The main thesis “Mileage Standards: Not the Way to Energy Independence” is itself misleading. “Independence” from importation, if one means continued use of petroleum only, is not possible, and even if the broader implication was intended (i.e., all energy sources not just petroleum) every specialist in the field I have read admits that it would take the US many years to replace imported oil with in-country alternatives.
So in a sense the main thesis starts with a false implication, that is, that someone (who?) is claiming that mileage standards are proposed as *the* means towards true independence. The US just imports too much oil for modest mileage improvements to solve that. Most of the reasoned (and educated) opinions I have read would rather say that increased mileage requirements are just part of an overall strategy of getting the US off of imported oil.
While the author may pooh-pooh mileage standards, the alternative proposed – that of increasing gasoline costs enough to cause sufficient demand destruction, suffers because the existing stock of automobiles in the US turns over very slowly, and if gasoline prices were to rise enough *today* to make a significant dent in oil importation (and the price would have to rise considerably as gasoline demand in the US is rather inelastic) the current owners of automobiles would like find themselves in financial difficulties. Furthermore, oil prices fluctuate (at times rather dramatically) as supply and demand seek an equilibrium and this tends to negate the advantages of the negative feedback of high prices since when low prices come the negative pressure (on demand) alleviates.
So, unless the author is proposing that the government implements a rather onerously large national gasoline tax (say $5/gallon… is that enough?), the option left is to ramp up the mileage of the US transportation stock, which itself will take time.
