i was checking the latest news on yahoo and i came across this article and i was outraged


WASHINGTON (AP) -- Congress approved a "cash for clunkers" program Thursday to provide government incentives of $3,500 to $4,500 to motorists who trade in their gas guzzlers for more fuel efficient vehicles after Senate Democrats narrowly defeated a Republican effort to kill the plan.

Auto state senators said the program would help hard-pressed car dealers and automakers by bringing buyers into showrooms, and they got help from President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden, who made calls to wavering Democrats urging them to keep the plan alive.

"This is an emergency for families and small businesses -- for an industry that has been the backbone of our economy for a generation," said Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., who sponsored the proposal.

Opponents said it would increase the federal debt without doing much to get expensive-to-operate vehicles off the roads.

Senate supporters of the program overcame a procedural hurdle by the plan's leading opponent, Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., on a 60-36 vote, winning the minimum number of votes needed to keep the program in a $106 billion war-spending plan that the Senate passed later Thursday.

The House approved the cash for clunkers bill last week on a vote of 298-119 and Senate Democrats attached it to the war-spending bill. The overall bill now goes to the White House for Obama's signature.

Four Republicans -- Kit Bond of Missouri, Thad Cochran of Mississippi, Susan Collins of Maine and George Voinovich of Ohio -- voted with two independents and 54 Democrats in favor of the clunker measure, while Democrat Ben Nelson of Nebraska was opposed along with 35 Republicans.

Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., changed her vote to support the vehicle incentive plan and spoke by phone with Obama during the vote.

Cantwell spokeswoman Ciaran Clayton said Obama "acknowledged Senator Cantwell's concerns that the cash- for-clunkers program ... did not do enough to meet our nation's urgent need to reduce foreign oil dependence" and vowed to work with Cantwell and others to "maximize the number of efficient cars on America's roads."

In addition to Cantwell, Obama and Biden reached out to Democrats Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Claire McCaskill of Missouri and Michael Bennet of Colorado, according to two people familiar with the outreach. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly.

Obama has encouraged Congress to approve the consumer incentives for new car purchases as part of the government's efforts to restructure General Motors Corp. and Chrysler Group LLC. The bill provides $1 billion for the program from July through November.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who supported a plan with more stringent requirements to receive the vouchers, said she received "absolute assurance" from Senate leaders that if the program was continued beyond November it would be modeled after the bill she pushed.

Supporters said the program, which would be implemented by the Transportation Department, was expected to be implemented by early August.

The auto industry and its union lobbied heavily for passage of the cash for clunkers plan as GM and Chrysler have received billions of dollars in government-led bankruptcies and the entire auto industry has dealt with plummeting car sales. In May, overall sales were 34 percent lower than a year ago.

Under the proposal, car owners could get a voucher worth $3,500 if they traded in a vehicle getting 18 miles per gallon or less for one getting at least 22 mpg. The value of the voucher would grow to $4,500 if the mileage of the new car was 10 mpg higher than the old vehicle. The miles per gallon figures are listed on the car window's sticker.

Owners of sport utility vehicles, pickup trucks or minivans that get 18 mpg or less could receive a voucher for $3,500 if their new truck or SUV got at least 2 mpg higher than their old vehicle. The voucher would increase to $4,500 if the mileage of the new truck or SUV was at least 5 mpg higher than the older vehicle.

Dealers participating in the program would receive an electronic voucher from the government for the trade-in to apply to the purchase or lease of a qualifying vehicle. The bill directs dealers to ensure that the older vehicles are crushed or shredded to get the clunkers off the road.

The program was intended to help replace older vehicles -- built in model year 1984 or later -- and would not make financial sense for consumers owning an older car with a trade-in value greater than $3,500 or $4,500.

The U.S. industry is expected to generate about 9.5 million vehicles sales in 2009, compared with more than 13 million in 2008 and more than 16 million in 2007.

Associated Press writer Matthew Daly contributed to this report.

The bill is H.R. 2346.




under this bill anyone can take any older vehicle and trade it in for a newer one. in theory if my truck got 11 mpg and i went to a participating dealership and found say a 98 f 150 that gets 21 mpg with a sticker price of 4600 then i could get it for 100 dollars and they would in turn shred my truck. i was confident obama was going to change the way our country is run but we had to know he was gonna f@#k something up he is taking a crap on our lifestyle and passion. anyone know how bad the gas milage is on the presidential limo? and how bout airforce one the plane and the chopper. he is one of the biggest individual gas guzzlers in the country. i swear if this takes hold i will personally drive over every smart car and toyota pos i see from now on anyone else with me or am i just a " smog makin earth hating hillbilly jacka$$" as i am regularly called by the guys around here that can park there car in a refridgerator box. you can keep those tiny plastic pieces of crap and we'll see what happens when your too busy playing with your blackberry to notice the light change and you t-bone me. i will laugh while i bang out the dent with a hammer and you will cry the wrecker driver sweeps up the plastic pieces. and i am not huge on doomsday theorys but if the "emp attack" ever happens good luck getting to somewhere with more civilization i will be the guy cruisin around like nothing happened meeting up with my "hillbilly" friends to come up with a plan to save your sorry a$$. if you want to save the planet stop expanding the cities and plant a damn tree but out here in the country things are just fine i planted enough corn this year workin on a farm to counteract all the smog in my town and we all drive trucks. everyone feel free to rant with me

 

Oh, much ado about nothing. The law as written pertains only to 1985 and newer vehicles because they have EPA mileage ratings that started in 1985. Now your cut and paste states 1984 near the bottom so how does this affect trucks before then? Frankly, in my opinion not much built in the 80's is worth much anyway and pretty much from the mid to late 70's also. No style, no power engines, no quality and so forth...

 

...without doing much to get expensive-to-operate vehicles off the roads....

I do not know what they consider expensive to operate? For my situation a 400 a month payment plus full coverage, plus gas would be more than the total invested in my truck (had less than a year), liability insurance and gas for the mileage I drive it. Ill stick with what I can easily work on, and brings a smile to my face when I pass those hybrids on the way to the gas station.

 

But think of what treasures the Junk Yards and Auto Auctions are going to have now.

 

No treasures, just shreded remains, thats the point of the bill.

 

There is a 72 f100 4x4 fe 4spd at the local pick and pull. Nice truck. I got some interior pieces and the complete good grill for about $100. They are only asking $170 for a complete disc brake frontend out of another 76 they have. Around here they can make more off of parts than the price of scrap is paying.

 

Thirty Five Hundred dollars or more? I can't think of any, but I might be wrong. We, as Tax Payers are actually the ones paying this bill. I'm pretty disgusted at the fact I am expected to pay $3,500 or even $4,500 from my and your taxes for Bubba's '85 Ford F-250 rust bucket that he's been trying to sell for $300 for over a year! Now, Bubba will be able to "Buy" himself a "New(er) POS for Five Grand and only owe about $500. Bubba might be happy......I'm NOT!

 

I for one wouldn't sell my truck, especially if I knew it was going to the crusher, besides its paid for I own it, and if something breaks I don't have to wonder if its actually broke or if its just a stupid sensor gone bad, give me an old fashioned carb and standard ingnition system any day. I might see about selling my 96 explorer with 315,000 miles though no one else would ever pay that much for it.

 

If you ask me deals like those trucks in pick n pull are going to be a lot harder to come by in the future, lets face it, not to much longer and you won't have a choice but to scrap your old truck,, because you just can't get the parts, and congress wants to be sure you can't.

 

Bubba's Going to be surprised too as the credit is only to purchase a BRAND NEW vehicle not a used vehicle. Suddenly 3500 is no bargain trading in his 85 junk for a 50K truck...

Oh, much ado about nothing. The law as written pertains only to 1985 and newer vehicles because they have EPA mileage ratings that started in 1985. Now your cut and paste states 1984 near the bottom so how does this affect trucks before then? Frankly, in my opinion not much built in the 80's is worth much anyway and pretty much from the mid to late 70's also. No style, no power engines, no quality and so forth...

100 percent true, meaningless to any vehicle older than a 1984 vintage as they do not qualify.

f you ask me deals like those trucks in pick n pull are going to be a lot harder to come by in the future, lets face it, not to much longer and you won't have a choice but to scrap your old truck,, because you just can't get the parts, and congress wants to be sure you can't.

[COLOR="Red"]The Bill specifically calls for recycling of the parts with the exception of the core engine, transmission and frame. all else can be sold as used parts.


Garbz

 

I could see them imposing a "fee" upon registration renewal for vehicles older than 1985. This would be to receive extra money because our vehicles get worse fuel mileage, pollute more, and an "eye sore" to the greenies. Can you imagine going to renew your registration and having them add an extra $100, $200, $300 to it and call it an "age tax"?

 

That's the opinion now, but in 10-20 years those will start to become classics. Even though the bill limits the year, I'm concerned that we're going to trash would be classics AND deplete the market of cheap trucks / SUV's that people without a lot of money may need. If you're just out of high school and want to start a lawn business, it's gonna be hard to find an affordable truck when this bill passes. Or how about the single mom that needs an affordable SUV to haul her kids around rural areas or to take camping? I know the local college buys trucks that fit into this bracket for work around campus. If they have to start buying more expensive trucks, other programs will suffer. There are a lot of reasons why we still need cheap trucks and SUVs. Encouraging American's to get into more debt and buy a new vehicle (lets be honest, hardly anyone pays cash), is down right irrisponsible.

 

If your driving a clunker, most likely is due to your low income status, so most likely your credit score is low, soooo you will not qualify to buy a new car anyway. If you are driving a 7-15 year old auto then you like not having payments, These cars will not hold up to be 30 year olds anyway due to there decomposing design so you can use these to trade in if you want to make car payments. Now if you drive a classic, then its by choice and they are becoming more of a status, stating to the world, " I can afford to pay for gas". Say no to AGE TAX, we will have to get SEMA involved, this will kill a large part of the US specialty auto restore industry.

 

The salvage yards will have to get on board to fight the age tax also. Some of the more specialized yards have sections for vehicles from the 70's back.

 

not all people choose to drive older vehicles due to income status, or unavailability of credit, my 96 explorer is still in excellent condition, even at 315,000 miles, no dents, or chipped paint, no tears in the interior, cracks in the dash all the electrics still work, It's simply more fiscally responsible to repair a good looking good driving vehicle, compared to spending 4800.00, a year at a $400 dollar a month payment for 5 years plus the cost of insurance, other than maintenance, I've had to replace a water pump, fuel pump, and I rebuilt my transmission, total i've spent on this truck after owning it for 10 years, about $6000, lets say I agreed with what seems to be the norm for most people trading in every 2-3 years and always having a payment, i'd have spent 48,000 dollars over the past ten years in payments alone. and what would I actually own to show for it, other than a huge debt because cars don't hold there value, so most people end up financing negative equity in their new car, they've spent all that money and at the end of the day they own nothing.