Senators Introduce Much Stronger Cash-for-Clunkers Proposal

By
Tuesday, May 19, 2009 at 5:36 pm

Just as the House Energy and Commerce Committee was passing a not-very-green cash-for-clunkers amendment to the Waxman-Markey bill, three senators introduced a rival proposal with much stronger environmental standards.

Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) co-sponsored a measure today that would modestly increase the “clunker” requirement of the program and significantly raise the fuel-efficiency mandates.

The House measure would give a $3,500 voucher to a driver who trades in a car that gets 18 miles per gallon or less for one that gets at least 4 mpg more. The Senate proposal, on the other hand, sets the upper limit for the clunker at 17 mpg and requires that the new vehicle get at least 24 mpg. It would set a sliding scale, whereby a trade-in that achieves a 7-mpg improvement would earn a driver $2,500, while a 10-mpg gain would yield $3,500 and a 13-mpg increase would garner $4,500.

And while drivers could receive a voucher for a 1-mpg improvement in their trucks under the House plan, the minimum under the Senate proposal is 3 mpg.

“The ‘Cash for Clunkers’ proposal that I’m putting forward with Senators Collins and Schumer would place a greater emphasis on fuel economy improvements than the House compromise — which could allow for the scrapping of perfectly adequate vehicles in return for federal incentives to purchase gas-guzzling vehicles,” Feinstein wrote in a press release. “That’s unacceptable. Our proposal, on the other hand, would achieve between 32 to 38 percent greater oil savings, save drivers 176 gallons of gasoline per year, and cut greater greenhouse gas emissions by 32 percent more than the House compromise. In short, this would accomplish the dual goals of stimulating car sales and requiring more efficient vehicles. We believe this is a much better deal for American taxpayers.”

Ordinarily, I’d say that such an ambitious proposal would have little chance of passing, but with bipartisan sponsorship, it could actually shift the debate. The differences between the House and Senate measures will likely be reconciled in conference — that is, if the Senate is able to pass its version of the Waxman-Markey bill several months down the road. And as anyone who’s kept an eye on Washington recently can tell you, that’s a big if.

TWI is on Twitter. Please follow us here.

Follow Aaron Wiener on Twitter


Comments

9 Comments

kokomjolk
Comment posted May 20, 2009 @ 7:50 am

Please let the Feinstein, Collins, Schumer Bill to pass – if not, we're not buying a new car! (My old 4-runner gets 18mpg according to http://www.fueleconomy.gov)


David
Comment posted May 20, 2009 @ 8:34 am

Feinstein et al are not looking at the reality of what cars get for MPG, they seem to be just making up numbers that look good. The mpg of newer cars is not that much better than older ones. And, $2500 is not much when you consider the trade-in value of most cars. Even my old 95 4Runner is worth that already. So, what kind of incentive is that?


Tired of my truck
Comment posted May 20, 2009 @ 10:02 am

What a joke. If this passes, I will still be driving my Dakota!
I really don't expect ANY bill to be passed. This idea is drawing everyone and anything with a mouth proposal or grievance to it.
“LOOK AND LISTEN TO ME!”
Sheesh


Jake
Comment posted May 21, 2009 @ 6:06 am

I for one see this as a necessary measure. The government continues to say we need cleaner running vehicles on the road but continues to pass legislation which takes effect in four to six years but not now.
The time is now to remove the many old and poorly running vehicles off the road

Jake


Roger
Comment posted May 21, 2009 @ 11:45 am

Does someone know that you get the trade in value of the vehicle on top of it. I assumed that would be the case.


Paul
Comment posted June 1, 2009 @ 1:37 pm

It's nice that Congress is talking about it, but it's actually doing the opposite right now. If they want to stimulate car sales, then promising this nice thing, but dragging it out is acutally causing me to POSTPONE my purchase since I don't know what I will qualify for, and talking a difference between $2500 and $5000 ( or none ) will affect which options I consider getting.


K Scurlock
Comment posted June 3, 2009 @ 8:38 am

Please send me : Kenneth Scurlock more information. I would like to Register for this program. My car is a 1981 Chev. My adress is 726 Kettering St. Apt. 4 west Lancaster Ca. 93534 #661-948-5202
Thank You! K. Scurolck


K Scurlock
Comment posted June 3, 2009 @ 3:38 pm

Please send me : Kenneth Scurlock more information. I would like to Register for this program. My car is a 1981 Chev. My adress is 726 Kettering St. Apt. 4 west Lancaster Ca. 93534 #661-948-5202
Thank You! K. Scurolck


House Passes Cash For Guzzlers, Senate Counters | DREW JONES
Pingback posted June 19, 2009 @ 9:33 am

[...] can look forward to plenty of compromises if and when the legislation passes the Senate. [Source: TheWashingtonIndependent] No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post) Categories : [...]


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.