Cash For Clunkers: Obama Pushes Senate To Refuel Funding

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Cash For Clunkers: Obama Pushes Senate To Refuel Funding stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

KEN THOMAS | 08/ 3/09 10:59 PM | AP

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
A person passes a car in a dumpster placed in front of an auto dealership in Philadelphia as a promotion for the "cash for clunker" federal incentive program, Monday, Aug. 3, 2009. With the Obama administration saying it will honor $3,500-$4,500 "cash for clunker" deals in the pipeline by Tuesday, the Senate is under heavy pressure to pass a House bill that come up with $2 billion to extend the instantly popular and overwhelmed rebate program. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke)

WASHINGTON — The White House warned Monday that the "cash for clunkers" program, already zooming toward a quarter-million trade-ins with the initial $1 billion in rebates, could sputter to a stop by Friday unless the Senate quickly approves $2 billion more.

While Republican lawmakers complained about another government giveaway, the Obama administration pointed to environmental gains made during the first week of the program that gives rebates of as much as $4,500 to motorists who trade in gas guzzlers for more fuel-efficient vehicles. The White House also highlighted recovery news from Ford Motor Co., which reported its first U.S. sales increase in nearly two years.

That won over some Democrats who had grumbled the program wasn't wringing out enough fuel efficiency. They complained that smaller rebates of $3,500 were going to people buying new cars that get as little as 4 more miles per gallon than the gas-guzzling clunkers they traded in.

But many Republicans remained skeptical, and Democratic leaders were uncertain they could get a favorable vote on a House-passed $2 billion extension by week's end, when the Senate begins a four-week recess.

"If it doesn't happen this week, it's unlikely that we'll make it to the weekend with a program that can continue," President Barack Obama's spokesman, Robert Gibbs, told reporters. He estimated the additional $2 billion would allow consumers to take advantage of the incentives through September.

"I hope we can get it done," said assistant Senate Majority Leader Dick Durbin, D-Ill.

New figures showing that vehicles purchased so far with the rebates are averaging nearly 10 mpg better in fuel efficiency than their scrap heap-bound trade-ins won over some Democrats who wanted even tougher mileage requirements.

"The best solution is to continue and extend the program as it is," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. "The program appears to be running very well."

Story continues below
advertisement

Although the House approved the funding by a nearly 3-to-1 margin last Friday, conservatives who have criticized it as another taxpayer bailout for the auto industry have much more leverage to block it in the Senate.

"This is just mass chaos, so to extend it with 2 more billion dollars without stopping and seeing what we've done would be crazy," said Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C.

Despite the assurances from the White House, many dealers said they were concerned they could be on the hook for some of the money if the Senate fails to approve the $2 billion. John McEleney, chairman of the National Automobile Dealers Association, said his organization was warning dealers there were no guarantees they would be reimbursed for sales they make under the program this week. McEleney said he has stopped offering cash-for-clunkers deals at his own Iowa dealerships.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said the average mileage of new vehicles purchased through the program is 9.6 miles per gallon higher than for the vehicles traded in for scrap. Buyers of new cars and trucks that get 10 mpg better than their trade-ins get the $4,500 rebate. People whose cars get between 4 mpg and 10 mpg better fuel efficiency qualify for a smaller $3,500 rebate.

LaHood said some 80 percent of the traded-in vehicles are pickups or SUVs, meaning many gas-guzzlers are being taken off the road. The Ford Focus is a leading replacement vehicle. General Motors Co., Chrysler Group LLC and Ford Motor Co. accounted for 47 percent of the new vehicles purchased.

Ford said its sales rose 2.4 percent in July from the same month last year, its first year-over-year increase since November 2007, while Chrysler Group LLC posted a smaller year-over-year sales drop compared with recent months, helped by "clunkers" deals. Other automakers showed gains, giving ammunition to supporters of the car rebate program.

Senate Republicans appeared to be in no hurry.

"We were told this program would last for several months," GOP leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said. "It ran out of money in a week, prompting the House to rush a $2 billion extension before anybody even had time to figure out what happened to the first billion."

McConnell said, "It's not a bad idea to look for a second opinion. All the more so if they say they're in a hurry."

Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona, the Senate's second-ranking Republican, suggested lawmakers "take a time-out" so they could receive more details about the program before providing more money. "I'm concerned that somebody's going to have to pay for this, and $4,500 for everybody that wants to take advantage of this program is a lot of money."

Making its case for more funding, the administration collected information on 80,500 vehicle transactions logged into the government's operating system through Saturday afternoon. Gibbs said the fuel efficiency improvements would save a typical customer $700 to $1,000 a year in fuel costs. The new vehicles were getting 25.4 miles per gallon on average, a 61 percent increase over the models traded in.

The data helped appease lawmakers such as Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Feinstein, who had questioned whether the program's environmental benefits go far enough.

The lawmakers said administration officials told them that 120,000 new vehicle sales had been processed through the program and an additional 100,000 to 130,000 were expected to be processed to reach the $1 billion set aside.

LaHood said on MSNBC, "We're encouraging senators to listen to their car dealers and the people they represent. If they do that, it will pass the Senate."

The administration has been coy about just how long dealers would be reimbursed for rebates, after saying Sunday that the program would have to be suspended if the Senate failed to act.

Fierce lobbying for the program came from other quarters: The National Automobile Dealers Association and the American International Automobile Dealers contacted thousands of dealerships, telling them to bombard the Senate with phone calls and e-mails.

"This is the one true stimulus that seems to be working out of all the things that have been tried in the last few months," said Cody Lusk, president of the international group.

The Senate narrowly approved the initial money in June. But some lawmakers who voted for the plan, including Feinstein and Collins, have said the additional dollars should push consumers to buy even more fuel-efficient vehicles and to allow people to buy fuel-efficient used vehicles. Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., has said he was concerned with the way the House paid for the extension, shifting $2 billion from a renewable energy loan program.

___

Associated Press writers Stephen Manning in Washington and Tom Krisher in Detroit contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — The White House warned Monday that the "cash for clunkers" program, already zooming toward a quarter-million trade-ins with the initial $1 billion in rebates, could sputter to a sto...
WASHINGTON — The White House warned Monday that the "cash for clunkers" program, already zooming toward a quarter-million trade-ins with the initial $1 billion in rebates, could sputter to a sto...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
385
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next › Last » (6 pages total)

If you do this, don't tell the dealer you have a clunker to trade in until you have negotiated the best possible price. Then get your $3500 or $4500 knocked off of the negotiated price.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:22 AM on 08/08/2009

Does anyone know where they've posted the comparative "life cycle analysis" that was used to decide this program was beneficial?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:53 AM on 08/08/2009

The Cash for Clunkers Crock of Cr@p.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:51 AM on 08/08/2009

I have been waiting for a chance at a new car. They better pass this quickly. There are alot of deals for under $10k out there. I found a ton at www.slickbudget.com/cash4clunkers.html. Hope this helps those still looking.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:45 PM on 08/06/2009
- ejhickey I'm a Fan of ejhickey 11 fans permalink

This program has been wildly successful and should be applied to other areas of the economy that are depressed. the retail clothing area for example is depressed . The federal government could offer subsidies to everyone who buys a new wardrobe - say $1000 rebate for every $5000 spent. Program could be called "Dollars for Duds"

Another area that needs help is the restaurant business. Many people are forced to eat at home or to go to cheap fast food places because of lack of adequate funds. the President could declare September, "National Eat Out " Month and offer a subsidy to people for eat at least 50 meals a month in a restaurant . Program could be called "Funds for Food"

Before anyone rejects these ideas , think of the stimulus these two programs would provide and how much better everyone would feel after a few good meals and some new clothes.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:05 PM on 08/04/2009
- zipowitz I'm a Fan of zipowitz 32 fans permalink

I love the tongue in cheek post but a lot of people here won't get it OR actually think you have a good idea. I've tried this comparison and have asked which industry should be next for special treatment but nobody will answer the question.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:07 PM on 08/04/2009

Don't forget that they should require that these purchases are put on a credit card so the finance industry can benefit too.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:42 AM on 08/08/2009
- Peter007 I'm a Fan of Peter007 32 fans permalink
photo

Its a great program. 1 Billion a week. Thats 52 billion for the year. I guess the 15 billion we gave GM wasn't enough.
The more special interests we help, the more votes we will get in November. That's the way the game is played.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:54 PM on 08/04/2009
- zipowitz I'm a Fan of zipowitz 32 fans permalink

$15 billion to GM? Try over $50 Billion and they are still laying off people. This is just a continuation of paybacks from Obama and the D's to the UAW. Sure it will generate a small bubble and make some positive news for O but it will not last without continued subsidies.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:03 PM on 08/04/2009
- econ1 I'm a Fan of econ1 5 fans permalink

"The best solution is to continue and extend the program as it is," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. "The program appears to be running very well."

Only the government could declare using up $1 billion "ahead of schedule" as running very well.

If the criteria is getting as many low mileage cars off the road as possible then clearly the payment is too high if it only lasted a week. But cost efficiency has never been a government strong point and it appears to be getting worse. Add this one to the $700 toilet seat. Can't wait to see how the health care works out. If it is out of money in a month....it will be "running very well."

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:33 AM on 08/04/2009
- zipowitz I'm a Fan of zipowitz 32 fans permalink

But this would mean you are thinking logically and that really doesn't work around here if you haven't noticed.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:01 PM on 08/04/2009
- zipowitz I'm a Fan of zipowitz 32 fans permalink

To Tailgateshirts. Your post: yawn. $1 bil isnt big deal since Bush threw $300Bil to private insurance companies in the name of medicare with no money to pay for it

This is exactly the worst possible attitude we can have in this country. Bush did this so we can do that. How stupid is that. Bush spent like a drunken sailor, we all know that and you can continue to live in the past if you want but we need to be in the here and today. We cannot give this or any administration a free pass based on the ills of Presidents past. We are dealing with huge debts and deficits that will put a stranglehold on this country for decades to come.

Do you have any idea what a Trillion is? if you piled $1000 bills one on top of the other, a stack of them worth a trillion would be 67 miles high. Set that on its side and it'll take you an hour to drive the length of it. And somebody has to buy that debt.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:14 AM on 08/04/2009
- JFD8 I'm a Fan of JFD8 12 fans permalink

With guzzlers we're ready to dump
July broke an auto sale slump;
But the key to a Ford
Is a clunker reward
With Uncle Sam priming the pump.

News Short n' Sweet by JFD8
http://twitter.com/JFD8

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:58 AM on 08/04/2009
- regellner I'm a Fan of regellner 421 fans permalink
photo

This program has quite a bit of potential to help the country...no wonder the GOP wants to kill it.
They are trying everything they can to keep the country in a mess (created by them in the first place) until mid-term elections.

Following is a piece on the "Cash for Clunkers" program:

http://www.examiner.com/x-11326-Liberal-Examiner~y2009m8d4-Cash-for-Clunkers-program-facing-Senate-showdown-this-week


Raymond Gellner " National Liberal Examiner at Examiner.com
http://www.examiner.com/x-11326-Liberal-Examiner
__________­__________­__________­__________­__________­________

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:20 AM on 08/04/2009
- zipowitz I'm a Fan of zipowitz 32 fans permalink

I have asked this question several times but nobody here seems to want to answer it, so how about you. If this program is so successful and most here say it's going to help the country, then what industries should we be targeting next? TV's, Couches, RV's? How many private industries should our government get involved in?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:13 AM on 08/04/2009

oh shush up, do you know the amount of tax breaks that were given to various industries over the last 8 years.

Now you complain when something helps the LOCAL dealers.

Stop using talking points from that idiotic house member that was making up funny names for programs

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:48 AM on 08/04/2009
- Raccoon1 I'm a Fan of Raccoon1 16 fans permalink
photo

Well actually, I did. But apparently you aren't looking to see if anyone answered your question. So, although I've posted it before, I'll make it easy for you and give it to you again:
First of all, TV's and most couches aren't made in the United States anymore - that went overseas along with 40,000 factories and five million jobs during the Bush administration - so we don't need to help them - they're gone. We need to save whatever manufacturing we can in the US, because making things is the way wealth is created - simply trading dollars with each other doesn't CREATE anything.
The idea isn't to just throw money around, or throw it to your friends as the previous administration did. The idea is to apply it like a tool when and where appropriate, in an amount that is sufficient to save a major sector of the economy and tens of thousands of jobs - possibly hundreds of thousands until the economy recovers from the Republican Second Great Depression. It isn't going to be possible to save every economic sector, but the auto industry is viable and can make it. As messy as the bailout has been, do you think Wall Street should have been allowed to fail? Before you answer that, be sure to remember that it was George Bush and Hank Paulson who came up with that program.
You've never responed to my questions about Bush giving billions to the oil companies while they were

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:13 PM on 08/04/2009
photo

Cash for Clunkers was the TARP and bailout of the banks and brokers and the whole wall street casino.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:22 PM on 08/03/2009
photo

direct stimulation always feels good though, so I support this car deal.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:41 PM on 08/03/2009
- zipowitz I'm a Fan of zipowitz 32 fans permalink

Did you get any of the stimulation? Did you get $4500 bucks from your friendly taxpayers? How about those that didn't, shouldn't we get some stimulation?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:47 PM on 08/03/2009
photo

Why this is a good program
FOR GOPers ONLY:

This program helps:
1 - US Auto
2 - US Auto workers
3- GDP in general
4- Long range environment
5- US oil consumption.

The CBO estimates a shortage of GDP of approx $1 Tril / yr due to the recession.

If GDP shrinks, people don't spend money, corporations do not make sales thus make less profits, corps cut jobs, so people don't spend money, so GDP shrinks, so corps do not make sales and profits, so corps cuts jobs, so people do not spend money, so GDP shrinks, etc etc etc.
Do enough of that, and we have a 10 year Great Depression.

GDP growth comes from: 1- Consumer spending, 2-Corp spending, 3-Government spending.
During this recession 1 and 2 are not happening. If we do not want GDP to shrink we have to do #3.

If you do #3, it should be broad and over time. That is happening now.
The stim package is too small. It should have been $2 Tril for 2 years. (Recall $1Tril / yr GDP loss)

And $1 Bil will HELP. It will not make up for 1000 X $1Bil (= $1 Tril).

Also, this programs seems to have a nice economic multiplier.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:47 PM on 08/03/2009
- zipowitz I'm a Fan of zipowitz 32 fans permalink

This is only clears out inventory and does not drive future sales, so you have created a small bubble.

This does not and should not warrant US auto workers to ramp up car manufacturing as this again, is a bubble created by the subsidy.

This is a tiny blip in the GDP as we paid the $1billion and only stole from tomorrow for today.

Most of these buyers would have bought however this pushed them into the sale, this month. Unless you continue this, with more taxpayer money, then sales will drop to where they were.
Long range it does nothing to change the high unemployment, consumer confidence etc.. You will see a slight increase in car sales but it will be a blip unless this continues at a cost of billions.

It will help but it only helps those that can take advantage of it, which of course is not fair when it's taxpayer money you are talking about. How about passing out $4500 to EVERYONE and let us do with it what we want, as long as we SPEND it and not save it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:43 PM on 08/03/2009

Car dealers needs to get rid of dead inventory to make room for their new efficient cars, without leaving the dealerships with 1000s of dead stock.

You realize dealers got stuck in a game of hot potato where they cant return these cars to the mfg and they paid for them already. This will allow 2 things 1) dealerships to shut down easier (less inventory to eat) 2) clear room for new fuel efficient cars 3) give dealerships money, pay employees, they spend money on stuff , etc etc etc.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:51 AM on 08/04/2009
- zipowitz I'm a Fan of zipowitz 32 fans permalink

Adding to what I said:
Again, unless this is a sustained and continuous program, it will only be a flash in the pan because you really haven't added too many new buyers. You have in all likelihood made buyers move up a decision. Put it to you this way, if this doesn't continue, you will see a HUGE drop in numbers next month. This will be hard pressed to be sustained growth as the overall economic status hasn't improved. In fact those that bought cars, now have new debt which means that they will not spread the $25 - $40K into other areas like TV's or Refrigerators. It's not like a house where you buy the house and then have to furnish it. This spreads the money around. Cars don't do this. You buy a car and you are done. In fact in this case, you spend less on gas so less tax money. You pay interest but that goes to the bank, which we probably bailed out.

Also, if you want this to be for the environment, then why not wait until the higher mileage standards kick in or the electric automobiles arrive. This is done for the sake of showing some positive sign that something, anything good is happening. Unfortunately it was bought and paid for by the taxpayers, again.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:44 PM on 08/03/2009
- mamacat I'm a Fan of mamacat 136 fans permalink

$20 billion for Big Oil tax cuts? GOP: "yes indeedy, we will vote for that!"

$150 billion/year for Bush's tax cuts for the wealthiest among us? GOP: "Why of course, that is an excellent idea!"

$800 billion/year for the combined defence and war budgets? GOP: "We need to increase the defence budget! Never know when those darn commies might try to make a comeback!"

$1 billion for the CARS program? GOP: "Oh my God! Obama is going to make us go broke with this program! We can't afford to do this!"

Me thinks I see a pattern here.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:34 PM on 08/03/2009
- zipowitz I'm a Fan of zipowitz 32 fans permalink

So let me get this straight, you think all of that spending was really bad yet now that Obama wants to do it, you thinks it's really great? How hypocritical can you be.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:37 PM on 08/03/2009
- mamacat I'm a Fan of mamacat 136 fans permalink

One trillion dollars to benefit the rich is OK, but 1 billion dollars to help Americans is hypocritical? Wow.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:46 PM on 08/03/2009
photo

YES. It's GREAT!
Support for middle class Americans.
Cash for Clunkers:
1- Supports American Auto Industry
2- Supports Americans Workers.
3- Puts cash into the economy - Bang for the Buck.

It is not the money, per se.
It is WHERE it goes and to WHOM it goes. That is the KEY.

Economics. Learn some.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:35 PM on 08/03/2009


Obama is spending money on infrastructure and to help the economy.
more importantly zipowitz, do you think that Obama's spending is bad and bush's was good?
mmmmmmmmm It is not always that you spend it is what you spend it on that can make a difference..

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:44 PM on 08/03/2009
- Raccoon1 I'm a Fan of Raccoon1 16 fans permalink
photo

Let's don't forget the subsidies for the oil companies - when they were already setting all-time records for profits. For some reason zippy can only see one side of the argument.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:49 AM on 08/04/2009
photo

I don't know why so many people are against this. I think it is a great idea. My parents just turned in their old, rundown Lincoln to get a new car. They have been wanting to get a new car for years but this just gives them the extra push while bettering the environment at the same time.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:37 PM on 08/03/2009
- ddanimal I'm a Fan of ddanimal 28 fans permalink

Its a stupid idea because its a waste of money. It provides a short term boost to the economy at the expense of adding to the US debt.

It does not remove anything close to $4,500 worth of pollution.

Its a welfare givaway and I resent being forced to pay for your parents new car. If they cant afford it, they shouldnt be buying it. Ever heard of that concept?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:45 PM on 08/03/2009
photo

But they can pay for it. They just like the idea of the 4500 discount. They pay their fair of taxes too.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:47 PM on 08/03/2009
- zipowitz I'm a Fan of zipowitz 32 fans permalink

According to most here they think this is wildly successful and will create many jobs. So then I have an obvious question. If 1 Billion dollars will do this, then why did we need to spend over a Trillion and only get higher unemployment with the Stimulus Bill? What the hell were we thinking?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:31 PM on 08/03/2009
- mamacat I'm a Fan of mamacat 136 fans permalink

Ah yes, the power of non-thinking.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:37 PM on 08/03/2009
- retroredux I'm a Fan of retroredux 63 fans permalink
photo

zipowitz knows zippo=appropriate name

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:47 PM on 08/03/2009
- zipowitz I'm a Fan of zipowitz 32 fans permalink

Nice try. Go ahead and answer the question. If you think this is such a great program then why don't we expand it and start giving subsidies to every industry that has been impacted by this recession or any product that can reduce energy cost.

Come on smarty pants let's hear it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:57 PM on 08/03/2009
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next › Last » (6 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect