Mitt Romney Gas Prices Rhetoric Doesn't Get Support Of His Own
Economists
Posted: 03/23/2012 2:30 pm Updated: 03/23/2012 2:47 pm
WASHINGTON
-- Mitt Romney on the campaign trail has chided President Barack Obama for
failing to curb prices at the pump, even as prominent economists have debunked
those talking points, saying there's little the president can do to lower
prices in the short term. Now the latest twist: No one from Romney's economic
team will step forward to defend him.
And
not for want of opportunity.
After
Romney insisted that more drilling in Mexico and in the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge could bring down the cost of gas, The Huffington Post contacted
members of Romney's economic team -- two revolving-door lobbyists and two former chairmen of the Council of
Economic Advisers under President George W. Bush -- to ask if
they would vouch for the claim.
"I
will pass. Sorry," prominent macroeconomist Gregory Mankiw, a Romney
advisor, replied when contacted by HuffPost about an interview. Other queries
were similarly denied or unreturned.
Consider
the argument: "The best thing we can do to get the price of gas to be more
moderate and not have to be dependent upon the cartel is: drill in the gulf,
drill in the outer continent shelf, drill in ANWR, drill in North Dakota, South
Dakota, drill in Oklahoma and Texas," Romney said on "Fox and Friends" on March 16.
Other
economists haven't been shy about debunking the claim, explaining that U.S.
energy policy has very little effect either on oil prices or on overall U.S.
employment. Recent studies have backed them up. The Associated Press'
statistical analysis of 36 years of monthly, inflation-adjusted gasoline prices
and U.S. domestic oil production found no statistical correlation between gas prices and how
much oil comes out of U.S. wells.
"The
truth is that we're already having a hydrocarbon boom," Paul Krugman explained in a recent article, "with
U.S. oil and gas production rising and U.S. fuel imports dropping. If there
were any truth to drill-here-drill-now, this boom should have yielded
substantially lower gasoline prices and lots of new jobs. Predictably, however,
it has done neither."
Since
then Romney has put forth other ideas about how to curb the price of oil. At a
campaign stop in Illinois on Saturday, Romney called on Obama to fire what he
dubbed "the gas-hike trio," a reference to the administration's
energy secretary, interior secretary and head of the EPA. "No question in
my mind that these -- I call them the gas-hike trio ... are on a mission to
drive up the price of gasoline and all energy so that they can finally get
their solar and their wind to be more price competitive," he said.
There
are some things Obama could do help alleviate pain at the pump, as HuffPost's
Peter Goodman noted in a recent article. But increasing domestic drilling and
firing the EPA's Lisa Jackson aren't among them. "He could unleash a
serious-minded, subpoena-wielding probe aimed at frightening the Wall Street
speculators who are responsible for most of the climb in gas
prices," Goodman noted in a recent column. But that's not something
Romney's looking at.
An
independent economist who has called Romney "hands down"
the best choice for the GOP nomination hardly came to his rescue.
"I
don't think there's anything in the short run," said Decision Economics
President Allen Sinai, when asked what could be done to bring down gas prices.
"I think as part of the election campaign, President Obama and whoever is
the Republican candidate owes the American people an energy plan that will deal
both with the supply of oil energy and the demand."
Asked
what changes the nation might expect to see in the price of gas over three to
six months or even a year, Sinai responded simply "nothing, Americans are
going to be stuck with whatever it is."
Joel
Naroff, who has chided President Obama for his handling of the economy, agreed.
"Nothing
in the short term changes things a whole lot," Naroff, president of Naroff
Economics, told HuffPost in a recent interview. "For example, the
skyrocketing prices in gasoline, especially in the last two years, has had
nothing to do with supply and demand. I don't think anybody is arguing that
point right now. Nothing -- I don't believe that anything that anybody could
have done would have changed things dramatically in the short term. The
president and Congress could have said every single available place to drill,
regardless of what anybody thinks, is going to be drilled. They could have said
that two years ago, and we wouldn't have a whole lot more oil than we have now.
So, short term, U.S. energy policy has little to do with the ups and downs of
prices."
Harvard
economist and historian David Landes, whom Romney has quoted approvingly in speeches, wasn't
available to comment on the issue.
Even Romney himself has contradicted his rhetoric on gas
prices. Earlier this week, evidence surfaced that as governor of Massachusetts,
Romney responded much as Obama has done recently, describing high gas prices as
the natural result of global market pressures.
Of
course it's not impossible to find economists who'll throw Romney a bone.
Larry
Kudlow, an economist and television personality whose praise of Romney's
economic policies Romney has touted in press releases, has argued
that Obama is not without options.
But
even he offered a tepid endorsement at best.
"I
think, in the short term, more drilling would have some effect, not a huge
effect," Kudlow said in an interview. "You've got your oil markets,
and they're buying and selling in the futures, so if they saw an opening of,
let's say, oil drilling offshore -- federal lands, Alaska, the Arctic -- they
might say, 'Well, you know it's going to take 10 years, but we're going to sell
the futures contracts because we see more supply equals lower prices.'"
He
added, "I'm a market guy, and I say more drilling and more pipeline. The
price will take care of itself. We should stabilize, but we have so much we
could be doing."
No comments:
Post a Comment