Americans don’t like it much when gasoline prices rise rapidly, as they have been for the last few months, and the President of the United States usually gets at least some of the blame.
That’s what is happening now.
A new Washington Post-ABC News poll finds that “Nearly two-thirds of Americans say they disapprove of the way the President is handling the situation at the pump. Just 26 percent approve of his work on the issue, his lowest rating in the poll.”
The President’s overall approval rating had been edging back up, but the Post-ABC News poll shows that 46 percent of Americans approve of the job he’s doing, while 50 percent disapprove.
If prices continue to rise, or stay at or above $4 a gallon, could they cost Obama the election? Nate Silver, a statistician who writes for the New York Times, says historically gas prices alone are not a significant factor in elections.
“Overall, the relationship goes in the direction that you might expect—higher gas prices mean a poorer performance for the incumbent party—but it is fairly weak statistically,” Silver wrote earlier this month in the Times.
The notable exceptions were the 1980 and 2008 elections. When Barack Obama beat John McCain in 2008, gas was at $3.81 per gallon. In 1980, when Ronald Regan beat Jimmy Carter, gas was $3.37 a gallon (in today’s prices).
But Silver argues that even in those cases, gas prices in and of themselves appear to be secondary to the impact expensive fuel has on the economy.
“Higher gas prices are important to the extent that they affect things like G.D.P., inflation and unemployment… but there isn’t evidence that they (gas prices) matter above and beyond that,” Silver wrote.
Still, high gas prices could be problematic for Obama for just that reason. Silver’s research shows that G.D.P. has declined during three of the six Presidential election years since 1948 when gas prices were at their highest.
If oil continues to rise, thus weakening an already delicate recovery, the President will find himself shouldering more blame for the economic doldrums.
Additionally, the President’s ability to control the price of oil is open to debate. The President could be doing more to encourage oil exploration by opening up additional federal lands and speeding up the permitting process, but other factors, such as instability in the Middle East, are farther out of his reach.
But when it comes to higher gas prices, and their impact on the economy, Americans are not usually willing to debate the economic nuances of oil prices. Americans hate higher gas prices. It doesn’t help that we’re reminded of them every time we see a gas station sign as well as during each fill-up.
Silver argues we handle higher gas prices a lot better when we have a sense that the economy is strong and growing. If, however, the economy is stagnant because of the high cost of energy, then there is a greater chance of a political price for the incumbent party.