
WASHINGTON, D.C. (January 28, 2009) –SEMA, the Specialty Equipment Market Association, is opposing an effort by some Washington lawmakers to include a national car crushing program in the upcoming economic stimulus package. Vehicles targeted for the scrap pile will likely include Chevy Blazers, Chevy Silverados, Chevy S-10s, Chevy Tahoes, Dodge Dakotas, Dodge Rams, Ford Explorers, Ford F-Series, Jeep Cherokees, Jeep Wranglers and any other SUV or truck that obtains less than 18 miles per gallon. Under the plan, the Federal government would pay a premium for 1999 and newer cars.
The so-called “Accelerated Retirement of Inefficient Vehicles Act” is cash-for-clunkers with a twist. Instead of focusing exclusively on old cars as is typical with scrappage programs, this bill will target any vehicle with lower fuel economy ratings. Participants will receive a cash voucher to purchase a more fuel-efficient new car or used car (MY 2004 or later) or receive credit for the purchase of public transportation tickets. Under the legislation, “fuel-efficient” means at least 25 percent better mileage than the CAFE standard. It will be illegal to resell the scrapped vehicles. Bill sponsors want to destroy four million pickups and SUVs over the next four years.
The program will fail to achieve its goal of improving fuel efficiency and stimulating car sales, but will increase unemployment and the cost of used cars and parts. Here’s why:
* Given the minimal $1,500-$4,500 voucher value, the program will lure rarely-driven second and third vehicles that have minimal impact on overall fuel economy and air pollution. This is not a wise investment of tax dollars.
* The program will reduce the number of vehicles available for low-income individuals and drive up the cost of the remaining vehicles and repair parts. This is a basic supply-and-demand reality.
* The program will remove the opportunity to market specialty products that are designed exclusively for the targeted pickups and SUVs, including equipment that increases engine performance and fuel mileage. Congress will be enacting a program to eliminate jobs and reduce business revenues in the automotive aftermarket.
* The idea that the trucks and SUVs must be scrapped in order to save energy is irrational. The program’s “carbon footprint” does not factor in the amount of energy and natural resources expended in manufacturing the existing car, spent scrapping it and manufacturing a replacement car.
* The program fails to acknowledge driver needs, such as the ability to transport a family, tow a trailer or rely upon the performance, safety and utility characteristics associated with the larger vehicles. Instead, these vehicles will be destroyed.
* There is no evidence that the program will achieve the goal of boosting new car sales or increasing fuel mileage. Many states have considered scrappage programs in the past as a way to help clean the air or increase mpg, but abandoned the effort because they simply don’t work. The programs are not cost-effective and do not achieve verifiable fuel economy or air quality benefits.
* The program will hurt thousands of independent repair shops, auto restorers, customizers and their customers across the country that depend on the used car market. This industry provides thousands of American jobs and generates millions of dollars in local, state and federal tax revenues.
“Our members, like all business entities, are suffering the effects of the stalled economy,” said Steve McDonald, SEMA’s Vice President for Government Affairs. “In fact, for our members that market product for newer vehicles, we depend on a thriving and vibrant auto industry to create new business opportunities. We support efforts to spur new car sales. We don’t, however, support public policy efforts that we are convinced don’t work and will waste tax dollars in the process.”
What can YOU do to oppose the legislation?
So I’d like to see contractors driving to a site in a Prius. Are our representatives really that stupid? All I know, let them keep digging themselves in the hole, so that in ‘10 and ‘12. we can get intelligent people in DC.
By bassman97. January 30th, 2009 at 5:05 amHere is a story that came up on the internet after my last post. This is just one of the many changes the lawmakers would make for us. Basically, they want to take away our ability to make our own decisions and make them for us. After all, they think we are too stupid to make intelligent choices on our own, and they are partly right, look at who was elected to represent us in the Peoples Republic of California.
http://cbs2.com/consumer/fkat.screen.tv.2.921884.html
By srjsr. January 29th, 2009 at 8:14 pmGlobal warming is nothing more than a hoax. It is just another way for the government to control your personal life.
I cannot remember the persons’ name but he was the President of Czechoslovakia. He states very plainly that the global warming hoax is nothing more than an attempt by socialist/communist to take control of every nuance of your life and have complete control of it. He has challenged Al Gore to a debate, but, Al Gore refuses to meet with him to discuss global warming. Al Gore merely states that this person is a crack pot. I guess Al Gore knows something about being a crack pot since he was at one time the Vice President.
Who do the liberals blame for the last ice age. It can’t be us since we were not driving cars and there was no pollution from the cars or factories. What was causing the carbon footprint back then? I remember back in the early 70’s we were being told that a new ice age was coming. If we didn’t act right away we were all going to freeze to death. Well, obviously we fixed that problem because now we are going to to burn up with the planets’ temperature rising an astounding 1 to 2 degrees.
The weather cannot be controlled. It is cycular. If these idiots think we can control the weather then they should make it rain when its dry, and have the sunshine when there is too much rain, warm it up when it is too cold, and cool it down when it is too hot.
By srjsr. January 29th, 2009 at 1:54 pmAre they going to make Al Gore give up his private jet also?
By tjtucker. January 29th, 2009 at 10:58 amI like how this makes anyone not driving a 4 cyl out to be an environmentalist criminal. What a pile. Taxation on personal choice, nice. What also makes no sense and is stated is low income people who can only afford used cars, suv’s whatever. Everything is more expensive on newer cars, insurance, purchase taxes, everything. Nice try at a eco utopia, try solving problems already on their plate instead of wasting time on this poo.
By 64GALAXIE514. January 28th, 2009 at 4:01 pmI’m not paying taxes for this B.S. law.
By nitrorustlerpro15. January 28th, 2009 at 2:55 pm