he mass of heavyweight political, media and academic power lining up to abort the embryonic idea of a gas tax “holiday” tells us several things. The first is that it must be one heck of a good idea. The offensive against the idea is well-organized, entrenched and of the urgency normally reserved for emotional debates over the Right to Life, same-sex marriage or flag burning.

That leads to the second point illustrated by the debate, namely the nature of the enemy—the “Statists” for whom government is the new god to which they adhere as the council of guiding wise persons.

Democrat presidential candidate Barack Obama derides the idea as political gimmickry designed to pander to the voters who pay the tax.

Gee, imagine that, pandering to the taxpaying voters instead of pandering to the usual collection of corporate interests, pressure groups, lobbyists and the menagerie of favor-bringers that swarm over Capitol Hill like lice on a hippie’s head.

If such a concept ever caught on, that would be tantamount to a modern day Boston Tea Party, complete with politicians throwing special interests overboard before the bucket of tar and bags of feathers arrive.

Dave Wallach fills his gas tank at a Valero gas station in
Sacramento, Tuesday, April 29, 2008. (AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli)

It is very easy to oppose a gas tax holiday when you are a tenured professor in some state-supported university, or when you are not paying for your own gas, like many politicians who drive “on the job.”

Obama offers the same three “talking point” arguments that have become the mantra of what is now a well-oiled script to discredit a gas tax holiday: 1. it’s a gimmick or pandering; 2. it does nothing to discourage conservation or toward easing our fossil fuel dependency; 3. the government cannot afford it.

Leaving aside that it is the voter to whom all the pandering is supposed to be directed, they are just plain wrong in that characterization of the tax holiday.

A gas tax holiday is not designed as a weaning off fossil fuels plan or part of a long-term energy strategy. Plain and simple, it is a breather for the working stiff who has to slave away that much harder to earn enough money to get back and forth between home and the rock pile.

We tax-paying working stiffs needed an energy policy and alternative fuel program two Bushes, a Clinton and a Reagan ago—what we need now is a tank of gas to get to work.

The notion that the government cannot afford the holiday is laughable. Nationally, we have a budget in excess of $3 trillion, fully two-thirds of which – $2 trillion – consists of money taken from people who produce it and is then redistributed to others who did not. And at best, it’s a leaky distribution network.

We know that “Kalifournia” can afford it. We know so because for some five-years straight, Arnold met all questions about the fiscal condition of the state as “fantastic” and reassured us that his promises to fix the problems that led to his election were fulfilled—you might even say that it was “mission accomplished.” Not to mention that (as I wrote in a previous column) we are so awash in dough that the most urgent matter in this area’s educational community is heating Folsom’s $3 million high school swimming pool for its two dozen users.

The cost of fuel is causing other necessities to rise in price and this impacts the working poor and middle class harder than anybody in the chorus of voices against a tax holiday. It is so insulting, so condescending and disrespectful for ivory tower people of means to scream like scared little girls in a horror flick at the mere suggestion that the working stiff get to keep a couple of extra bucks a week.

That elitist mentality holds working people to be a renewable resource for harvest—all they want is your money and your mind. Give it a while and we can all join the Chinese in being involuntary organ donors for the privileged classes.