kluge

Well, there are PACs and there are PACs. "Leadership PACs" like Clinton and Obama set up are common means of helping out the party. As I noted, the principle has long been used at all levels of politics. Special interest PACs, on the other hand, depend on your opinion of the interest served. My own reaction is typically "My candidate's PAC supporters are good PACs - the other guys are bad PACs." A PAC is just a way of aggregating money. As I said before - I don't put much weight in Obama's election to reject PAC money in this election. I don't think the million or so that Clinton has received from PAC will weigh particularly heavy on her, compared to the $170 million she's taken in overall.

On the other hand, the feigned outrage over Obama giving campaign cash to politicians who are Superdelegates is bogus, too. (a) if you could buy a local politician for $10K Clinton would have bought them up long ago; (b) Of course Obama gives them available left over campaign money from 2006 - just as the Clinton campaign loans out Bill to "deserving" local politicos. You use what you've got to advance yourself and your party. If either of them didn't they'd be morons. (And we tried that in presidents. Didn't work out so well, did it? )

So, my take is, bottom line: Tempest in teapot. Both ways. Neither Clinton nor Obama is for sale. We know what they stand for - time to move on. Let's find a real issue.

1sokkermom

^ The Iraq War?

tega

Saturday/Sunday WSJ page A10 provides some insights for this topic. They basically slammed Obama's idea. Hillary and MacCain's tax holiday is a bad idea, but Obama's idea is worse.

vossron

If she is elected, I fully expect her to listen to economists instead of campaign handlers. That goes for all three candidates.

Hunt

Kluge, the gas tax holiday issue is a sad reminder of a sad truth in American politics: a candidate needs the votes of stupid people to win. Candidates who feel particularly threatened will resort to campaign tactics that are specifically designed to appeal to uncritical, uneducated, and not-too-bright people, such as scaring them with scary black people, lying about a veteran's war record, and now, promising them a discount at the gas pump. It's a sad tactic, but it works.

barrons

"If she is elected, I fully expect her to listen to economists instead of campaign handlers"

Because economists are SOOOOOOOOO good at seeing the future. I'd prefer getting a prediction from a tea bag. The real truth is they don't really know what will happen.

interesteddad

A lot of people who champion the merits of college economics apparently missed class the day the professor said, "Now, here's the dirty little secret about economics. The real world doesn't always work like the nice, tidy stuff in your textbook."

vossron

I've had enough of the our current government by hunch. But I agree that a teabag would have done a better job. A new Doonesbury icon!

All seriousness aside, don't expect any more from economists than to say what effect a particular policy will have. No economist will claim to be able to predict the future, so it's disingenuous to complain that they can't. It's "the dismal science" because we don't want to hear the bad news our economic policies will bring upon us in the near future.

Americans prefer the "lower taxes" mantra no matter what it does to our grandchildren. Gas tax vacation is just another populist gimmick that masks the serious problems economists are trying to alert us to, but we don't want hear about them.

I think both Clinton and Obama are smart enough be entrusted with leading us through the coming difficult times; I will be delighted with either, and either one will be a refreshing change.

tega

Here is a study on gax tax holiday

http://www.nber.org/tmp/65433-w12266.pdf

barrons

Typical wealthy economist on the gas tax.

"I don't have to agree with everything she says, and I think she was wrong on this one,'' Rivlin said in an interview today. ``If anything, we need higher gas taxes.''

Many states have sales tax holidays for back to school buying and they have turned into major marketing events with stores having special sales and doing everything to attract business. I'm sure some economists said it was a stupid idea to allow regular people to save a few bucks on their kids clothes.

interesteddad

barrons:

I don't know about you, but my tank is getting low and I sure as heck don't need higher gas taxes today when I go fill it.

In fact, Alice Rivlin is so sure I need to pay even more, maybe she'd like to come fill up my tank for me.

tega

Hubris did you read the study?

What does this mean? It is this kind of attitude that makes obama followers look silly.

New York has a sales tax holiday, and the last time I checked there are very few walmart in NY

barrons

Hubris is obviously all uninformed bark. The name fits

» 2008 Sales Tax Holiday Schedule*on*Blueprint for Financial Prosperity

ucsd_ucla_dad

A former colleague of mine did - of course he's happily retired now thanks to his oil stocks.

kluge

So we can expect that about half of the billions siphoned from the national exchequer will go to the oil companies, and Joe Voter will save about $7 a month. Brilliant. Let's just continue the tradition of screwing the younger generation by charging our current living expenses on their charge card - and adding a 40% tip to the wealthiest of the wealthy for the privilege. What's a little more voodoo economics on top of a nine trillion dollar National debt?