SOUTH BEND — A new poll released Tuesday shows an increasing number of Americans are worried they could soon be forced to wait in line to buy rationed gas. It's an even bigger worry for some than high prices at the pump.

The poll comes from CNN/Opinion Research, and it shows something unexpected: more Americans are more worried about gas shortages, long lines and rationing, than high prices.

55 percent of the 1,035 drivers surveyed by phone for the poll last week listed long lines at gas stations and gasoline rationing as their number one energy worry. 40 percent responded that high gas prices were their main concern.

The survey carries a margin of error of +/- 3 percentage points.

It's a reminder of a different era, when gas shortages were front page news.

In 1973, long lines, quota signs, and empty gas pumps were common sights. But Notre Dame Economics Professor Dr. Thomas Gresik says there was little other choice.

"That was a serious problem because there simply was not enough oil coming into the United States," he said. "There had to be rationing."

But the supply eventually grew.

So did prices.

By 1979, the jump at the pump was so bad, then President Jimmy Carter implored Congress to impose "price controls,"-- a sort of "artificial ration" aimed at lowering the price at the pump.

Decreased demand equals increased supply, and thus, lower prices.

And oil costs did drop, at least temporarily. But the drop came at another cost: those familiar long lines and inconveniences of gas available only a few days a week.

Now, it seems at least some drivers fear that happening again.

While neither Congress or President Bush have given any indication that rationing is even on their radar as a potential solution, Dr. Gresik isn't convinced it hasn't crossed minds in Washington, D.C.

"Given what I've seen in Congress, anything is on the table," he said.

The reason for the fear is convenience, he added.

Even at $60 or $70 per fill up, many drivers say they're willing to toe the line between easily accessible gasoline and higher prices. Simply put, they're willing to pay a little more to avoid being inconvenienced.

"I hope they don't do that," said South Bend driver Curtis Scott, Jr. "It worries me, because I don't want to have to wait and wait in line for it."

"I'd be against rationing," agreed driver Kevin Deneen. "I don't think it would solve the purpose they're trying to accomplish. It's a quick fix. I get scared of quick fixes."

"It's a band-aid to me," nodded driver Dan Kagarise. "I don't know that it would really be the best solution."

Dr. Gresik agrees.

"If we want to see some policy that's really going to mess up the availability of gasoline in this country, and create long lines, price controls would certainly be it," he said.

The problem, he says, is supply.

"Right now, at current prices, the quantity of oil demanded is equal to the quantity supplied. People want to see lower prices. But what they don't realize is that there's two important factors in any market: price, and quantity. Unless you can control both, there's always going to be unexpected consequences," Gresik said.

It's one reason why he doesn't believe Congress will move forward with any sort of rationing plan in the near future. But that could change if oil prices continue to rise.

Meanwhile, alternative plans to deal with the soaring price at the pump continue to hit gridlock.

On Tuesday, Democrats in the U.S. Senate pushed legislation to impose a "windfall profits tax" on the five largest U.S. oil companies. They claim it would address America's anger over prices, and "big oil" could afford it after reporting $36 billion in profits in just the first 3 months of this year alone.

But Senate Republicans say a new tax won't fix the Country's energy problems. They want to expand domestic oil production, and used a filibuster to block any action on the energy package on the Senate floor. Democrats couldn't muster the 60 votes needed to consider the motion, so it failed.

Dr. Gresik says it's a dangerous line to walk.

"We already have a record of how windfall profit taxes work," he said. "Congress implemented them on the oil companies in 1979, in reaction to exactly the same situation [we have now] and it made the problem worse. Windfall profit tax is a backward looking policy. It hurts the incentives for future investments in production, which is what we need to get lower prices."

The only solution, Gresik says, is an alteration in the equation: decrease demand or increase supply. Since it appears, so far, that Americans are unwilling to alter their energy consumption levels, he says lower prices will only come through increased supply from new drilling sites or expanded refinery capacity.

Until that happens, he predicts prices will remain steady or rise slightly. And a huge increase, he says, isn't out of the question.

"We could hit 5 [dollars] a gallon," he said. "It is possible. In fact, it will happen if we don't make some changes."