“Liberalism always generates the exact opposite of its stated intent.” – Jim Quinn
Betty Sutton's Cash For Clunkers - Green, but for who?
Oh Betty, is it true? Were you really wrong, AGAIN?
Let’s take a look.
3/18/2009 DAILY NEWS: Rep. Betty Sutton introduces a cash-for-clunkers plan
“This is a very comprehensive bill with multiple beneficial effects that I think will make it palatable to enough of the Congress that we can enact it,” Sutton said Tuesday. “It not only assists consumers who need a lot of help in this economic downturn, but it will stimulate our economy, reduces emissions, and reduces our dependency on foreign oil.”
5/21/2009 Congress Woman Betty Sutton Press Release
helping consumers purchase more fuel efficient vehicles, helping boost sales of our domestic auto and related industries and helping our environment.I look forward to the swift passage of this measure on the House floor,” said Sutton.
6/09/2009 Cleveland.com: House adopts Rep. Betty Sutton’s “cash for clunkers” bill
“This bill is also about people,” Sutton enthused at a news conference after the bill’s passage. “It’s about the people who make those cars, who make the steel and iron that are used in those cars, it’s about the dealers, it’s about our environment, it’s about our economy, it’s about the strength of our nation.”
9/03/2009 Barberton Herald: Sutton is Clunker lady
Sutton said her goals with CARS, the Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save act, was to help people buy new fuel efficient cars, reduce fuel use and provide a cleaner environment.
And now we learn the truth.
The following excerpt is from an online article by William Jeanes for AOL Auto. In Cash for Clunkers Buyers Suffer Buyer’s Remorse, Jeanes points out the numerous flaws in Betty’s Cash For Clunkers (C4C) program.
Call me a naysayer, but I do not think adding individual household debt will lead us out of the financial wilderness. Nor will it, as applied in the C4C experiment, do much to lessen our dependence on fossil fuels. Quicker than you can say, “Holy statistics, Mr. Wizard,” the numbers nerds ascertained that the new vehicles sold under C4C will use more—not less—fuel than the beaters that were turned in and destroyed.
How can that be? Think of it on a personal level. Suppose you had a 10-year-old particulate belcher that, as the euphemism goes, needed work. Even if you lived in an Orlando suburb, you’d still be less than excited at the idea of piling the kids into it and lighting out for Disney World. But that new Malibu that gets a hell of a lot better mileage is a different kettle of green. You trust it; it’s economical; you drive it more. A lot more, according to another piece of research.
CNW surveyed drivers involved in the purchase of the first 239,000 C4C vehicles. The average intended annual mileage was 10,894, up from the actual clunker mileage of 6,162. For those of you without a calculator falling readily to hand, that’s nearly double.
But what about that miles-per-gallon improvement we were promised? Well, we got it. The average fuel economy reported by C4C buyers rose from 16.3 mpg for Old Dobbin to 24.8 for the new carriage. A monster step in the right direction. Add to that the over-90-percent reduction in tailpipe excretions and we’re still looking good, right?
Not as good as we might. The new car, because it’s new and fun and green and clean and smells good, will be given some 61 additional gallons each year by its grateful owner. For those first 239,000 C4C vehicles, that’s 14.6 million gallons that the clunkers wouldn’t have gobbled up. The approximately 700,000 total vehicles moved under the program will therefore use an additional 42 million gallons of fuel annually during the first years of ownership.
read more: AOL Autos
From increased consumer debt to a greater dependence on foreign oil – it does appear that Congresswoman Sutton gave us one clunker of a bill.
Betty, Considering how wonderfully your predictions of a greener auto fleet have stood up against the real world numbers, are you starting to understand why WE DON’T TRUST YOU?
