Nancy Boyda announced she was supporting a bill to suspend the federal gas tax when prices rose above $3 a gallon (this is not new, Republicans bounced this around in the last Congress).
Money from gas taxes pays for roads, bridges and other transportation needs. Boyda realizes this and says this bill will make up for the lost tax revenue by rolling back tax breaks for big oil companies. Boy, now doesn't that sound good. Let's lower the taxes on drivers and raise the taxes on evil big oil companies. What a great sound bite.
Now, for a brief lesson in economics. Oil companies are in business (like other businesses) to make money. If as an oil company your tax burden goes up and you wish to continue making the same profit margin, what are you going to do? You will raise your prices (or possibly lay off workers to save labor costs which is not only bad for the economy as a whole, try explaining to those families that they lost their jobs because you were just trying to help them save $200 in gas money).
Now, let's say a gracious oil company board decides they will take the lost revenue and keep all their employees in the name of public good to lower your driving costs, what do you think will happen? These companies are publicly owned, traded on the stock exchange, so if you or I own mutual funds or have some other stock-based retirement plans, many of us at least indirectly own some shares of oil company stock. As revenue drops the shareholders will either sell shares, causing the company to have to buy back its de-valued stock, or they will demand the board do something to fix the situation. The board will then either have to raise prices, lay-off workers, or be voted out at the next shareholder meeting.
As with most things the government tries to "fix" by creating negative tax incentives or regulations, this plan won't work.
Dedicated to the proposition that Nancy Boyda is a one termer.