After Big Oil, There's Always Big Spud

So says Vermont Tiger contributor (and former Vermont resident) Jonathan Lesser in the Wall Street Journal.  He proposes  a simple solution to combat high gasoline prices and global warming at the same time:

if Congress really wants to "do something" about high gasoline prices and global warming, it can always try rationing.

To lower gasoline prices permanently, you can reduce demand, increase supply, or do both. Congress long ago capped supplies by proclaiming from on high: Drillest thou not offshore, nor in ANWR. The next obvious step for our solons is to cap demand by rationing gasoline, and then gradually reduce the quantity of ration coupons.

How would this be accomplished?  Simple: 

"Trading" in coupons would be encouraged to ensure gasoline is allocated to uses of only the highest value. So Congress could reserve quantities of ration coupons for key lobbyists and their clients.

This rationing scheme would promote very useful and desirable social results:

As ration coupons are reduced, consumers would increasingly clamor for more electric cars, cars that ran on French-fry oil, and "flex-fuel" cars that burn everything from gasoline to garbage. Eventually, gasoline could just be banned, reducing prices to zero and eliminating all ill-gotten profits.

The genius of Lesser's plan is that it is easily applicable to the problems that are likely to result after gasoline is no longer used:

And if Congress then had to tackle French-fry oil speculators and impose a windfall profits tax on Big Spud, well why not?

One can only hope that Jonathan runs for Congress from his new state.

Comments

[Dennis Lukas]

The current gas and oil prices are here to stay and they will rise even higher. The American people have not cut there consumption giving the markets a heads up that we can afford the extra cost. With out competion from hydro or nuke power Wall street traderes will continue to advance oil prices.Oil proffits are replacing the mortgage proffit losses.

[Green Mtn Punter]

I think there could be a lot of pols who are very soon going to find out that $4-5 gasoline as the status quo is unacceptable to American voters. Just as the ace of trumps beats all in bridge, lower gasoline prices, or the promise thereof, will be the savvy pol's ace, trumping all other issues in Campaign 2008.

Polls consistently show that Amercians are not willing to accept $4-5 gasoline as their sacrifice on the altar of Democrat environmental extremism. The game is up and the first pol to say this wins.Too bad Mitt Romney isn't the Republican nominee (so far) as he has been saying it for quite some time.

McCain HQ should be calling Newt to a summit this week to find out how and when to play the highest of all trump cards in the 2008 election deck, a trump card that only Republicans can play because Dems have pre-empted themselves from holding this card.

[David Usher]

I want to hear the candidates talk seriously about what they would actually DO about $4-5 gasoline.

Instead, we have blather and prattle that 'big oil' or speculators, or China and India or the far-away oil producing countries are at fault.

As the campaign unfolds, I think extreme environmentalists may wind up with targets on their back. Or will it be the auto companies along with 'big oil?' We voters/consumers certainly aren't part of the problem, are we!

Where's Pogo's sage advice when we need it? He would certainly remind us about demand and supply. But someone to blame is what we really want and the candidates will feed us that meal.

Meanwhile, the solarists and windmillers will tell us they have the energy answers.

Oh well. For a dose of reality, I think I'll view Ross Perot's latest charts on the U.S. fiscal mess.