While I think tax breaks are a help in changing behavior and prodding those who can afford to do so toward energy conservation, I think the biggest impetus will be market prices.

That being said, I agree with McCain's statements in opening up new areas for oil drilling. Because of the time that'll be required to realize the potential of those oil fields AND the problems we already have because of limited refining capacity, I don't believe it'll result in a significant reduction in the price. We'll never see $2 a gallon prices again. What I think it will do is keep prices from rising so quickly long term. That would be useful in preventing the stagflation the economy experiences as it has to adjust these sorts of spikes in oil prices.

I'm not sure tax breaks on gasoline will help in the short term if demand increases and raises the price of crude. But I agree that opening up offshore drilling will increase supply in the long term and help to lower oil prices. However, if oil prices remain low (or artificially low thanks to India and China subsidies), then demand will continue to increase and end up erasing the benefit from increasing supply. It's a tough call to make.

There is plenty of supply. There isn't a supply problem. We just need to reduce demand and the prices will moderate. I agree with Beth. The current prices aren't high or people would be making more adaptations. They were just so low for so long we are spoiled. No need to disturb more of the environment because we are greedy.

My thinking is that opening up domestic reserves will keep prices from getting higher or increasing to quickly. The demand from India and China will only increase demand on the world supply though.

The hope is that this country can continue to pursue alternate sources of energy and more efficent ways of using established sources as we gradually convert toward them.