Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying

The mainstream media has today caught up with the reality of the race. That reality has been constant since Obama mathematically won the race in February.

It took a decisive win in North Carolina and holding his ground in Indiana to bring about this realization. In winning last night Obama triumphed over Hillary Clinton’s last minute pandering on the gas tax. It was ultimately the pander that sunk Hillary Clinton’s stock with the media.

I have argued that the gas tax pander would backfire on Clinton. Today it appears that is exactly what happened.

Here’s New York magazine on the impact of the pander:

There was a certain you-had-to-be-there quality to the homestretch of the Indiana Democratic primary. Through most of last week, national newspapers and cable pundits stayed fixated on the Jeremiah Wright imbroglio. But over the past week, the headlines in Indiana turned to the split between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama on the idea of a gas-tax “holiday.” So did the political ads flooding Hoosier airwaves. And the result was last night’s nasty surprise for Clinton.

It’s easy to see why Clinton was tempted to hop aboard the Pander Express, once John McCain floated the idea of suspending the federal gas tax of 18.4 cents a gallon for the summer. Giving some badly needed relief to truckers, farmers, and vacationers fit right in with the hash-slinger-in-a–Wal Mart–pantsuit image Hillary honed in Ohio, perfected in Pennsylvania, and was deploying all over Indiana. And when Obama derided the idea by saying it would only save consumers “pennies,” he seemed to be handing the Clintons one more opportunity to portray him as an out-of-touch elitist.

But as things turned out, when Hillary called for suspending the gas tax, she threw Obama the kind of rope he desperately had been seeking to pull himself out of the Wright train wreck. Wright screwed Obama as hard as any noncandidate has ever screwed an American presidential contender. And even after counterattacking and distancing himself from his former pastor, Obama was noticeably off his game. But the gas tax became a rare instance where Clinton and Obama directly and diametrically opposed each other on a policy issue, automatically generating headlines and coverage that helped push Wright out of the local news in Indiana.

Further, the gas tax turned the national media against Hillary over the weekend, because the Clinton campaign hadn’t bothered to line up (or just couldn’t find) a single expert to support suspending the tax. That left Clinton herself and surrogates like Senator Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) insulting economists on national television, which looked ridiculous. It also left the media free to report the story without trying to be evenhanded and essentially to tell viewers that suspending the tax is a stupid idea.

Most importantly, the new debate let Obama rediscover his voice. He not only opposed the “holiday” on principle. In a way he hasn’t done on issues such as wearing a lapel flag pin, he also stated his objections loudly, pithily, and in keeping with the themes of his campaign. Liberal bloggers kept writing that Obama needed to argue that suspending the tax wouldn’t save drivers any money. Instead, he hammered away at it as a “gimmick” and a symptom of the Washington politics he says he wants to change.

…

Tragedy or poetic justice, Clinton went one pander too far in Indiana.

Remember. Gas tax. Gas tax. Gas tax.

[Cross posted at Daily Kos]

Today Hillary Clinton entered the clueless world of George W Bush. She displayed her "my way or the highway" modus operandi that made her 1990s healthcare foray into such a debacle. Back then she didn’t care to listen to healthcare experts, this time she doesn’t care to listen to economists.

This morning on ABC’s This Week she showed us that she would be no less of an heir than John McCain to George W Bush’s head-in-the-sand governing style:

Pressed to name an economist who supports her plan to temporarily suspend the federal gas tax, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said today that commuters, truck drivers and other gas customers know it would make a difference.

“We have to get out of the mindset where somehow elite opinion is always on the side of doing things that really disadvantage the vast majority of Americans,” Clinton said during an appearance on ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos at the Conrad Hilton Hotel in downtown Indianapolis. “I’m not going to put my lot in with economists because I know if we did it right … we would design it in such a way that it would be implemented effectively.”

…

An Obama supporter picked from the audience by Stephanopoulos to ask a question in the town hall meeting format of the show said she makes less than $25,000 a year, so the price of gas is not an academic issue for her.

“I really do feel pain at the pump,” said Kara Glennon. “However, I do feel pandered to when you talk about suspending the gas tax. I don’t think that it’s really a reasonable plan. Call me crazy, but I actually listen to economists because I think they know what they’ve studied.”

Later on CNN’s Late Edition Gene Sperling, a top economic advisor to Hillary Clinton (who was also economic advisor to President Clinton), was left with the unenviable task of cleaning up after his candidate. Sperling, who is a man of integrity, could not bring himself to justify Hillary Clinton’s gas tax holiday for the oil companies. Pressed repeatedly by Wolf Blitzer to explain Clinton’s proposal Sperling punted:

BLITZER: …As you know, Gene, a lot of economists out there think it is not going to achieve its desired results, and it is largely political pandering.

SPERLING: I think the problem with a lot of the criticism is that they have not recognized that this is a balance between two competing long-term agendas. Senator Clinton has a very bold long- term agenda on moving us towards a low-carbon, pro-jobs future. That includes, as you know, a capital trade proposal, fuel efficiency, commitment for 5 million jobs, and a windfall profits tax. These are all things that are part of the long-term agenda.

But she also has an agenda about empowering people to deal with the middle-class squeeze, which includes a bold $1,000 savings incentives for savings in your IRAs and 401(k)s, a $3,500…

BLITZER: What about the gas tax?

SPERLING: I’m getting to that. $3,500 credit for college loans, and, as you heard Elizabeth Edwards say recently, the best plan for actually reducing health care costs.

BLITZER: But what about the gas tax?

SPERLING: Well, the point is that you have to try to find a balance. And the way her balance is working is she’s saying we’re going to take the savings from the windfall profit tax and from closing energy loopholes, and use them for energy efficiency and creating these 5 million green energy jobs.

But for just three months, for just three months, as you noted, she would say you can put this into the highway trust fund, so the families who are dealing with the middle-class squeeze now, in terms of higher food prices, $3.70 gas, lower home prices, could have a little relief over three months. And I think a lot of the criticism has been as if this was her long-term agenda, which it is not.

BLITZER: All right. So on this specific issue, she’s more aligned with McCain than she is with Obama.

Later after Robert Reich called Hillary Clinton’s plan "dumb" and "stupid", Blitzer tried again with Sperling:

BLITZER: Is there any serious economist out there who thinks this is a wise policy? Because as you heard Robert Reich just say, there is — the notion out there, if you eliminate this gas tax, the demand will go up, and then the price will simply go back up right away.

SPERLING: Listen, it’s like I said before, she’s got a long-term agenda for a low-carbon energy future with a strong cap and trade proposal.

BLITZER: But let’s go back to this. What is the economic rationale for eliminating these gas taxes over three months?

SPERLING: The economic rationale is simply that we have very rarely ever been in a time like this, where you almost have a bit of a mini-stagflation going on. You have got an economy that is almost in recession. You have people paying twice as much for eggs as they used to. They’re paying twice as much for gas prices as they used to. And when you have a campaign and an agenda that focuses on the middle class squeeze, as Senator Clinton does, and when you’re focusing on that in terms of lowering health care prices, in terms of lowering the cost of sending your kids to college, making it easier to save, just to simply say that for this three months we could just put some of that money into the highway trust fund, not cost any jobs, as Senator McCain would. It is just a little bit of relief for the people that are struggling and the truckers that are struggling day by day right now.

It’s not surprising that Gene Sperling is having trouble justifying a gas tax holiday. Back in 2000 he advised President Clinton not to suspend the gas tax. Here is President Clinton at a press conference in 2000 explaining that a gas tax holiday would not pass the savings to the consumer:

Q. Mr. President, in light of the fact that OPEC has decided to increase production, do you see it as a mistake for the Senate to proceed with a bill that would suspend the gas tax? And if it reached your desk, would you veto it?

A. Well, I don’t expect it to reach my desk because there seems to be bipartisan opposition to it in the House, including among the leadership. But the problem I have with it, apart from what it might do to the Highway Trust Fund and the spending obligations that have already been incurred by the acts of Congress, the budgets, is that I’m not sure that the savings would be passed along to the consumers in addition to that. So I think there are a lot of questions about it. But I don’t expect it to pass. 

Hillary Clinton herself was against cutting the gas tax before she decided to pander to Indiana and North Carolina voters. Here she is debating Rick Lazio in 2000:

And one of my fundamental disagreements during this campaign with my opponent was when he called for the repeal of the gas tax. Now, the gas tax is one of those few taxes that New York actually gets more money from Washington than we send. And we are totally reliant on it to do things like finishing I-86 in the Southern Tier, or the fast- ferry harbor works up in Rochester, as well as the work we need to do here in the city.

But now Hillary Clinton has decided that the economists, her husband, her own economic advisor and common sense be damned. It’s her way or the highway - and it will be a highway in disrepair because she would rather give billions in tax giveaways to oil companies than pay for the maintenance of the nation’s infrastructure.

Hillary Clinton, in a shameless pander, is trying to convince the voters in Indiana and North Carolina that her proposal to suspend the federal gas tax is good for them. It is not. It is good for the oil companies.

Back in 2000, when Hillary Clinton was running for Senate as an actual Democrat she strongly supported the gas tax. In the October 2000 debate against Rick Lazio, Hillary Clinton said the following in response to a question from the moderator:

KRAMER — O.K., Mrs. Clinton, recently a number of proposals have been put forth to build a large domed stadium on the West Side of Manhattan. Do you think that taxpayer money should be used to build such a stadium?

CLINTON — Well, with all due respect to Mayor Giuliani, who’s sitting in the front row, the answer is no, I don’t. I love sports and I love the opportunity for people to go to sports, but I don’t think that’s a good use of that space and place or of taxpayer dollars.

I think there is a lot of work that we need to do to upgrade the infrastructure of New York. That’s why I support the Second Avenue subway. That’s why I support the East Side connector, why I would support a rail link to La Guardia and to J.F.K. There is work we need to do to repair our bridges and our roads to make sure that we’re prepared for the 21st century. I’ve worked very hard to educate myself about all the infrastructure needs that are required around the state of New York, because I think we have to follow in Senator Moynihan’s footsteps in saying that we need to have public buildings and public works that really reflect the greatness of New York. I will go to the Senate to continue the work on Penn Station and others that Senator Moynihan has started. And one of my fundamental disagreements during this campaign with my opponent was when he called for the repeal of the gas tax. Now, the gas tax is one of those few taxes that New York actually gets more money from Washington than we send. And we are totally reliant on it to do things like finishing I-86 in the Southern Tier, or the fast- ferry harbor works up in Rochester, as well as the work we need to do here in the city. So you can count on me to support infrastructure, but I’m sorry, Mayor, I can’t go with the domed stadium. [Emphasis added by me]

In response, Rick Lazio, the Republican supporting the oil companies said the following:

LAZIO — Yeah, first of all, let me say this: I think it’s important that New York gets the Jets and the Giants back here. I think it’s important that we have a focal point where we build economic development. And this is not just a plan for a stadium, it’s also a plan for expansion of convention space, which is very important. I think private money needs to be on the line here as well, though. I don’t think this should be funded with public money entirely. But I believe that this is an important development, an important initiative to try and build jobs, more jobs for New York.

I should note, and I think my opponent knows this, that when I did call for the repeal of the gas tax, and I know she loves the gas tax, but let me say this: we would not take one dime from the trust fund. We made that clear when we had the proposal. I voted against the gas tax back in —- [Emphasis added by me.]

Back in 2000 Hillary Clinton was for the consumer against the oil companies. Today in Indiana and North Carolina she has sided with the oil companies against the consumer, but is trying to convince the voters that she is looking out for their interests. Hillary Clinton has flip-flopped to pander to the voters.

She is trying to convince the voters that she is giving them a tax cut. No such thing. The gas tax is not a tax on the consumer. The gas tax is a tax on the oil companies at production, and the oil companies pass the cost forward to the consumers. A gas tax holiday is a tax cut for the oil companies and not the consumer - Hillary Clinton knows this and that is why in 2000 she was for the gas tax. The gas tax on oil companies is also essential to support the nation’s highway infrastructure. Now in 2008, desperate to pander to voters, she has completely reversed herself.