Fossil Fuels

Gas Prices and Political Mythology

If there is any issue you can be sure will come up during a presidential election campaign, it's gasoline prices.


If there is any issue you can be sure will come up during a presidential election campaign, it's gasoline prices. They are simple, important and plainly visible to anyone who drives. They're the classic pocketbook issue: When prices are low or at least falling, voters somehow feel better than when prices are high or rising.

Lately it's been the latter. During his acceptance speech at the Republican convention, Mitt Romney faulted President Barack Obama because "gasoline prices have doubled" on his watch, while lamenting the plight of a hard-pressed American "watching the gas pump hit $50." Message: You won't have to do that when I'm president.

His line of attack sounds curiously similar to the complaints of Democrats when the last Republican was in office. In 2008, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida upbraided oil company executives, "I'm a mom of three young children who filled up her minivan the other day for $68. Sixty-eight dollars—that's real money."

Democrats led us to believe they would do better. But Wasserman Shultz, now head of the Democratic National Committee, is just one of many in her party who have been oddly quiet on the subject lately.

The posturing by partisan leaders may look hypocritical, and it is. But it also exposes something even more important: how little the conscious decisions of our elected officials affect this issue they invest with such importance. In this area, they are loath to admit that they are often unimportant and sometimes completely irrelevant.

That has never been more obvious than in the past few years. Democrats assailed President George W. Bush and the oil industry when pump prices soared above $4 a gallon four years ago. Obama was so aggrieved he called for a windfall profits tax to punish oil companies for "price-gouging." Republicans, meanwhile, blamed Democrats for opposing an expansion of oil drilling.

But then, before Obama could even take office, a funny thing happened: Prices plunged off a cliff, bottoming out at a now-incredible national average of $1.69 a gallon. Something else funny happened: No one celebrated or rushed to take credit.

Why not? Because it wasn't energy policy that caused the reduction. It was a recession, compounded by a financial panic. You want to cut gas prices? There's no medicine like an economic collapse.

It was not the cure Republicans had in mind. Remember the chant that erupted repeatedly at their 2008 convention? "Drill, baby, drill!" If we did, Sarah Palin and others assured us, the resulting gusher would slash driving costs.

At this year's convention, the chant had fallen out of fashion. Maybe that's because it might lead voters to realize something the GOP would prefer not to publicize: Under Obama, domestic oil output has sharply increased, and prices have gone up anyway.

In recent months, U.S. fields have been churning out more than 6 million barrels of crude per day—the highest level since 1998. The number of drilling rigs in operation has more than tripled. If you didn't know better, you'd think a Texas oilman was in the Oval Office.

But the apparent glut has not brought down retail prices. This is not entirely bad news. As the economy has grown, albeit slowly, demand for energy has grown as well. If economic growth had been more vigorous, in fact, prices would be even higher than they are now.

Obama thus finds himself cursed with painful driving costs even though the usual important factors should have kept them down. Until recently, strong growth in places like China and India fed high worldwide demand. The possibility of an attack on Iran has created fears of a supply disruption. Hurricane Isaac and refinery problems have tightened the squeeze.

All of this highlights the banal reality: There's not much this or any other president can do to manage today's unpredictable worldwide market to please American consumers. Events beyond our borders can overwhelm the effects of U.S. government policy.

So when politicians talk about gas prices, don't pay much attention. Knowing which candidate will win the presidential election wouldn't tell you much about what you'll be paying at the pump over the next four years.

When it comes to the oil market, the next president is likely to find himself in the same position as an illustrious predecessor. "I claim not to have controlled events," said Abraham Lincoln, "but confess plainly that events have controlled me."

NEXT: Virginia GOP Challenging Virgil Goode's Status on Ballot

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. That gas price? You didn’t influence that.

    It’s not as funny when it’s true.

  2. ummm, I pay almost 70 cents per gallon of taxes here in Wisconsin. Considering I pay $3.75 per gallon, the price is actually extremely influenced by politicians.

    Sure, only 18 cents out of the 70 gets to the federal government, but isn’t 5% of what I pay in gas “influential.”

  3. Just because the last time prices went down was due to a faltering economy doesn’t mean that there aren’t government policies keeping the price inflated or that reform of government policies wouldn’t be likely to influence supply and consequently prices. Recessions aren’t the only things that affect price. It’s worth mentioning that the record-output of US domestic oil has been exclusively on private land where there is less opportunity for government dumbfuckery to take place. Imagine if the regulatory apparatus wasn’t hostile to development of land owned by the government? Or if the government auctioned off its land holdings, removing itself from the equation entirely? Or if there weren’t a nasty tax built into every gallon gasoline? Or if refiners didn’t have to blend it with subsidized corn-based ethanol? The government footprint in the energy market is so astronomically huge that it’s utter rubbish to say that a change in policy is not capable of influencing price. Although the extent to which a president has any control of the manifest different tentacles of government reaching into the energy market is fairly negligible.

    1. Well stated PM.
      In addition let’s add in to the mix of government interference and taxes the effects of the Federal Reserve.
      A 2% average rate of inflation doesn’t sound like much but over time it has taken us from $20 or less for a barrel of oil to today where we are paying close to $100 a barrel for the exact same barrel of oil, with a high in the $150 a barrel range.
      No one in this country is prepared for the price shock that will occur when OPEC starts to demand Gold for Oil instead of Federal Reserve Notes. That time will come, and sooner than anybody in the Federal Government or Federal Reserve System are willing to admit. Agreements are already in place that take the FRN out of the equation. These agreements will most likely expand in the future, further damaging the purchasing power of the US Dollar.

  4. I disagree with the assertion that gasoline prices are completely independent of the president. As “Public Citizzen” points out, monetary policy is a strong reason why gasoline prices are so high. Oil is traded in dollars solely, and if the dollar decreases in value, it buys less oil (all other factors held constant). Why this is such a difficult concept for pundits (both liberal and conservative) to grasp is quite beyond me.

    The value of the dollar has plummeted over the last ten years, due to loose monetary policy (much based upon Keynesian myths and debt monetization). Bingo, higher gas prices.

    In addition to monetary policy, the president and his cronies also have a huge impact on regulatory and environmental policy, which can also affect prices in a very direct way. Both the last two administrations (and particularly this one) have pursued policies that are adverse to keeping gas prices out of control.

    It is not a direct 100% correlation between the actions of a president and gas prices (there are demand shocks, refinery bottlenecks, political instability in oil-producing nations, etc), but it cannot be argued that there is zero correlation.

  5. cool exceptionally well written how can i find out more?

  6. im obliged for the post very good submit information seems overwhelming

  7. im obliged for the post im thankful for the post touche outstanding arguments

  8. this text is worth everyone’s attention cool exactly what i was looking for

  9. fantastic blog article liked your article post very informative post

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.