"I think I heard you say to Herman today that gas prices are not high enough yet to cause enough public outrage with Congress causing action," wrote a somewhat aggravated Steve LaMarsh.

"Further, you allowed as how many large cities have mass transit which shield the urban population from these high prices thus, dampening the outrage. These statements made you come across to me as an "inside the beltway" elite."

Ouch. Nothing like the ole "Beltway" elitist jab from a listener.

Here is what I'm saying. Both parties are feeling the heat. But they obviously aren't feeling the heat enough to back off their beliefs and seek major compromise on energy.

While Republicans are talking a good game about including conservation, efficiency and renewable fuels, many of them have enjoyed a few good laughs at the expense of "tree hugging environmentalists" over the years.

And I don't think that's gone away at $4/gallon.

Earlier this week, President Bush didn't seem to want any part of leading a call for Americans to conserve energy.

"It's a little presumptuous on my part to dictate to consumers how they live their lives," Mr. Bush said at a Tuesday news conference.

"The American people are plenty capable and plenty smart people and they'll make adjustments to their own pocketbooks."

Democrats meanwhile say President Bush should be speaking out more about conservation. They simply see the same issue differently.

While Democrats are talking a good game about wanting more drilling in the US, they certainly haven't given up their applause lines about Big Oil, or backed off their opposition to new drilling offshore or in ANWR in Alaska.

My point is - that might change at $6/gallon - but then again - maybe not.

Democratic leaders in the House and Senate have made very clear that they won't let their energy bills be hijacked by GOP plans to open more lands for drilling.

Is that the right move?

Right now, it would seem that both parties are preaching to their own supporters. Democratic voters would be more likely to oppose new drilling. GOP voters would be more accepting of those plans. Seems logical to me.

Yes, people are demanding "action." But like many things in life, "action" can mean different things to different people. Just like the word "change" in the Presidential race this year.

For now, both parties are able to argue that they are trying to do something in Congress on energy, but that the other party is blocking their effort.

We'll see if the voters punish either party in November on gas prices. Right now, my money would not be on that proposition.

So let me try this again. I am not saying that gas prices aren't high enough. I am not saying that people aren't mad about high gas prices.

I'm saying that gas prices haven't gone high enough to result in action by the Congress.