I always hear people talk about gas prices and seeing how high they were, I was hearing things like “Just wait till the election, the politicians will see to it the prices come down before the election.”
In Chicago in fact they have dropped dramatically.
My question is has anyone actually done a real survey about prices of gasoline before national elections to see if they actually, in fact, DO come down before the national elections?
Commodity prices are a worldwide market, it would be a stretch.
In this current GD thread, I post a link to every months closing oil prices since 1946: here, if you want to look at it.
Evidence of price collusion is patently obvious before 1973, but it had nothing to do with elections. 
But anyway. A common story, even repeated by Bob Woodward, has that Bush asked (or “thanked”) the Saudi Oil ministers for keeping gas prices down prior to the 2004 elections. The request was made in April/May and the election was, of course, in November.
Now… remember, the Saudis don’t produce gasoline, they produce crude oil. So here’s a price chart of crude oil in the months from the “request” to the election:
Given that there was a 47% rise in the price of crude oil in the intervening period, the facts do not follow from the accusation.
Just because I’m a nice guy, I’ll do the 6-month runup to the past 10-odd presidential elections, putting the incumbent in italics. If you can determine a pattern, let me know by April, 2008, willya? 
1976: Jimmy Carter (D) beats Ford (R)
1980: Reagan (R) beats Carter (D)
1984: Reagan (R) defeats Mondale (D):
1988: Bush 1 (R) defeats Dukakis (D)
1992: Clinton (D) beats Bush 1 (R)
1996: Clinton (D) defeats Dole (R)
2000 Bush 2 (R) defeats Gore (D)
What prevents a party in power from releasing oil from theStrategic Petroleum Reserve to flood the market and lower prices?
Because there’s not enough in there to do so, plus, more importantly, the political hit from so obviously “buying” the election will negate any potential positive effects from the lowered prices.
Nothing, and Clinton did this before the 2000 elections, but I’m not sure it really worked.
In terms of the OP, there is no evidence in the recent past that gasoline prices drop to influence an election.
Go to http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/wrgp/mogas_history.html
for a complete list of gasoline prices, week-by-week dating back to the early 80’s.
In the Bush Administration, prices have not dropped before either the 2002 or 2004 elections. During 2002 gas prices hit a low of $1.09 in May and then rose to $1.43 in November. In 2004 prices were at a high of $2.03 for the year in May and were only $2.00 in November.
Note that it is gas price rise or fall before an election that is the issue. E.g., the peculiar rise in gas prices prior to the 2000 election that has been suspected by many to have been done to favor Bush over Gore. Since there has been no “official” investigation into the matter, a GQ type answer cannot be given in this case. (Other than to mention that it was and is something that a lot of people believe.)
JohnT: I don’t buy the theory alleged in the OP, but just beacuse OPEC didn’t manipulate the price of oil (and they absolutely can do that) before elections doesn’t mean that US oil companies didn’t manipulate the price of gas at the pump. They’d have to be in complete collusion to do that, but it is theoretically possible.
BTW, did anyone notice this recent headline:
Interesting speculation based on no facts. However, it is a fact that Clinton released oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in October/November 2000 in order to lower oil prices. So if we are going to accuse anyone of being political, then it would have to be Clinton
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3159/is_11_221/ai_67642671
Who says there is no “official” investigation? The FTC investigates these matters all the time. They did so in 2000 at the request of Bill Clinton and found no evidence of any price manipulation. I’m trying to find a cite for this, but I sat through a briefing the FTC gave in 2000 before the election and they said there was no way prices were being manipulated. They also said they would not release this information before the election.
But they didn’t raise prices “against” Gore, nor lower them “for” Bush. In the six months prior to the 2000 election, from the first week of June to the first week of November, the price of a gallon of US gas went from $1. 535 to $1.502. Same thing in 2004… Bob Woodward wants us to believe that there was some great big conspiracy then, but the data doesn’t support it: In June 2004 the price of gas was $1.983, in November, $1.986.
I mean, this is data that has already been cited in this thread. Why the constant need for conspiracy theories when there is no evidence for them?
Lastly, since the largest US oil company is only the eight-largest oil company in the world, the US domestic oil industry doesn’t have enough market power to artificially depress prices in the manner needed, for the length of time needed, for such a process (using prices to manipulate elections).
There was no overall rise in gas prices prior to the 2000 elections. Actually, the peak was June 2000 with gas prices hitting $1.66 before falling to $1.53 the week of the election. How you can claim that demonstrates a rise in gas prices designed to sway an election is beyond me.