A sight for sore eyes (and pocketbooks)

I never thought the sight of gas under $4 a gallon would be so welcome...
















(Seen today on Walker Road in Beaverton, just west of Nike)

Stuck in our ruts

Congress is in full-blown blame mode as it tries to look like it's working to help Americans who are paying through the nose at the gas pump.

Today's Oregonian notes that Republicans are all over Democrats for refusing to drill for oil and natural gas within our borders, and Democrats are castigating the GOP for bowing low to the oil companies and refusing to acknowledge the need for alternative energy sources.

But the key from that story came from U.S. Rep. Earl Blumenauer who, while promoting his usual topics -- mass transit, alternative fuels and new energy sources -- admits that there is no quick fix:

I never pretend we're going to change this stuff overnight. We've taken decades to paint ourselves into this corner. . . . We have to change fundamentally our politics to stop being hostage to the energy vision of the 1950s. Drill where it's appropriate. Stop the speculation. Give people more choices and have alternatives. This is what we're going to be slugging on for the next 30 months.

The next 30 months. That takes us to January 1, 2011.

In 30 months, who knows what the price of gas might be? But if we're going to be working on this for the next two-plus years, why do our parties feel the need to barricade themselves into their traditional constituencies? Why can't we simultaneously pursue existing and future energy sources?

Why can't we explore -- vigorously -- other sources of energy? Every idea that doesn't involve fossil fuels is an idea that won't require sending our money to foreign whack-jobs, and will (hopefully) be more friendly to the environment.

Why can't we drill for the oil in our country (including the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and off-shore)? Every barrel of oil that comes from the United States is one fewer barrel that we have to buy from Hugh Chavez or the House of Saud. Even if it's only 10 years of oil, that's 10 years of fewer imports from foreign whack-jobs. And by the way, Blumenauer should listen to his own message to "stop being hostage to the energy vision of the 1950s." Fifty years ago -- even 20 years ago! -- our technology did not allow for drilling in sensitive areas such as ANWR or off-shore, but that has changed.

If it's going to take more than two years before Congress even gets off its hind-end to do something, it seems to me that it's necessary to stop playing petty little games and explore every idea that might help.

You're not paying enough to operate your car

As if the prospect of gas at $4 a gallon isn't enough, get ready Portland -- the region's leaders think you need to pay more.

Yesterday's Oregonian reported that statewide gasoline use decreased by more than 4 percent in January compared with the previous January. That's good, right? It means less fossil fuel consumption and lower carbon emissions.

But it also means that gas tax revenue has decreased to the lowest level in more than two years. So what does that mean? It means that when the Oregon legislature convenes in 2009, you should be ready to hear how the state's transportation grid is in shambles and the state doesn't receive sufficient taxes through gas purchases to finance repairs. You should be ready to hear Gov. Ted Kulongoski, in his last biennial legislature, call for a new tax on miles driven -- a new tax based on mandatory installation of GPS devices in our cars to track mileage. And you should be ready to hear the sound of crickets from people who would otherwise complain about Republican efforts to invade their privacy.

Oh, and if that wasn't enough, we have today's Oregonian editorial. You have to read to the last two paragraphs to see that our region's leaders are planning an additional vehicle registration fee to fund transportation maintenance ($54 per vehicle, but it doesn't say if that's a biennial fee to match the DEQ fee). And it ends by noting that legislators "haven't managed to raise the gas tax since the 1991 session. That's something of which every single one of them should feel ashamed."

Ignoring the amount of tax money spent on mass transit options that serve a disproportionately small percentage of the public, it may be that the gas tax should have been raised over the last 17 years. However, I doubt anyone is currently "ashamed" by that when we're already paying through the nose at the pump. No one, that is, except the Oregonian and the regional leaders who never overlook a chance to make you pay more to the government, even when the problem is exacerbated by inaction and ineptitude on the part of the government in question.