I like high gasoline prices. I wish they were higher.
Some things are hard to do in a democracy.
A lot of my friends think Big Oil is the problem. I don't. I think my fellow Americans are the problem.
Gasoline prices are visible in-your-face reminders of inflation. High gasoline prices are bad politics.
Politicians have a problem taking actions to raise gasoline prices to address climate change. Republicans oppose taxes; Democrats oppose regressive ones. Families of low or moderate income spend a higher percentage of income on transportation fuel than do wealthy people. That concerns Democrats. Higher gasoline prices generally favor people in cities and disfavor people in the countryside. That concerns Republicans.
I like high gasoline prices because they are a persuasive price signal telling people to use cheaper alternatives. When it is cheaper for people to fuel electric vehicles with solar panels on the roof of their homes than it is to buy gasoline, then the whole economic system will adjust. Solar companies will install collectors, financial firms will finance them, and car companies will have the vehicles to buy. It is starting to happen.
I have written before that I don't blame Big Oil for drilling, refining, and selling us gasoline. We use fossil fuels because they were available and cheap, and 19th century technology made it work. Fossil fuels are still cheap. We still flair off natural gas at many wells because it doesn't pay to collect and sell it. We don't buy fossil fuels because we are talked into it by some con man. We want them. Oil companies supply what we demand.
Americans have every power to regulate how oil is drilled, refined and sold. When people in Oklahoma get tired of the mini-earthquakes they will elect politicians who will create new fracking rules. If drilling and fracking causes methane leaks--and they do--then it is up to the American political system to stop it. We won't do that? Whose fault is that?
Businesses offload their externalities onto the public, or the future, or into oceans, or onto foreigners. We know that. We see it. We know that conscience and good will is an unreliable brake on selfishness. There must be mechanisms to shape self-interest. That is what democratic government is supposed to do.
Democrats are probably correct in thinking that a majority of people favor "saving the planet from climate change." What is not correct is that a majority of people are willing to sacrifice very much to achieve that goal. What is my evidence for such a claim? The politics we experience right now. Coal mining has tortured and scarred West Virginia; surely people there hate what it has done to their state. No. If a majority of people hated coal mining no amount of money in campaign contributions could keep coal-supporters in office. Politicians support coal because the voters do. Wyoming, Texas, Oklahoma, and North Dakota are all coal or oil states. They are the most Republican states in the country.
I don't praise selfishness. I describe our political reality. We-the-people make choices. We are the enablers of Big Oil. We distract ourselves when we blame the wrong target. There is reason for Democrats, environmentalists, and climate activists to want to deflect blame onto Big Oil. Their real complaint is with a sacred target: Democracy itself. People are reluctant to sacrifice for the common good, especially for a distant and remote purpose. Democrats think that surely the problem must be campaign finance corruption, or mass delusions created by Fox News, or gerrymandering, or too many senators from the wrong states. Anything but us, selfish humans, using the energy source that is cheapest and most convenient.
China might lead the U.S. in addressing climate. The air in some cities there is bad enough to motivate their political process. If their leadership decides to transition from coal to nuclear, solar, and wind they need not worry about pesky voters in coal country.
In a democracy, the way to put Big Oil out of business is to create cheaper and better alternatives to oil. That needs to be the focus for Democrats. We cannot force change on people, but when fossil fuels cost more than alternatives we won't need to.
When I talk with my Republican clients I'm usually amazed at the animosity toward public transportation of any type. They look at it as a waste of taxpayer money. Since oil prices are driven by supply and demand, doesn't every car not driven mean less competition for that gallon of gas, and in affect lower fuel prices? As you have said before. Democrat's are lousy at messaging.