ALBUQUERQUE — At a downtown Albuquerque gas station on Friday, Tom Udall was determined to showcase the anger and frustration many are feeling over escalating gas prices.

 

And on that score, he succeeded.

 

The Udall for Senate campaign staged a small group of motorists around two folding tables in the middle of the parking lot of the Ever-Ready Oil Company at the corner of First Street and Mountain Road.

 

“Every time the gas price goes up one penny it costs the post office $8 million,” explained Susie Romero, an Albuquerque letter carrier. “This, in turn, affects hiring. They’re not hiring carriers so we’re taking on more and more. For me, I’ll go in and carry my route and carry part of another route and everybody’s angry. They see us getting there late. They get mad at you more!”

 

Udall nodded sympathetically.

 

Jennifer Gonzales, a part-time real estate appraiser and mother of two, stayed closer to home for her pain at the pump story: "We just went on a short camping trip to Las Cruces a few weeks ago,” she told Udall as he scribbled down notes. “Gas, one way, was over $100. And so now we’re really evaluating. Is it really worth having a camping trailer, going on family camping trips? And that’s just a basic thing. I mean, that’s not going to Disney Land but it’s so expensive and you can’t justify it anymore."

 

In an exasperated voice, she added, “I’m just amazed that it just goes up and there’s nobody protesting! Nobody saying anything!"

 

Nobody saying anything? Nobody except for everybody, including the five-term congressman turned Senate hopeful who faces GOP U.S. Rep. Steve Pearce in the November election.

 

"Basic supply and demand is at work here,” Udall remarked, “but there are a lot of other things going on."

 

In a question and answer session with reporters following the event, Udall expressed his solidarity with the pain at the pump crowd with a strong populist edge.

 

“This is really hitting middle class families. I think they’re getting hammered, I think they’re getting crunched,” he said. “And I think the anger is focused on big oil. I really believe that. I think these people see these record profits and they see record prices and they think it’s wrong and I think it’s wrong.”

 

The Santa Fe Democrat ticked off his preferred solutions: cracking down on hedge fund speculators and price gauging, building more “new, clean refineries,” and adopting stronger fuel efficiency standards.

 

Udall grudgingly added one more item to the list. “I want to be clear: We need to have responsible drilling.”

 

But another idea often touted as a solution to upwardly mobile gas prices, particularly by Udall’s environmentalist allies, is a higher gas tax. Proponents have long argued that such a tax spike would provide the clearest market signal for consumers to consume less.

 

Asked about a higher gas tax, Udall sped away fast.

 

“I don’t see that now as part of the mix,” he said quickly. “This is not the period to be raising taxes on people.”

 

Asked if he has ever supported an increase in the federal 17-cent per gallon gas tax, Udall appeared a bit unsure about his own record: “Not that I’m aware of,” he half-answered.

 

The Independent later asked Udall spokeswoman Marissa Padilla for a more definitive answer.

 

“I would just let his answer stand as it is,” she said. “There are so many votes,” she added. “I don’t want to give you the wrong answer.”

 

Touchy subject

 

Yet, some people believe now is precisely the right time to raise the gas tax. And not just self-described environmentalists. Last month, conservative Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer offered what he called “the cure” to today’s gas woes: “a U.S. energy tax as a way to curtail consumption and keep the money at home.” In the column entitled, “At $4, Everybody Gets Rational,” Krauthammer proposed a phased $2 per gallon increase to the gas tax over two years.

 

That column was chosen by Albuquerque Journal columnist and KNME TV host Gene Grant as the starting point for a discussion of a higher gas tax during this past weekend’s episode of New Mexico In Focus.

 

Early on, Grant framed the debate this way: “Can someone actually sell the republic the idea of a bigger tax on gas to keep it high and make it a benefit to the country?”

 

“I think it’s wonderful that Krauthammer has had an attack of sanity,” responded NMI’s quick-witted columnist Arthur Albert, one of the show’s panelists. “A tax makes perfect sense as part of a larger attempt to get us off oil and off imported oil. Yes that can happen. But it won’t happen with McCain.”

 

Quick cutaway to an irritated looking Scott Darnell, fellow panelist and the acting executive director of the state Republican Party.

 

“What he’s (Krauthammer) talking about is putting the energy economy on American terms,” Darnell later elaborated, “and not allowing our energy prices to be driven by leaders from foreign countries and activity overseas.”

 

Interestingly enough, Darnell didn’t dismiss the idea outright.

 

In response, Jim Scarantino, a Weekly Alibi columnist, conceded that a new energy policy is a must. 

 

"You have to make this change," he began. "Question is, how we make it. Whether we make it in a way that brings our economy to its knees, that ships our wealth to countries that hate us. Or, whether we do many of the reasonable things that Pete Domenici has advocated for years. Which is, you utilize all the forms of energy available to us, through efficiency, through new technology — and that includes solar and wind – whether you use our great nuclear capacity that we don’t touch. And whether you fully utilize the incredible – we still have incredible oil resource in this country."

 

Oddly enough, Scarantino’s mostly conservative prescription is awfully close to Udall’s.

 

As he listened and took notes last Friday, Sen. Domenici’s would-be successor calmly explained that he supports renewable energy, nuclear power and “responsible” drilling.

 

But he opposes higher gas prices.

 

“I just as mad as they are," Udall said pointing to the participants of the campaign "roundtable," which was actually square, just as it was breaking up.

 

Editor’s note: To view M.G.Bralley’s blog and photos, go here.