Against a backdrop of skyrocketing gas prices, the Republican candidate for president has argued that his opponent's previous support for a 50-cent gas tax — a measure offered in the hopes of lowering consumption — was pure folly. As he put it: "I cannot see where a 50 cent a gallon tax applied to gasoline would have changed the price of gasoline. It would still have gone up as much as it has, and the 50 cents would be added on top of that? Then we're asked to believe that some way they would get this back to the consumers. But why? Why take it in the first place if you're going to give it back?"
Sounds like President Bush attacking Sen. John Kerry, right? Wrong.
Actually, the year was 1980. The words, spoken during a presidential debate with another northern candidate named "John" — John Anderson — belonged to Ronald Reagan.
When then-Gov. Reagan asked Richard to develop his 1980 presidential strategy, he drafted a 176-page campaign plan. Journalists later labeled this document the Black Book. In it, Richard wrote, "People act on the basis of their perception of reality; there is, in fact, no political reality beyond what is perceived by the voters."
Then, as now, the influence of soaring gas prices on the outcome of the election will depend on whom or what voters perceive is responsible for increased prices and whether they believe Mr. Bush is to blame.
While the gas issue appeared bleak for President Carter, one could well argue it looks much worse for Mr. Bush. Just this week, Alan Greenspan announced that high gas prices are here to stay. Last week, the U.S. Energy Information Administration announced motor oil fuel prices have sailed past previous highs for the fourth week in a row. Retail prices for regular-grade gasoline are, on average, 24 cents more than they were this time last year.
And, as if all that weren't bad enough for the president, Bob Woodward has just released a book suggesting that the Saudis promised Mr. Bush they would coordinate favorable oil pricing to coincide with the 2004 presidential election. Sensing an opportunity to attack, Mr. Kerry has seized upon Mr. Woodward's reporting and has labeled the alleged negotiations between Mr. Bush and Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan a "secret White House deal."
All of this, it would seem, stands to favor Mr. Kerry. After all, how could the avalanche of negative information about gas prices not crush voters' perceptions of Mr. Bush?
Yet whether the president's actions have increased or will increase the price of gasoline — a thesis most experts would deem specious at best — is irrelevant. What matters most is how voters answer one critical question: "Who or what do you believe is most responsible for the recent increase in the price of gasoline?"
In an independent national survey administered by Wirthlin Worldwide last week, we asked 1,000 Americans precisely that question. We believe the three top responses reveal both challenges and opportunities for each candidate.
First, of those polled, exactly half (50 percent)cited OPEC and/or oil companies as the reason for higher gas prices. To some, this might seem like an opportunity for Mr. Kerry; he could exploit the president and vice president's ties to oil companies. However, data collected when Bill Clinton was in office revealed that Americans blamed high gas prices on oil producers then as well.
Yet, like Mr. Reagan in 1980, the Bush campaign decided to remind voters of Mr. Kerry's past support for a 50-cent gas tax in a recent series of television ads. The message: If you think prices are already too high, imagine what they would be under Mr. Kerry. How this argument holds up long term remains to be seen. If Americans grow weary of the pain at the pump, sentiment could shift.
At 19 percent, the Iraq war was tagged as the second strongest contributor to price increases. Since Mr. Bush led America to war, one might assume this gives Mr. Kerry a decisive advantage.
However,the most recent CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll found that 57 percent of Americans believe it was not a mistake to send troops to Iraq. Moreover, given Mr. Kerry's now-famous statement about voting for the war before he voted against it, raising the issue would only open him up to Mr. Bush's central charge: Mr. Kerry flip-flops.
Finally, 18 percent of those polled said Mr. Bush was to blame for higher gas prices. Not surprisingly, two-thirds of these individuals were Democrats. Partisanship,therefore,largely explains this response.
Like Mr. Reagan in 1980, so far Mr. Bush has managed to navigate the issue of high gas prices effectively by suggesting things would only get worse under his opponent.
Still, our survey found that 91 percent of registered voters drive cars. Indeed, mobility bestowed by the automobile in the United States has all but become an "inalienable right."
Whether, in fact, President Bush's leadership has "infringed" upon that right matters little. Come November, it will be the candidate who has managed voters' perceptions most effectively who will find himself in the presidential driver's seat.
