No One Earning Less Than $250,000 Ever Drives

At least, that must be the case if we're to believe the Obamessiah's promise not to raise taxes on anyone earning less than $250,000 by 'one dime'.  Here's the problem...

Raise federal gasoline taxes to help pay for road projects?

Not during a recession, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has said.

Then how about moving toward a system that finances highway construction by charging motorists by the mile?

When LaHood suggested last week that be considered among other potential financing schemes, he got bushwhacked by the White House. "It is not and will not be the policy of the Obama administration," the president's press secretary said.

With the administration's position seemingly clear, a special commission created by Congress is nonetheless endorsing those two ideas.

Its report Thursday warns that if government fails to find a new way to raise money, "we will suffer grim consequences in the future: unimaginable levels of congestion, reduced safety, costlier goods and services, an eroded quality of life, and diminished economic competitiveness as a nation."

The National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission says the current 18.4 cents a gallon gas tax and 24.4 cents a gallon diesel tax are not raising enough money to keep pace with the cost of highway, bridge and transit projects. The commission proposes lifting the gasoline tax by 10 cents per gallon and the diesel tax by 15 cents per gallon, and adjusting both for inflation.

So, if they end up raising taxes on gas and diesel, they apparently believe that no one who earns more than $250,000 ever drives anywhere, right?

Seriously, though, let's take a realistic look at this situation.  Sure, the Obama administration said no to the gas tax hike, but if the commission thought that was a firm and final stance, why would they have wasted their time recommending just that?  To me, this looks like a preemptive political cover game - the commission floats the idea to see how much public animosity there is toward the idea, and the administration gets to come out hard against it.  They look tough, and like they're on the side of the people.  However, I wouldn't be surprised if this idea came up again a bit further down the road, and Obama will have a different reaction to it then.  He'll talk like it's something he really didn't want to do (and he'll point to this first rejection as proof), but since things are so dire, well, he has no other choice.  Then he'll call on Americans to share the load, sacrifice for the common good, blah blah blah and raise the gas tax.

When that happens, I wonder if anyone will have the guts to call him on his $250,000 promise.  I can't imagine any reporter would, outside of perhaps Jake Tapper, but even he only gets so many chances to ask questions.  I suppose it's a moot point anyway, since Obama has already broken the $250,000-no-tax-increase promise; what's one more incident going to matter in what has become a chronic pattern?

But, you have been warned.

There's my two cents.