revised: Nancy Pelosi's ulterior motives... AKA California

[Shawn Anderson]

Re: Nancy Pelosi's ulterior motives... AKA California to control CAFE standards.

We need to look at the bigger here, if they tighten up on new cars its only a matter of time until the force all cars to be tested. We all need to support sema. It make more sense for the bail out to lock emistions saftey and cafe standards to save the big three money, but I you gotta make the bunny hugers happy.

[squirrel]

Re: Nancy Pelosi's ulterior motives... AKA California to control CAFE standards.

They're not too worried about the emissions that are tested for anymore (HC, CO, NOx)....the way new cars are built these are pretty well taken care of.

What they're concerned about now is CO2, which is proportional to how much fuel the car uses. California, Arizona, and some other states have been working on plans to limit CO2 emissions, which essentially means they would have their own CAFE standards.

Testing has always been done only in "non-attainment" areas, that's EPAspeak for places with dirty air. There's still no need to worry about national smog testing.

[DanStokes]

Re: Nancy Pelosi's ulterior motives... AKA California to control CAFE standards.

Well, sorta. All vehicles sold in the US have to pass Federal emissions standards, which generally are more lax than the CA standards. This happens before the cars are allowed to be sold to the public, and EPA also monitors cars in the field to assure that vehicles in use continue to meet the required standards. The difference is that individual motorists are not required to bring their vehicles in for testing like they are in "Non-Attainment" areas. Here in coastal NC, they run a yearly computer scan to assure that all of the sensors are working, and this, generally, finds gross polluters. Areas in California have chosen any number of different I&M tests in an effort to find and fix gross polluters. Again, I&M programs are state programs.

Dan

Testing has always been done only in "non-attainment" areas, that's EPAspeak for places with dirty air. There's still no need to worry about national smog testing.

[squirrel]

Re: Nancy Pelosi's ulterior motives... AKA California to control CAFE standards.

I have this fantasy that for a month, in some city with a smog problem, all the cars that are meeting current emissions standards are parked, and only the "gross polluters" are driven...would the smog go away?

[DanStokes]

Re: Nancy Pelosi's ulterior motives... AKA California to control CAFE standards.

That, actually, would work. It's a function of VMD - vehicle miles driven. Instead of a relatively few alligators, we are being eaten by a huge swarm of piranhas. Problem is, we're still being eaten. It would be pretty hard to keep all those folks with compliant cars home for very long, though.

Dan

[Aircooled]

Re: revised: Nancy Pelosi's ulterior motives... AKA California

Opps, lawsuit provision dropped from bailout bill. Maybe I am too suspicious? See quote from cnn

Democrats dropped a provision in their previous draft of the bill that would have prohibited automakers from continuing their support of lawsuits against states that have drafted more stringent emission standards than current federal rules.

"We do not believe there was any chance the legislation would pass if that provision remained in," said White House Deputy Chief of Staff Joel Kaplan.

[squirrel]

Re: revised: Nancy Pelosi's ulterior motives... AKA California

so does that restore your faith in Congress? ;)

[Caddyman]

Re: revised: Nancy Pelosi's ulterior motives... AKA California

no

[Brad54]

Re: revised: Nancy Pelosi's ulterior motives... AKA California

Hell no.

-Brad

[Mr4Speed]

Re: revised: Nancy Pelosi's ulterior motives... AKA California

Not just no but !#&* NO!

This does illustrate the importance of dynamic tension in our governing bodies however. Always vote for deadlock-the less Congress does the better!

[CTX-SLPR]

Re: revised: Nancy Pelosi's ulterior motives... AKA California

Well I like to be paid so I always have an interest in the federal budget. If you think this is new, I might point out the older Chrysler Bailout from the late 80's early 90's. If Chrysler folded and sold its self to others.... the only name I'd be concerned with surviving is Jeep and hopefully whoever buys it would take it back to its roots. Heck, there's an idea, sell Jeep to GM, fold GMC into Jeep and scrap the Chevy truck lineup and let GMC/Jeep go 4 wheeling and hauling to thier hearts content.

Hijack, I want to see how Tata runs Jag with all the Ford oversight on powertrain.

[SuperBuickGuy]

Re: revised: Nancy Pelosi's ulterior motives... AKA California

While it's true there is an anti-car agenda in Washington; Perhaps you might like to see a driving reason behind the bailouts....

http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/23836.html

To save you so reading; the short is that local governments have been trying to spend more money but the feds have been reluctant to give them more - citing such silly things like deficit spend, blah blah blah - so the local governments have gotten creative... and started leasing equipment rather then buying it... leasing, you say, is a good way to avoid paying taxes (trust me on this).. but, you say, governments don't pay taxes... oh this is true, but what if the government could sell those depreciation tax credits they get on such things as buses, light rail trains, and etc? Then, of course, you would lease a light rail car from a company that bought the light rail car for your governmental agency and the company that bought the rail car would depreciate the light rail car on their taxes.... clever, no? Well, no - not if the IRS were to find that deduction illegal (not going into history but there's precedent for this).

Oh yes, and I am breaking out in hives for having the appearance that I'm defending the witch Pelosi
local governments, ?wisely?, choose to insure against the possibility that the IRS would do such a thing and bought from the only company that would sell them the insurance policy.. wanna guess who that company was? if you guessed AIG, now you know why they're into your tax dollars for saving an insurance company.... and for those political pundits who wish to blame one or the other... the creative genuises who came up with this scheme... a consulting firm in Chicago who was advising the city on how to fund purchase of their Metro Orange rail cars...

the short - locals got to say "look at all the money we saved you the taxpayer".... now the feds get to pick up the tab with interest.... and look at the extra money you taxpayers will get to cough up....