Yes, there are still reports out there about the energy situation despite gasoline prices less than $2 and fairly warm weather so far. My local paper ran a couple of AP articles on Sunday that put the blame in the wrong place and offered a misguided solution.

In the first, titled "Rising grocery costs not as bad as feared for holidays," an agricultural economist opines, "It doesn't make sense for a retailer to raise prices in response to a short-term energy spike." The basic conclusion of the article was that most manufacturers and retailers haven't raised prices yet because those that have done so have lost market share.

In the second article, titled "Driving tax considered for funding roads," I read that the US Chamber of Commerce commissioned a report about how to fund our transportation infrastructure. They found that the trust fund supported by federal gasoline taxes will hit a zero cash balance in 2008. (Hmmmmm. Interesting that it could happen around the same time as many are saying the oil supply problems will really start getting bad.) They also projected a $500 billion shortfall in what's needed to maintain our automobile infrastructure and $1.1 trillion shortfall to improve it.

Their solution? Put a tax on hybrids and other fuel efficient cars, of course. Just brilliant!

Ah, you beat me to it!  I was also going to mention the tentative recommendation by the US Chamber of Commerce commission to put a tax on hybrids to make up for the reduced gas tax revenue due to their better mileage.

That has to be one of the most bone-headed ideas by a government bureacrat that I've heard in a long time!  Don't they have a prize somewhere for the year's most stupid idea?  

 It's things like this that make me despair over whether our government is up to the challenge of doing anything useful regarding our energy situation.  While they certainly have the money (yours and mine, actually), they sure don't have the will, the focus, or the common sense.

The US Chamber of Commerce is not part of the government.  Almost, but not quite.

Rick DeZeeuw

Well, no they're actually not, but the way that they get intimately involved in the setting of government policy, they might as well be.

For that matter, neither is the Federal Reserve part of the government, but does anyone doubt that this entity is just about the most power 'non-governmental' government agency?

By that standard, the folks who might as well be part of the government includes everyone who hires a lobbyist.