While the coolest part of the inauguration yesterday was the fantastic poem, since this is a blog about resource economics I will focus on the topic at hand. There is much in the news already on the topic of transportation. In the confirmation hearing for Transportation Secretary nominee Pete Buttigieg, "Buttigieg said options to cover the costs of transportation spending 'could include revisiting the gas tax, adjusting it, and/or connecting it to inflation'....But after the hearing, a Buttigieg spokesman ruled out supporting an increase in the gas tax, saying a 'variety of options need to be on the table to ensure we can invest in our highways and create jobs, but increasing the gas tax is not among them.'" Interesting.
Meanwhile in the Atlantic, a commentator writes, "Rather than try to kneecap America’s oil and gas industries, Biden should pledge a subsidy-palooza that helps bring down the price of every technology in the clean-energy portfolio: hundreds of billions in guaranteed federal purchases of clean-energy tech, such as batteries and electric cars; more subsidies for solar and wind energy; and more R&D spending on clean energy and carbon removal."
This is the difference between economics and political economics: the former is interested in finding what is most efficient, while the latter focuses on what is most politically palatable. Both matter!
