Mr. Nixon’s Energy Saving Plan

New York, Dec. 4—It is most often objected to a rise in the price of gasoline and fuel oil that it “favors the rich.” This is like saying that wealth favors the rich, which it indisputably does. The millionaire, in order to avoid the cold weather, can fly to Rio de Janeiro. It must be driven home, and driven home again, that the proper way to cope with shortages that are inconvenient in character, as distinguished from physical shortages that justify subsistence rationing, is through the price mechanism. It is demagogic and superficial to conclude that this is the course of action that “favors” the rich. The rich, as I have suggested, can look after themselves. They will always be able to get the gas they need by very simply buying it at whatever price the black market commands.

Consider President Nixon’s two most conspicuous proposals designed to lower the consumption of gasoline. We are all supposed to drive at speeds of 50 miles per hour or less. Now the public tends to think of that as perfectly reasonable. When a categorical proposal is made, the human tendency is to try it out on oneself, and if the proposed inconvenience is not inordinate, then the suggestion is not unacceptable. But there are people in the United States for whom the difference between driving 50 mph and 70 mph is the difference between getting home at night—a major personal objective—and not getting home. In 1942, Governor Coke Stevenson announced calmly that the sovereign state of Texas would not abide by the most recent ukase of President Roosevelt that in order to save tires and rubber no one could drive faster than 35 mph. “Why won’t you go along?” a young man asked him. “Because, son, in Texas if you drive 35 miles per hour, you don’t ever arrive.”

About the Author

William F. Buckley Jr.

William F. Buckley Jr. founded National Review magazine in 1955.

Featured Tags

New York, Dec. 4—It is most often objected to a rise in the price of gasoline and fuel oil that it “favors the rich.” This is like saying that wealth favors the rich, which it indisputably does. The millionaire, in order to avoid the cold weather, can fly to Rio de Janeiro. It must be driven home, and driven home again, that the proper way to cope with shortages that are inconvenient in character, as distinguished from physical shortages that justify subsistence rationing, is through the price mechanism. It is demagogic and superficial to conclude that this is the course of action that “favors” the rich. The rich, as I have suggested, can look after themselves. They will always be able to get the gas they need by very simply buying it at whatever price the black market commands.

Consider President Nixon’s two most conspicuous proposals designed to lower the consumption of gasoline. We are all supposed to drive at speeds of 50 miles per hour or less. Now the public tends to think of that as perfectly reasonable. When a categorical proposal is made, the human tendency is to try it out on oneself, and if the proposed inconvenience is not inordinate, then the suggestion is not unacceptable. But there are people in the United States for whom the difference between driving 50 mph and 70 mph is the difference between getting home at night—a major personal objective—and not getting home. In 1942, Governor Coke Stevenson announced calmly that the sovereign state of Texas would not abide by the most recent ukase of President Roosevelt that in order to save tires and rubber no one could drive faster than 35 mph. “Why won’t you go along?” a young man asked him. “Because, son, in Texas if you drive 35 miles per hour, you don’t ever arrive.”