…)
Already, a handful of conservative groups are eyeing the expiration as the next potential front in the spending and tax fight — including Grover Norquist’s influential Americans for Tax Reform group — but are mum about any potential legislative strategy.
“In general, ATR has always supported the idea of ending the federal tax on gas and having states pay for their own roads,” Norquist told POLITICO, but he declined to say whether he or his group plans to pressure congressional Republicans to let the excise tax expire.
“ATR would love to help begin such a dialogue,” he said.
“We’re monitoring the situation. I think that everyone on the Hill and most outside groups are pretty focused on the nation’s debt crisis,” said Barney Keller, spokesman for the conservative Club For Growth, who also wouldn’t say whether his group wants the tax to expire.
You can already see how this issue could play itself out a month from now. As it is the issue of increased energy prices is an easy one to demagouge with simplistic slogans (“Drill Baby Drill”) and even more simplistic ideas (anyone remember when Hillary Clinton and John McCain came up with the idiotic idea of a Federal Gas Tax Holiday during the 2008 campaign?). It’s not at all hard to see the argument over the the gas tax being boiled down to the slogan Barack Obama wants to increase the price of gas. Given that renewing the gas tax is going to require affirmative action on the part of Congress (rather than legislation to block it) I’d already say that the forces that come out against it are going to have the advantage here, especially given the partisan make up of Congress and the difficulty of getting anything through the Senate.
There are, in fact, some remarkable similarities between the just concluded debt ceiling showdown and the showdown that could result over increasing renewing the gas tax. Like increasing the debt ceiling, the renewal of the Federal Gasoline Tax has been a fairly non-controversial action in the past. Ronald Reagan did it in 1982, George H.W. Bush did it in 1990, Bill Clinton did it in 1993, and George W. Bush and a Republican Congress did it in 2005. Additionally, attempts to roll back the tax in the past have generally failed.
The main reason for that is that the gas tax is one of the few federal taxes that is specially designated for only one purpose:
The federal Highway Trust Fund — the largest source of cash for mass transit and road improvements — is funded by the tax on fuel. In 2008, when high gas prices kept consumers away from the pump, the fund temporarily ran out of money, forcing Congress to appropriate an additional $8 billion to keep road projects on track.
Now, with many states facing budget shortfalls and cutbacks, it’s unclear whether states could assume a larger role in maintaining their highways. Experts say that an expiration of the gas tax would throw the nation’s transportation system into chaos.
“It’s the most important transportation funding source we have,” said Carl Davis, an analyst with the group Citizens for Tax Justice. “It would be absolutely devastating to that trust fund.”
(…)
More policy-oriented conservative groups — even libertarian scholars — believe that the tax must ultimately be renewed.
“I have every expectation that will happen this time,” the conservative Heritage Foundation’s Ronald Utt said on renewing the tax. “If nobody has a bill to replace it, then they’ll have to.”
“It’s no question that it should not expire,” said Robert Poole, a transportation policy expert with the libertarian Reason Foundation. “There’s certainly good grounds for rethinking the federal role as it has evolved,” he told POLITICO. But “if it were to suddenly go away, it would be chaotic.”
Of course, this is just the kind of logical, fact-based argument that many in the Tea Party movement refused to accept with regard to the debt ceiling. In that case, they simply refused to believe that letting the Federal Government get to the point where it didn’t have enough money to pay its bills would be a big deal. Is it really that hard to believe that they’d worry much about bankrupting the Highway Trust Fund? Given the comments from groups like Heritage and Reason, and given the fact that transportation funding is an issue that hits home in nearly every Congressional District, its possible that this won’t be an issue that the GOP as a whole won’t push too hard on.
7Of course, the gas tax won’t be the only battle that Congress will be fighting when it returns on September 7th. The Federal Budget for Fiscal Year 2012 has to be approved by September 30th, and the battles are already shaping up over the membership and purview of the so-called “Supercommittee” formed by the debt ceiling deal.Then, after the supercommittee submits its report in November, Congress will have a month to debate the package it presents and either approve it, or allow the across the board cuts set forth in the deal to go forward. Then, the 2012 election cycle starts.
In other words, if you thought the past two months were the worst of it, you haven’t seen anything yet.
Are you now a propagandist Doug?
(now to finish the post)
does the gas tax cover the cost of the nation’s highways, bridges etc…? if not then it should be raised. Does the tax actually go to pay for what it is levied? I don’t have a problem with raising the tax if the we are continually going in the hole each month b/c we spend more than we have on our highways unless the money is just going to be pissed away in Iraq, Pakistan, Libya or some other hellhole.
Doug –
So renewing the gas tax is somehow “raising the gas tax”?
I guess in the GOP world of “Death Panels”, “Global Warming is a Hoax”, “There is no such thing as evolution”, renewing the gas tax IS raising the gas tax.
The modern GOP: Where words don’t mean what they used to mean.
maybe you just need an editor Doug.
I have to wonder, just exactly what are the Tea Partiers goals? We already have taxes at Mexico rates, do they want us to have Mexico roads too? I would suggest any one who thinks this is a good idea to take a trip south of the border and drive on their roads, some of which are little more than mountain trails. I also have to ask, how many Rep. controlled state legislature’s will actually vote for an increase in state taxes to make up for the shortfall?
The Teatards want government services, they just don’t want to pay for them.
As we see with the current FAA tax “holiday,” corporations that collect taxes just raise their prices when the tax is away.
Maybe it is the perverse Alinskyite Islamo-fascist in me, but I think this could be a good turn for liberals.
If the Highway Trust Fund is bankrupted, and the nations roads go to hell then it will make traveling by automobile more difficult and unpleasant, encouraging people to use mass transit.
So the meme can be that the tree-hugging Greens want to take away your right to drive, by bankrupting the Highway Trust fund.
The only thing I am unsure of, is what symbolic item will the RedState Strikeforce mail to their Congresscritters? A chunk of asphalt, or a flat tire maybe?
According to this chart, the federal excise tax on a gallon of gas is $0.18. Total taxes add up to $0.64 cents, or about 16.6% of the total price.
“Distribution costs, marketing costs, and profits” account for $0.16.
“Refinery costs and profits” account for $0.22.
The biggest cost is “Crude oil costs,” at $2.79.
Just for a moment, let’s pretend that the distribution, marketing, and refinery costs are zero, and those numbers represent pure profit. That means the governments (federal and state) make about 170% more money on a gallon of gas than the people who actually make, distribute, and sell it. Make those numbers more realistic, and it’s even more imbalanced.
J.
@OzarkHillbilly:
Maybe they are also end-timers? Since, well, if Jesus is coming back soon, then there really isn’t any need to fix potholes, is there?
Gentlemen,
The use of the word “increasing” rather than “renewing” was inadvertent and I have corrected it.
While I support a long-term gradual increase in the tax on gasoline, I think we need to be realistic when we have stories out this very day about consumer spending dropping due to high energy costs. Plus,it’s a regressive tax; it won’t be very difficult to demonstrate how harmful this tax is to working class people in this economy.
They are simply swinish.
They want stuff from the government but they don’t want to pay for it.
They are America’s Worst Generation.
Ah, a post about gas taxes. Be still my beating heart.
FYI, the feds do not only charge excise taxes on gasoline and diesel. There’s also the “environmental fee”. That’s a tax too.
Every state in the union charges an excise tax, separate and apart from the federal taxes.
Then there are state “environmental fees,” along with local taxes and fees.
Incidentally, what might shock the self-proclaimed “libertarians” of the Internet is that state taxes on gasoline and diesel cross borders. The state of origin charges those fees (even if the end product is not consumed there) and then the destination state charges its own taxes and fees; again, separate and apart from the federal taxes.
If by way of example fuel is distributed via pipeline from the Bay Area, California to Sparks (Reno), Nevada, then picked up by a tanker truck and then dropped off into a gas station in Carson City, Nevada, the feds will charge two taxes (excise + environmental), California will levy a “spill fee,” Nevada will charge its state excise tax and its own environmental fee, then Carson City County will charge a sales tax.
Is that enough taxation for you?
In sum total the taxes and fees in the above scenario add up to over 52 cents per gallon. Following up on No. 7’s cogent and relevant comment, and also FYI, the gross profit margins in the wholesale fuel distribution industry generally range . . . drum roll . . . wait for it . . . . from 3/4 cents to 1 cent per gallon. Most of those business are family-owned, close corporations.
Perspective is wonderful, isn’t it?
Just wait’ll they have to saddle up a horse to go to work…
@Jay Tea:
Gas prices drive Exxon Mobil profit up 41% –
Royal Dutch Shell Profit Nearly Doubles –
BP Profits Rise – http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/04/27/national/main20058048.shtml
Yes. The poor oil companies. Taxes are sooooo cutting into their profits.
Are we really weeping for the oil companies…that are enjoying record profits this year?
I keep forgetting, for every single issue, there has to be a wingnut victim somewhere.
“…That means the governments (federal and state) make about 170% more money on a gallon of gas than the people who actually make, distribute, and sell it…”
Jesus-God are you really that stupid? Seriously. The Government is now a money making entity? We just had a big f’ing stink about raising the debt ceiling because our debt is too high and you and Jan cried about how we’re going bankrupt and are just like Greece. Now the Government is making too much money. Do you have any idea what it is you actually think? Or is it just random nonsense spewed forth in whims?
Again – The US is a low-tax country. Keep saying that to yourself until it sinks in…because it is fact. It’s not one of the “improbable or impossible” fantasies you have while eating cheetos in your PJ’s. It’s fact.
http://www.aip.com.au/pricing/internationalprices.htm
We also have close to the cheapest gas.
We also have $2.2T dollar in infrastructure maintainance that’s needed in the next 5 years – which clowns like you have no interest in addressing. Just let them fall down.
Fool.
@Jay Tea:
Just for a moment, let us pretend that the gov’t collects exactly 0 cents on a gallon of gas and builds absolutely no roads or bridges or traffic lights or any of the infrastructure that Jay’s favorite industry is wholly and completely dependent upon for their very existence… I wonder how much money they would make then?
Now, let us make Jay’s head explode by making those #s a little more realistic and point out the major flaw in his thinking: The Government does not make a single thin red cent off a gallon of gas. All that money is taken in, redistributed to the states and reinvested in the roads, bridges, rails, rivers etc etc so that those people who are soooooo unfairly taxed on a gallon of gas can continue to make record profits year after year after year.
@Tsar Nicholas: And it still isn’t enuf. Imagine that.
@Doug Mataconis: I had feeling as such Doug after I read the “30th – 30th” sentence. Thing is, when you said it, it was an honest mistake. When the tea party says it, it won’t be a mistake. Wrong, but not a mistake.
None of these are the subject of the post, nor are they up for renewal by the feds. They sure do muddy the waters up successfully though.
Gee,what a surprise… norm and Ozark have issues with me. Not the accuracy of the information, not my summation, not my source, but I need to be thoroughly excoriated for bringing it up.
I should have made it clearer: my comment was a pre-emptive argument against raising the gas tax. I’d like to see it cut, but I can live with it continuing as is.
J.
@hey norm:
thanx for the link Norm. I found it interesting that only Mexico ranks below us on the chart, and they have a nationalized oil industry to help support those low prices and low taxes.
but the mis-interpretation of the meaning of the information which is charachteristic of you. All I know of you is what you post, which is giibberish nonsense.
@Jay Tea:
Gee, what a surprise, Jay changes his tune when called out on the fallacies within his argument. Jay, for the record, nobody was talking about increasing the tax, just renewing it. Until now. But if one goes back and rereads your original post, your BS just gets deeper because nowhere within that post do you even allude to such a position.
This part is a bit murky as well:
Only 2005 involved a simple renewal, the rest of the examples are increases, which involved filibusters, tie votes in the Senate, and most notorious of all, Bush’s breaking of his “no new taxes” pledge that may have helped lead to his defeat in ’92. Background. I’d say renewals have been non-controversial; increases have been controversial.
@OzarkHillbilly:
Just to elaborate on this thought-
Since the early 1900’s the official policy of state and Federal governments has been to intervene in the marketplace with the specific goal of making automobile travel easier, more convenient and safer.
Mandatory parking, paved streets, signalized intersections, the Interstate Highway System, NHTSB, public funding and backing of oil exploration and production, and a myriad of other helpful actions have ensured that automobiles, as opposed to rail became the dominant mode of transportation in America.
The gasoline tax doesn’t begin to repay the taxpayers for all the assistance they have given the oil and auto companies over the years.
@OzarkHillbilly: What you inferred is your problem, not mine. I presented facts — taken directly from the state of California’s official web site. I was curious what the actual tax on gas was — I knew that it greatly exceeded the profits — and thought it relevant to put some actual numbers to the topic at hand.
I understand that you might be allergic to facts, and prone to premature denunciations, but you really need to work on that hair-trigger of yours.
J.
@Liberty60: Oh, please. It ain’t been public charity. The public has also received tremendous benefits from the oil companies. I won’t argue that it’s been symbiotic, but the benefits of having the gas and oil companies are tremendous.
As you noted, public policy has made “automobile travel easier, more convenient and safer.” And why? Because that’s what we, the public, wanted. It’s become a quintessentially American expression of freedom — freedom of choice (what car do we want?), freedom of travel (we don’t need to figure out the schedules and routes, we’ll go where we wish, when we wish!), freedom of expression (bumper stickers, vanity plates, make and model), freedom of association, and a whole host of other freedoms.
The greatest offense of the oil and gas companies? They gave us what we wanted. Well, sold us what we wanted. But that’s the American way. And in the process, they made a lot of people rich, and gave a hell of a lot more jobs.
Was it all a net gain or loss for America? I’m not making that argument. But you implied that it was all negative, and that’s just patently false.
J.
@Jay Tea:
Jay, you are responsible for your words no matter how you try to weasel out of your arguments… which is what you are doing here.
I am not allergic to facts, just fallacious arguments of which you make a habit. Can you name ONE fact you cited that I argued with? NO. And you haven’t, and you won’t….. OK, there was that statement that the “gov’t made more off a gallon of gas than the producers” and I said “B*LLSH*T!” and which you have yet to say I was wrong…
I repeat Jay:
and you still have not answered.
Jay, I know you are supremely impressed with your own intelligence, but I lived with a pathological liar for 5 years and I can spot a weasel a mile away. Seriously, “you are bringing a knife to a gunfight.”
By the way site administrators: when I hit b-quote, it automatically bolds what I am quoting. Am I doing something wrong? or is this just a bug? It is an irritation…
tom
@Jay Tea:
You got that right, they made trillions off the public.
and paid for it.
He says after arguing it was symbiotic….
Jay, at what point do you actually read yourself? Ever?
@OzarkHillbilly: First up, don’t trust the buttons. They don’t seem to work quite right.
Next, you went ballistic over my first comment, where I said absolutely nothing about letting the tax expire, or even suggested taking the opportunity to cut it. I just attached numbers to the topic at hand.
And in your little rant, you made one really big error. All that federal tax money goes into the general fund .It is not “earmarked” for any specific purpose. Oh, rhetorically, it sounds good to say it like you did, but it’s bogus. Kind of like how Obama and the Democrats keep talking about “asking” wealthier Americans and corporations to pay higher taxes, when what they really mean is demanding it under penalty of law. Sounds nice, ain’t true.
J.
@OzarkHillbilly: Ozark, I was getting technical. “Symbiotic” means “in balance, beneficial to both sides.” I was noting that there have been benefits to both sides, while avoiding the argument over whether or not, in the big picture, it was in sum beneficial to both sides. ‘Cuz that’s not an argument I wanted to get into.
Do the oil companies offer benefits to the general public? Yes, absolutely. Do those benefits outweigh the costs? Not going to get into that — far too much minutiae and wiggle room.
J.
Jay, you said a whole lot of stuff and now you want to say you are not responsible for how people interpret you remarks with in the context of the post? Bullsh*t. You knew what people were talking about, you said things within that context. Now it is my fault for interpreting what you said within that context? I don’t think so.(and for the record, if calling you on your BS is “going ballistic” may I nuke your arguments into oblivion)
Jay, but that is the crux of the matter. I can see the weasel… Can you?
@Ozarkhillbilly: Ozark, I yield. The gas and oil companies are unmitigated Satans that have never done a single thing that has benefited the public. And when discussing taxes, bringing up actual numbers and breakdowns is not only irrelevant, but destructive and distracting and just plain wrong. You’re not only right on both points, but I agree with the next two you choose to make before you even bring them up.
Feel better now?
J.
@Jay Tea: This talking point, that the government “makes” more money on gas than the oil companies, is an old one.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/1139.html
Fox viewers probably find it logical.
@Scott O.: So, it’s because it’s old, so it’s no longer true?
J.
@Jay Tea: Are taxes and profits synonymous?
@Scott O.: Of course not. But here, they are certainly analogous.
J.
Funny thing is Reagan Raised the Gas Tax, and unemployment dropped, that was after rasing Taxes when he signed TEFRA in 1982.
The tea party is full of blowhards that have no clue what they are talking about.
If Reagan’s 1981 Tax cuts would have worked, he would not have needed to raise taxes.