Cash-for-Clunkers Bill Introduced in House
We’ve been keeping an eye on cash-for-clunkers plans during the economic downturn, wondering if what’s worked in Europe and Brazil can work in the U.S.
Rep. Betty Sutton, D-Ohio, wants to give it a try. She introduced a bill that would offer vehicle owners cash discounts on new, fuel-efficient models if they have their old car crushed or recycled.
Of course, there are plenty of interested parties who would want this bill to give them a nod, but the current incarnation sounds like this: The vehicle being scrapped would have to be at least eight years old, and the new vehicle would need a higher gas mileage rating — 27 mpg on the highway is the lowest qualifying figure for cars, 24 for trucks — with cars with the highest ratings getting the best deals.
Cash vouchers would range from $3,000 all the way up to $7,500, meant for vehicles attaining 100 mpg (this provision targets the Chevy Volt).
There are some problems. First of all, the bill only extends the offer to vehicles that cost less than $35,000, which means the Volt probably wouldn’t be eligible, not to mention some other fuel-efficient vehicles. Secondly, while the offer extends to foreign automakers’ cars built in the U.S., it does not cover vehicles built overseas, so the Toyota Prius — the most fuel-efficient car on the market right now — would not be eligible.
Bill Unveiled to Pay Cash for Trading in Old Clunkers (Detroit Free Press)
Previous
Subscribe to our feed
Email us your tips!
So, the bill is going to be dead soon in its current form. Why? It is contradicting itself.
If they want us to buy fuel efficient vehicles, but the best of the crops are not included, what do they want from us now?
Also, what do they mean by truck?
A body on frame vehicle? Or a pick-up truck?
So what do they take the Forester, Edge, Venza, and alike as?
Well, you usually don't get quite what you want with a government bill but this is a better one than what was initial put out there. The cash ceiling sounds like an attempt to limit subsidizing the wealth. But the wealth buy regular cars like the rest of it. If this goes through i will read it carefully and then decide if I will 'recycle' my 94 Dodge Intrepid.
So a Toyota assembled in the USA would be included. What about a Chrysler, GM or Ford vehicle assembled in Canada or Mexico? Would they be excluded? It sounds like they would. And yes, the very efficient Prius should certainly be included.
Somebody should put up a list and state if they are still available. I bet it would be short and half of the models would be discontiued by their reorganizations.
I wouldn't trade my family's VW Bug in, but there's other cars at home that I'd gladly trade in for scrap. They're not running well and you could only imagine the pollution it spreads. The revised CARS Act is something I'm looking forward to.
I was wondering--is this offer eligible if I was to buy, say, a 2008 Ford Focus (used)??
Or is it just brand-spankin-new vehicles?
A 24 mpg truck ?
The last American built truck that got "over" 24 mpg on the highway was the 1982 Chevrolet S-10.
Well' it wasn't actually an American truck, at least not completely, it was a hybrid, What!, A hybrid you say?
Yes it had an Isuzu engine and transmission ( Isuzu was the company that made cars most americans hated but got great fuel mileage), yes that Isuzu.
It got 28 mpg city and 37 mpg highway ( 1.9 liter gasoline engine )
How about a list of acceptable trade-ins and acceptable purchases. It will make our lives much easier.
This planned may have worked in Europe, but the scale of America's auto industry and the depth of its troubles may make any plan too hard too work. What is needed is restructuring, consolidation and a new focus. Painful but necessary.
I think it's unfair the voucher replaces our trade-in value. Everyone, except the wealthy, is having a hard time paying bills...keeping their homes. Best thing for the consumer, auto manufacturer, and finance company is: for the consumers taking advantage of this to be better able to pay their new monthly payments, not set them up for repossession. And lowering monthly payments, in respect, helps all- by consumers being more able to keep ahold on their finances, and the manufacturers and finance companies getting their money.
Hello
I am unemployed guy at the moment and poor. dirt poor, at times I dont know if ill have food to feed my family, and I go to junk yards to keep my car running engine parts, my bro just got a transmission for his 1988 chevy car, which was 100 dollars, if they pass this law the engines and transmissions will be destroyed and this will not help low income and poor people needing parts, who cant afford new parts, little alone a new car and payments,
my bro's 1988 chevy celebrity does 32 high way miles, good for a 88! better then some of the new ones,
I my 93 altima it does 40 mpgs highway. yes 40, not 30 not 20. but 40.
and I seen the bill saying the older cars are not safe, they are very safe I have an 93 Nissan Altima, a new car hit it from the rear(2008) and drove my car in to a p/u truck the back bumper was shoved a little and bent trunk lid the ladies car was a new 2005 caddy and the front end was shoved in. like it hit a truck.
cost me 600 dollars to fix my car. lol paint and a trunk lid. and a hood. and other small parts.
the point is the older cars are very safe and better and safer then the new cars which is plastic front ends and radiator supports are even plastic.
I agree with the person which says the people who would rather keep their older cars or trucks, the replacement parts will be harder to come by because of the lack of parts available. Why can't these cars be resold or the parts like the engines and transmissions be reused? Because someone might make a little money besides the government. I would ask the people to really reconsider this program. The car payment will still be there, the full coverage insurance will still be there, and the taxes will still be due.