A Siegel,
How about an imported oil and refined products fee rather than a straight gasoline and diesel tax? Since its a tarrif, it could be a problem under the WTO rules. I'd sure like the money generated to go to medicare and social security taxes, which would directly benefit the working poor, elderly on medicade and children's health insurance, CHIPS.

It would favor US production which is mainly independent oil companies, and specificially target big oil and foreign refiners. It should help preserve OCAW jobs, and it would make for good employment in domestic service companies

Just a suggestion, but I think it makes more sense with your agenda than targeting US refining, which is great paying US jobs for the Oil,Chemical and Atomic workers union.
Bob Ebersole

Bob,

Right now the real focus is on developing very targeted and innovative legislative concepts. The ESCBs as the leading edge as a path to foster real moves toward a more energy efficient infrastructure across the nation:

The ESCBs

* set up a balance between Federal and Local government contributions and responsibilities -- a partnership;
foster iterative learning, from one town to another, from one project/program to the next
* build capacity, using the government wisely spending taxpayer money (and lowering tomorrow's financial burden on the taxpayer) to help create an infrastructure that will enable businesses and private individuals (across the country) to pursue energy efficiency and renewable energy with greater ease and, likely, at lower cost
* are not just Energy Smart, but also financially smart (bonds will pay for themselves), environmentally smart (reduce pollution), health smart (people in energy efficient structures (on average) are healthier, productivity smart (LEED structures have 10-15% higher productivity), etc ...

Now, as we revisit a grander vision, does it make sense to explore what are the best paths forward? Sure, we should engage in discussion.

My personal preference is for a Global Warming Impact Fee (GWIF), with heavy penalties in place for imports from any country that does not have an auditable equivalent. For a rough discussion of a GWIF (which merits updating), see: http://energysmart.wordpress.com/2007/04/19/global-warming-impact-fee-ha...

Well, im certainly for exploring it further. We have just plain got to have revenue from somewhere, the current bunch has looted the treasury and maxed out the credit cards.

Poor people in the US (and the rest of the world) are really struggling. I just want the taxes targeted so they don't hurt areas of the economy that are struggling and can return the money quickly to the poorest Americans. That 14-15% social security and medicare tax is a huge burden on people who can least afford it, while people who enjoy "capital gains" don't pay it at all. Its truely an obscene policy. But, i'm a landman, not an accountant or tax lawyer. I just want your guys to think about it.
Bob Ebersole

Truly ... part of our target of raising money within EA2020 is so that, writ large, the investment stream will help lower the "cost to own" and will help those with lesser means get past the "cost to buy" increment of getting to higher energy efficiency.

Remember Ross Perot?

I met that shithead once, he was buying a piece of an operator's deal that I'd worked on. He was short and skinny with big ears and really short hair. Sort of like an elf spy, had a" I am very serious look."

Is he still alive?

Bob Ebersole