• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

CAFE fuel standards bill goes down in flames bigtime, 62-38 in Senate

"This is still America," Sen. Trent Lott noted after the 62-38 defeat of the McCain-Kerry CAFE proposal. "We should be able to make our choices. We shouldn't have the federal government saying you're going to drive the purple people eater,"

Remember that banner held up after 9-11 that said something like "America, THINK! Why you are hated all over the world"? This is one reason.
 
didn't automakers have till 2015 to meet the company-wide average 35mpg standards? I think they should be able to make 25mpg trucks/50 mpg cars to average things out by then. 🙂
 


<< Remember that banner held up after 9-11 that said something like "America, THINK! Why you are hated all over the world"? This is one reason. >>



That's probably one of the stupidest statements i've ever heard in my entire life. If they hate us because we like large cars, then i don't give a crap if they hate us, because the problem is on their end.

Your profile shows that you're from Minnesota in any event, so i don't know why you should think we should give your opinion as to why the U.S. is hated any weight at all. Unless you hate and loathe the U.S. as well, then you're one of the ones whom you're talking about when you speak of folks hating the U.S. Maybe they hate us because they think we're all morons like you.
 
just goes to show politicians are in the hands of corporations😛 its silly, if all vehicles have to meet the same standard, the competition is equal, unless they are saying american manufacturers are stupid and unable to match foreign innovation or smoething.
 


<< just goes to show politicians are in the hands of corporations its silly, if all vehicles have to meet the same standard, the competition is equal, unless they are saying american manufacturers are stupid and unable to match foreign innovation or smoething >>


That's not what they are saying. They are saying that they are not going to force American consumers to buy something they really don't want. Unless I missed some clause or something, this bill would have effectively eliminated all V-8's in passenger vehicles.
 
yes, but giving americans what they want isin't always the best way to go. as shown by consumer trends americans give a sh*t about the enviroment, and have been facinated more by stupid things like tail fins for the longest time. Consumers will buy the largest car they can afford to drive, thats basically it, and unless you legislate fuel economy standards.. no ones going to buy a car based on its mileage.
 


<< That's not what they are saying. They are saying that they are not going to force American consumers to buy something they really don't want. Unless I missed some clause or something, this bill would have effectively eliminated all V-8's in passenger vehicles. >>



While I understand the reasoning that shot this bill down, it's unfortunately very short-sighted. Sure it's great that we can enjoy our V-8s now, but it's only a matter of time until there's just not going to be enough oil to go around or OPEC decides to cut production or the supply is cut for other reasons and we'll have to give them up anyway. Might as well get started with the transition now to make it less painful; it's not like we as a nation don't have the technological ability to make cars and trucks more fuel efficient.

It would also be nice not to have to play kiss-ass with certain countries simply because we need their oil so badly.:|

Fausto
 
I think it was too ambitious for the time.
At least some standards for trucks and SUVs would be nice.

*sigh*

BTW, even 40 mpg (which is equal to 6l / 100 km in SI units) is quite common in Europe, the VW Golf for example. The Golf is by no means unsafe, and very sporty (can easily do 120 mph, totally impossible to drive around with that speed in US unless you are super wealthy).

 


<< yes, but giving americans what they want isin't always the best way to go. as shown by consumer trends americans give a sh*t about the enviroment, and have been facinated more by stupid things like tail fins for the longest time. Consumers will buy the largest car they can afford to drive, thats basically it, and unless you legislate fuel economy standards.. no ones going to buy a car based on its mileage. >>


So who get's to decide? You? Me? Or a duly elected Congress? They just did. If the guy you voted for voted for this bill then I guess you have a clear concious. If not, give him a call. When someone builds a pick-up that will pull my boat, my camper or I can put a load of mulch in the back and gets 35 mpg, I'll buy it instead of the one that gets 18. This bill would have left me with nothing. Unacceptable.
 
john kerrey basically wanted the entire country to start driving around in golf carts. THis bill was a joke.
 
I've got a simpler solution. While forcing the cars to be more fuel efficient in this manner looks like a bully tactic; you could raise the taxes on fuel (giving the state DOTs more money to work with for remodelling and improving the already overcrowded and "overworked") would cause the same end result. It would just take a few extra years and hopefully we all will benefit from the improved roads.
I hate having to rely on foreign oil. Anything we can do to cut down on that would make our lives better. I don't think electric cars are the way to go though. Efficiency of the power plant versus the automobile engine (and to go one step further a lawn mower engine, why of why would you own one of those electric lawnmowers?).
 
Instead of funneling R&D into a dated design to eek out 50mpg for cars. Why not funnel all that R&D, so in 10-15 years, we arent using oil/gas at all in cars?
 


<< ; you could raise the taxes on fuel >>

thats right...tax us to death...as if 35-40 cents a gallon isn't enough..jeez, why dont you just move to EU where the gas is 50% tax=$2+ in taxes...rediculous:frown:
 
We need to do *something* to get rid of our dependance on oil producing countries. Making higher mpg vehicles and researching alternative fuel sources are far better ideas than drilling in Alaska.

I like my big engine cars as much as the next person, but I think they could easily make these cars get better mpg if they tried. IMHO, it is possible to make a 390 HP Cobra get at least 25 mpg in the city. It just takes an effort.
 
john kerrey basically wanted the entire country to start driving around in golf carts. THis bill was a joke.


and saying that only golf carts can get better mileage is a dishonest arguement.
 
some people are looking at this the wrong way. it is not saying that you can't buy certain cars. it is telling the manufacturers to improve those cars.

i don't know if you're aware of this, but the government regulates many things. the fda says food and drug products must meet certain requirements all the time. if they make the requirements more stringent, do you hear people freaking out going "OMG they're TELLING us we can't buy olives!"? i think not.
 


<< i don't know if you're aware of this, but the government regulates many things. the fda says food and drug products must meet certain requirements all the time. if they make the requirements more stringent, do you hear people freaking out going "OMG they're TELLING us we can't buy olives!"? i think not. >>


Yeah, tell that to the AIDS patients who can't use certain drugs because of the FDA, or cancer patients. The list goes on. I personally think the oil companies are being very short sighted. They could very easily take the lead in developing alternative fuels and corner that market. Instead they seem to be worried about the bottom line today. Someone tell me if I'm wrong.
 


<< I personally think the oil companies are being very short sighted. They could very easily take the lead in developing alternative fuels and corner that market. Instead they seem to be worried about the bottom line today. Someone tell me if I'm wrong. >>



I agree completely, the other bit of the equation are auto manufacturers being shortsighted and worrying about the bottom line. They don't want to put more money into R&D and simultaneously undermine the popularity of SUVs (thinking that people will be less likely to buy the ones with the weaker engines, I guess). The thing is, they are going to have to face the alternative fuel question one day whether they like it or not and they might as well get going now. People are going to be sceptical about these cars when they start really hitting the market and the one that is the most refined/most like their old gas car will be the one that sells.

Fausto
 
Yeah, tell that to the AIDS patients who can't use certain drugs because of the FDA, or cancer patients. The list goes on.

of course, most people care when it affects them, regardless of whether it is right or wrong. if the fda prohibits certain drugs, it's probably because they can't confirm the safety of them (unless the fda is horribly corrupt, which i would know nothing about).
 
The question remains: what will it take to get Americans out of gas-thirsty vehicles? You get shouted at if you want to raise CAFE standards, you get shouted at if you suggest raising gasoline taxes and you get shouted at if you want to drill for oil in Alaska. Some people have their heads in a hole thinking it's perfectly OK to burn all the gasoline they want because, after all, (a) oil is limitless, (b) gasoline refinement and combustion are free from pollution and (c) the suppliers of oil are peaceful and very much friendly with the USA. So go ahead, buy a 12mpg vehicle and burn all of the $1.29/gallon gas you want. That's consumer choice!
rolleye.gif


The solution is multi-pronged. CAFE standards should be raised (36mpg across the fleet may be too aggressive too soon, but the current 27.5/20.6 standards are a joke), gasoline taxes should be raised to fund broad income tax cuts and we should drill several acres in tundra Alaska for oil. Nodge down per capita demand, nodge up domestic supply. The more ways you attack the problem, the less dramatic each action needs to be.

But then again, this is America. Few want to make the tough choices. Social Security? Yea, it's going under in a few decades but hell, let's just ignore the problem and maybe it will go away.

The Big 3 - America's "Can't Do" Companies
 


<< gasoline taxes should be raised to fund broad income tax cuts >>


I sort of agree with every thing you said except that. Gasoline prices effect every part of our economy in such a way that no income tax cut could ever hope to off-set.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top