More on “one tank” Jack’s gas gimmick
The D&C had coverage of Jack Davis’ gas subsidy yesterday. So as you know from Grievous Angel, Jack Davis spend $27,000 dollars yesterday in a publicity stunt where he paid the difference between between what gas cost when George Bush came into office and what it cost now.
I found these quotes quite interesting first from Jack Davis
“We are here because I believe gasoline should help America run; gas prices should not be running America,” Davis said. “This (day) exceeded my expectations.”
Someone please explain what that exactly means. What is Davis’ plan? There wasn’t a mention of a plan in the article. It was all about giving away cheap gas with quotes from customers and other candidates for the same office.
I mean if there was a plan don’t you think it would be mentioned? That’s alright Grievous nails it with this comment from an earlier post.
Today’s gas buying event will maybe help a few hundred voters for a week at most. It is a one-time event that doesn’t solve any of the underlying problems. Davis’ website does not even list an energy policy on his “Issues” section.
Then there were these comments from a couple of folks who filled up with gas.
Jessica Fey and Nino Reyome of Churchville ran out of gas while waiting in line.
“My mom called me and said, ‘Go get gas!’” said Reyome, 27, as they filled up. “For Davis to do it out of his pocket shows what kind of man he is. He’s got my vote all day and every day.”
Chili resident Jackie Cripps, 50, saw the news about the cheap gas on television, got dressed and put her 9-year-old son Andy in her Dodge Caravan to drive to Greece.
Lately, Cripps pays $75 to fill her tank. On Thursday, her bill was $21.
“This may influence the way I vote. It’s a nice thing to do when we need it most because we drive more during the summer,” Cripps said. Cripps lives in a different Congressional district, however.
Can these people actually be serious? I wonder if they are even registered.
Davis succeeded in getting his name in the paper much like he has succeeded in buying cheap google ads reaching outside his district. Frankly Davis did a remarkable job getting publicity.
There is, however, a difference between a gimmick and plan.
Any plan (got that? any plan) will take time to implement so there will be no direct savings immediately. Build more power plants? Drill more? You are taking years before supply is increased.
Frankly, Jack is living in the past. Personally speaking, the days of cheap gas of the $1.50 kind is long gone. To say otherwise is to live in the past and we need to adjust our society to reflect this.
Jack is about the gimmick not the substance.
Related posts:
“I...
Beyond the people who are willing to sell their vote for a tank of gas, there are those who fall for the lie that drilling ANWR and the coastal oceans will lower gas prices. The government’s own Energy Information Administration said that any oil from the Alaskan wilderness won’t reach the pipeline for “7 to 12 years” and at that point would reduce the cost of a barrel of oil by 75 cents. I hope Jack Davis was more straightforward in his business dealings than he is in his politics.
Is Davis edging closer to violating election law?
From the NYS Board of Elections:
§ 17-142. Giving consideration for franchise.
Except as allowed by law, any person who directly or indirectly, by
himself or through any other person:
1. Pays, lends or contributes, or offers or promises to pay, lend or
contribute any money or other valuable consideration to or for any voter, or to
or for any other person, to induce such voter or other person to vote or refrain
from voting at any election, or to induce any voter or other person to vote or
refrain from voting at such election for any particular person or persons, or for
17-142 THE ELECTION LAW
410
or against any particular proposition submitted to voters, or to induce such
voter to come to the polls or remain away from the polls at such election or to
induce such voter or other person to place or cause to be placed or refrain from
placing or causing to be placed his name upon a registration poll record or on
account of such voter or other person having voted or refrained from voting for
or against any particular person or for or against any proposition submitted to
voters, or having come to the polls or remained away from the polls at such
election, or having placed or caused to be placed or refrained from placing or
causing to be placed his or any other name upon the registry of voters; or,
2. Gives, offers or promises any office, place or employment, or
promises to procure or endeavor to procure any office, place or employment to
or for any voter, or to or for any other person, in order to induce such voter or
other person to vote or refrain from voting at any election, or to induce any
voter or other person to vote or refrain from voting at such election, for or
against any particular person or for or against any proposition submitted to
voters, or to induce any voter or other person to place or cause to be placed or
refrain from placing or causing to be placed his or any other name upon a
registration poll record; or,
3. Gives, offers or promises any office, place, employment or
valuable thing as an inducement for any voter or other person to procure or aid
in procuring either a large or a small vote, plurality or majority at any election
district or other political division of the state, for a candidate or candidates to
be voted for at an election; or to cause a larger or smaller vote, plurality or
majority to be cast or given for any candidate or candidates in one such district
or political division than in another; or,
4. Makes any gift, loan, promise, offer, procurement or agreement as
aforesaid to, for or with any person to induce such person to procure or
endeavor to procure the election of any person or the vote of any voter at any
election; or,
5. Procures or engages or promises or endeavors to procure, in
consequence of any such gift, loan, offer, promise, procurement, or agreement
the election of any person, or the vote of any voter, at such election; or,
6. Advances or pays or causes to be paid, any money or other valuable
thing, to or for the use of any other person with the intent that the same, or any
part thereof, shall be used in bribery at any election, or knowingly pays or
causes to be paid any money or other valuable thing to any person in discharge
VIOLATIONS OF THE ELECTIVE FRANCHISE 17-146
411
or repayment of any money, wholly or in part expended in bribery at any
election, is guilty of a felony.
§ 17-144. Receiving consideration for franchise.
Except as allowed by law, any person who directly or indirectly, by
himself or through any other person:
1. Receives, agrees or contracts for, before or during an election, any
money, gift, loan or other valuable consideration, office place or employment
for himself or any other person, for voting or agreeing to vote, or for coming or
agreeing to come to the polls, or for remaining away or agreeing to remain
away from the polls, or for refraining or agreeing to refrain from registering as
a voter, or for refraining or agreeing to refrain from voting, or for voting or
agreeing to vote, or for refraining or agreeing to refrain from voting for or
against any particular person or persons at any election, or for or against any
proposition submitted to voters at such election; or,
2. Receives any money or other valuable thing during or after an
election on account of himself or any other person having voted or refrained
from voting at such an election; or having registered or refrained from
registering as a voter, or on account of himself or any other person having
voted or refrained from voting for or against any particular person at such
election, or for or against any proposition submitted to voters at such election,
or on account of himself or any other person having come to the polls or
remained away from the polls at such election, or having registered or
refrained from registering as a voter, or on account of having induced any
other person to vote or refrain from voting for or against any particular person
at such election, or for or against any proposition submitted to voters at such
election, is guilty of a felony.
http://www.elections.state.ny.us/NYSBOE/download/law/2008NYElectionLaw.pdf
RussElba: There are a lot of us who understand that ANWR won’t lower the price of gas, but will do a small part in ensuring we have a supply of gas until some alternative technology really starts taking hold
You would have to prove quid pro quo…which is very difficult. He’s hardly original…it’s a stunt that has been played by others, within just the past few weeks:
First in Illinois in May:
http://www.wbbm780.com/pages/2242836.php?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,360581,00.html
And in Virginia just last month:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/2008/06/sam_rasoul_hopes_cheap_gas_tur.html
Typical Jack - a day late and a few million dollars early
Davis is hardly original. Here’s others who have recently tried the same trick. Poor Jack, a day late, and a few million dollars short:
Mississippi:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/politics_nation/2008/05/blast_from_the_past.html
and another in Chicago in May of 2008:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-tenth-gas-web-may23,0,5331563.story
With gas priced at $4.14 per gallon Thursday, Seals said he would make up the difference out of his campaign fund—an expenditure incumbent U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) contended could violate federal law. Green Party candidate David Kalbfleisch joined Kirk in criticizing the event.
Seals, who unsuccessfully challenged Kirk for his 10th District seat on the North Shore in 2006, scoffed at the notion the campaign event smacked of trading money for votes. Other Democratic candidates across the country have made similar offers of cheap gas recently.
Ah yes…Jack “Zoolander” Davis:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05pJ1yG3IS0
And the stunt goes all the way back to 2006 with an interesting twist:
Friday, August 18, 2006
Cheap Gas, Pork & Buying Votes
Kentucky Congressional candidate Mike Weaver (D) had more than 100 people lined up for cheap gasoline at a recent campaign event. People could get ten gallons of $1.20 a gallon gasoline. Mr Weaver’s campaign paid $1,510 to cover the difference. The regular price was $2.76 a gallon.
That’s not sitting well with incumbent Rep Ron Lewis (R-KY) — the guy Mr Weaver is trying to unseat.
Rep Lewis, probably sore he didn’t think of it first, is demanding the US Attorney’s office look into the event as a case of “vote buying.”
Speaking of “vote buying” — we went to Rep Lewis’ official House website (paid for by your tax dollars) and looked around for some pork barrel spending. We found Rep Lewis bragging about:
$114,997 in Homeland Security money helping East Barren’s Volunteer Fire Department protect “50 square miles of mostly rural area” from terrorists
$250,000 to help celebrate Abe Lincoln’s youth in Hodgenville, KY
$150,000 to renovate the State Theatre in Elizabethtown, KY
The only difference in “buying votes” may be that Mr Weaver used money contributed to his campaign — while Rep Lewis used taxpayer money. (AP via MyWay.com/Rep Ron Lewis website)
The thing that bugs me most about those gas-buyers who now say that they will vote for Jack Davis is that this is symptomatic of many voters who focus on absolutely trivial issues. Because Davis saved one family $50 in gas money, they will vote for him and not even worry about how Davis’s other policies might help or hurt them in the future. It is reminiscent of many people, who in 2004, said they were going to vote for W because he “was a guy you could have a beer with”. We need smarter voters.
I agree. Maybe we could start a fund to put PBS and Meet The Press on video monitors beside long lines at Sea Breeze, Disney World, etc. (Kidding.) Getting smarter voters is a harder problem to solve than our oil crisis.
What amazed me was that a woman drove so far to get gas the cost of the drive offset her “savings.” Stunt!
I agree that drilling in ANWR, as much as I oppose it, has nothing in common with this ridiculous Jack Davis stunt. I know reasonable people who support drilling in ANWR and offshore but I don’t know any reasonable people who think this David cheap oil thing is anything but absurd.
Alternatives? They exist now. Wind is big in Europe.
Heck T Boone Pickens even has a plan to build wind farms in Texas.
.
“ensuring we have a supply of gas”
We currently do have an adequate supply of gas. I mean are there shortages anywhere?
Wind is also big in Lackawanna, NY. Right along the lakeshore. Could be done here too. Its an alternative that no one wants to discuss, but is looking better and better all the time … it doesn’t pollute, it doesn’t require massive generators to be built and maintained, and of course it is renewable.
(I moved). The whole drilling scam is an insult. The oil companies hold leases on public lands into the hundreds of thousands of acres. They haven’t drilled them because exploration and extraction wasn’t profitable until oil rose to current prices. They’re not as interested in drilling for the oil as holding title to the mineral rights to oil that is only profitable to pump if the price remains high. On Friday, Bush touted ’shale oil’. Shale oil is only worth the processing when oil is high. I f the price drops, shale is too capital intensive to be profitable. If you seriously think we have 7 to 10 years to wait, I fear for this country. How much has gas gone up this past year? How much will it go up in the decade before we see a drop from ANWR? This is a political season stunt to buy time we don’t have. What will make the difference is conservation. And if people keep believing the pipe dream, they won’t wake up to the fact that they have to make concessions, hard choices, and important political decisions. Its time we started facing facts, without waiting for some politician to pay our way out of this.
Looks like Nancy Pelosi is trying to buy my vote:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a5P_x5HfhQA0&refer=worldwide
Moving to San Francisco Elmer?
Good point
- she is trying to buy votes for her fellow Democrats