SEMA Legislative Alert

Final Chance To Prevent A Federal Program To Crush Newer Model Trucks & SUVs

Our efforts to prevent Congress from including a nationwide “Cash for Clunkers” program in the economic stimulus package were successful in the U.S. House of Representatives. Thousands of SEMA Action Network (SAN) enthusiasts and SEMA members contacted House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in opposition to the plan. The Speaker’s Office informed us that your emails, calls and faxes were received and, thanks to your work, Cash for Clunkers was not included in the economic stimulus package passed by the House. However, some lawmakers now want to include a vehicle scrappage program in the Senate version of the economic stimulus bill to be voted on during the first week of February. The legislation (S 247) would give $8 billion in taxpayer dollars to consumers who turn-in their “gas guzzlers” to have them crushed. Lawmakers need to scrap this idea!

Contact Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) IMMEDIATELY to Oppose S. 247

The so-called “Accelerated Retirement of Inefficient Vehicles Act” is Cash for Clunkers with a twist. Instead of focusing exclusively on older cars, this program would target vehicles with low fuel economy ratings of any model year. Vehicles targeted for the scrap pile will likely include Chevy Blazers, Chevy Silverados, Chevy S-10s, Chevy Tahoes, Dodge Dakotas, Dodge Rams, Ford Explorers, Ford F-Series, Jeep Cherokees, Jeep Wranglers and any other SUV or truck that obtains less than 18 miles per gallon. Participants would receive cash vouchers ranging from $2,500 to $4,500 based on the model year and whether the replacement vehicle was a more fuel-efficient new car or used car (MY 2004 or later). Fuel-efficient is defined as getting at least 25 percent better mileage for the corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) target for its class. It would be illegal to resell the scrapped vehicles. Up to four million pickups and SUVs would be destroyed over the next four years.

____________________________________________________________________

Don’t Delay! Please contact Senator Diane Feinstein today and tell her that you oppose S 247.

• Click here to send an email: (http://feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactUs.EmailMe)
• Call: (202) 224-3841
• Fax: (202) 228-3954

____________________________________________________________________

Talking Points

Oppose the Use of U.S. Taxpayer Dollars for Accelerated Vehicle Retirement

I am writing to urge lawmakers not to approve an “accelerated vehicle retirement” program. This is a misguided attempt to spur car sales and claim that the country’s fleet fuel mileage is being improved.

An accelerated vehicle retirement program is flawed because it does not factor-in how many miles-a-year the collected vehicles are currently being driven. U.S. taxpayers will be buying rarely-driven second and third vehicles that have minimal impact on overall fuel economy and air pollution.

The program will reduce the number of vehicles available for low-income individuals and drive up the cost of the remaining vehicles and repair parts.

The program fails to acknowledge driver needs, such as the ability to transport a family, tow a trailer or rely upon the performance, safety and utility characteristics associated with the larger vehicles.

Any vehicle scrappage program threatens enthusiasts nationwide with the loss of valuable parts and parts-cars for repair, restoration, and customization projects. An accelerated retirement program will reduce the availability of affordable transportation and repair parts used by low-income drivers. It will also compete with the Salvation Army, the Purple Heart and other charities that rely on vehicle donations to raise money.

The idea that the trucks and SUVs must be scrapped in order to save energy is irrational. The program’s “carbon footprint” does not factor in the amount of energy and natural resources expended in manufacturing the existing car, spent scrapping it and manufacturing a replacement car.

Many states have considered scrappage programs in the past as a way to help clean the air or increase mpg, but abandoned the effort because they simply don’t work. The programs are not cost-effective and do not achieve verifiable fuel economy or air quality benefits.

We hope we can count on you to reject “Accelerated Vehicle Retirement.” Thank you for your consideration on this very important matter.