Home > Opinion > Peter Roff > Democrats' Cash for Clunkers Plans Are Bad for Business

Democrats' Cash for Clunkers Plans Are Bad for Business

Reader Comments
Back to blog

<< First of all, the Stabenow-Sutton approach would send folks thinking about buying a car out into the marketplace to look first for an old clunker they could pick up on the cheap and exchange for a voucher. It's an easy few thousand bucks toward the purchase of a new car. The increased demand would, therefore, cause prices in the used car market to increase across the board. >>
Not possible with the language of the law. The vehicle up for a voucher must be registered and insured for at least one year prior, to the person who is trying to cash in on it. Since the CFC program ends November 1, 2009 - do the math.

Steve Wu of MI 11:07PM July 04, 2009

Minivans and full size vans are currently left off the cash for clunkers program, ignoring the most necessary type of vehicles needed to transport wheelchair and scooter users.
People who need to use minivans and full size vans with vehicle modifications such as ramps and lifts will not be able to benefit from program because of the 22 MPG EPA combined passenger car minimum, which is how the minivan is categorized.
There is only one minivan on the market today that meets the minimum 22 MPG threshold. That particular van, the 2009 Mazda 5, is not able to be structurally modified for lowered floor redesign like the Dodge Caravan, Chrysler Town & Country, Buick Terraza or Honda Odyssey. These particular vans are all readily available as modified vehicles for accessibility and fully crash tested.
Minivans need be put into a separate category all together -- instead of being grouped with passenger cars. The lightweight truck category, as an example, has a minimum 18 MPG EPA combined rating. Another alternative would be add a provision for people using a wheelchair or scooter. If you care about the independence and freedom a van brings to the physically challenged population, do not ignore this message write your Congressman and Senators before the law is finalized.

Guy Hanford of OH 10:19PM July 01, 2009

How much stimulus cash should I receive by keeping my 1988 Toyota Corolla which still gets 30mpg in city driving, and over 45 mpg highway? To date, all of the bills enacted to stimulate the economy and "rescue" our nation has not benefitted responsible and frugal citizens such as myself.

diane of SC 7:51PM June 20, 2009

My concern is this legislation is favorting the people who never cared about environment. Why only cars/trucks that has 18 or 17 mpg are qualified? Why for SUV/TRUCKS, only 2 mpg improvement is enough to qualify for the tax dollar benefit? That is really wasteful. I have never purchased a car/truck that use 20 mpg or less. There are many California also didn't buy gas guzzlers. Why not allow them to benefit on the stimulus also. If we want to help the auto makers and help the environment and give everyone an equal share to the benefits, then I would say give the tax dollar to any one who trade in a vehicle for a new one that improve at least 5 mpg. If I had a 20 mpg car, I have to get a 25 mpg new car. That will give me incentive to get a new smaller car or a new hybrid car.

Jamie of CA 2:45PM June 11, 2009

So if I were to junk my vehicle that I have owned and had insured for one year, does this bill only pertain to getting a new vehicle at a car dealership that sells only new vehicles or would I be able to get a new-used vehicle that did in-house payments at a place like Carmart?

Elizabeth of AR 10:14PM June 09, 2009

This bill would put every charity car donation program in the nation out of business since the amount of the voucher would be much greater than the tax deduction. The solution is to simply allow the charity to issue the voucher in lieu of the tax deduction. The charity would then junk the car in accordance with the bill. This way, everyone wins, the car dealer, car maker, car buyer and the charity.

karenc of NY 2:05PM June 08, 2009

One of the key components of the bill is that you must own the 'clunker' for a year and it must be running. So, there won't be this 'pick one up for cheap and exchange it for a voucher' run on old cars.
This program has been used in Germany and met with much success.
If it takes incentives such as this to get people to use more fuel efficient vehicles, then so be it. Very little about human nature gets changed without some external incentive.
The bill should contain provisions about buying used fuel efficient cars - exchange that old Buick at 12 mpg for a 2006 Honda at 30 mpg. That provision would help the garages and repair shops you are so concerned about. It would also help those who can't afford a brand new vehicle - but could afford a late model used car. Detroit would still get a good deal of new business - but they'd have to work for it.

LG of GA 9:41AM June 06, 2009

This bill would be a Godsend for poor people. All of a sudden there would, indeed, be a market for the junker in their back yard. Why is that bad? It would flush millions into the economy. Why is THAT bad?
I suspect Mr. Roff simply doesn't like anything that doesn't mean money going uphill to the rich. If this was a bill offering tax credits to by Cadillacs for CEOs, maybe he would like it more...

Matthew of ID 3:18AM June 06, 2009

This bill will help new car sales and the manufacturing industry (JOBS). Our daughter drives an older SUV (15 mpg) and I would very much like to trade it for a newer more fuel efficient vehicle. But when you go to trade as you well know you don’t get much for your trade with having an older car, making it discouraging to want to buy a new car. Bill H.R.1550 will help balance that out. Giving the new car buyer a $5000 dollar voucher to trade in his older car to buy a new more fuel efficient vehicle. I do know people are WAITING for this to pass and by WAITING it only hurts car sales even more. That’s why its so important to get this passed as soon as possible. It worked in Europe to stimulate the economy it will work here too. Please support H.R.1550 and H.R.1606 The House got it right, now if only the Senate will get it together. The President’s for it and the American people are too. This needs to be done a.s.a.p.

Bubba of TN 11:58PM June 05, 2009

Peter, poor people that drive beater cars don't usually go to repair shops if they can avoid it. And they do avoid it. Most of these junks are self maintained, if at all. So no auto repair jobs are threatened. Be realistic.
Somoeone who can afford a new car purchase does not normally maintain an old car in the category this legislation describes. But there may be a few. My college son has a 10 year old Olds that may qualify. But he won't be visiting any new car dealer soon. So this legislation will fall short.
Congress would be better off giving all new car buyers the described tax incentives to buy new cars manufactured in the US, (not Mexico) with extra bonus money for hybrids or fuel-efficient cars. This is tax money better spent than giving it away to the banks. I'm waiting.

Bogie of IL 2:32PM June 05, 2009