Pandering on gas

JOHN McCAIN AND Hillary Clinton are tied in a contest that is unlikely to produce a win for either of them, or for the American people: They’re competing to see which can stoop the lowest to buy our votes.

Sen. McCain’s suggestion to suspend the 18.4-cents-a-gallon federal tax on gasoline for the summer has been taken up by Sen. Clinton. This is the worst case of election-year pandering over gasoline since Mrs. Clinton’s husband opened up the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in a vain attempt to help Al Gore win in 2000.

Both candidates should know better. We understand that Sen. Clinton is trying anything at this point. It is harder to understand why Sen. McCain, with the Republican nomination sewn up, would do this.

To the extent that this tax cut would have any effect, it would be to encourage more gasoline consumption during the busy summer months. More demand creates pressure on gasoline prices to rise, not fall, and instead of going into the U.S. treasury, the windfall would go to the oil companies (Exxon Mobil’s profits for the first quarter of this year were “only” $10.9 billion), and ultimately to the petrodictators and terrorists.

We congratulate Barack Obama for not joining in (even though he voted for a similar deal as a state legislator).

This nation needs energy leadership, not cheap attempts to exploit Americans’ real anxieties over prices. Unfortunately, Sens. McCain and Clinton have decided to drive full-speed in the opposite direction.