NHRA News: Legislation threatens vehicle hobby industry

www.nhra.com ^ | 12/17/01 | Unsigned

[Neil E. Wright]

Legislation threatens vehicle hobby industry

---

12/17/2001

For the first time in many years, Federal legislation (S. 1766) threatening the vehicle hobby industry has been introduced. S. 1766 includes a provision (Section 803) that would federally fund state scrappage programs for vehicles more than 15 years old -- that means popular vehicles ranging from '60s-era muscle cars up through later-model vehicles such as Buick T-Types and Grand Nationals, Mustang SVOs and GTs, Z-28 Camaros, and Corvettes. Low-performance "sister" vehicles, like Buick Regals with interchangeable parts to GM Grand Nationals, would certainly be destroyed. The street rod industry will not be immune either, as late-model engines, suspension equipment, and accessories (such as the suspension parts found on Ford Mustang IIs) often used to modernize these popular vehicles will also be lost to the crusher. SEMA members are strongly urged to take action to defeat S. 1766. Here are a few simple things members and their employees can do to help:

• Send a letter on your company letterhead to your U.S. Senators opposing Section 803 of S. 1766. The letter need not be long. Simply express how S. 1766 will affect you, your company, and the automotive hobby. For more tips on writing your legislators, consult the SEMA document "How to Lobby Elected Officials." This guide is available at www.enjoythedrive.com/san To find out who your U.S. Senators are, call the SEMA Washington, D.C., office at 202/783-6007, or visit www.enjoythedrive.com/legislative/contact_legislator.asp
• Personal letters from employees of SEMA-member companies to their U.S. Senators opposing Section 803 of S. 1766 are encouraged. Again, letters can -- and should -- be brief (see notes in item above) and include personal reasons why the bill would affect their lives and careers. Contact the SEMA Washington, D.C., office at (202) 783-6007 for help or information.
• Share the alert on S. 1766 found at www.sema.org/fedleg/fedredhot/scrappage1201.html with as many people as possible, including your customers. Communicate with them the potential harm Section 803 of S. 1766 could have on the vehicle hobby, and urge them to get involved by writing letters as well. The SEMA Washington, D.C., staff is monitoring and actively lobbying S. 1766 on Capitol Hill. SEMA members are asked to send copies of their letters to the SEMA Washington, D.C., office for their records. Members are also encouraged to contact the staff if they have any questions or need assistance in their efforts to oppose this legislation. SEMA's Washington, D.C., staff can be reached at (202) 783-6007; fax (202) 783-6024.
  

[Neil E. Wright]

Time to write and call your congresscritters again!!

The s**t is starting to pile up AGAIN!!!!!!!!

Toward FREEDOM

[Neil E. Wright]

Just a little bump for more UNConstitutional BS from the dirtbags that infest our nation's capitol!!!

Toward FREEDOM

[deport]

S.1766

Energy Policy Act of 2002 (Placed on the Calendar in the Senate)

---

SEC. 803. ASSISTANCE FOR STATE PROGRAMS TO RETIRE FUEL-INEFFICIENT MOTOR VEHICLES.

(a) ESTABLISHMENT- The Secretary shall establish a program, to be known as the `National Motor Vehicle Efficiency Improvement Program,' under which the Secretary shall provide grants to States to operate programs to offer owners of passenger automobiles and light-duty trucks manufactured in model years more than 15 years prior to the fiscal year in which appropriations are made under subsection (d) to provide financial incentives to scrap such automobiles and to replace them with automobiles with higher fuel efficiency.

(b) STATE PLAN- Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of an appropriations act containing funds authorized under subsection (d), to be eligible to receive funds under the program, the Governor of a State shall submit to the Secretary a plan to carry out a program under this subtitle in that State.

(c) ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA- The Secretary shall approve a State plan and provide the funds under subsection (d), if the State plan--

(1) requires that all passenger automobiles and light-duty trucks turned in be scrapped;

(2) requires that all passenger automobiles and light-duty trucks turned in be currently registered in the State in order to be eligible;

(3) requires that all passenger automobiles and light-duty trucks turned in be operational at the time that they are turned in;

(4) restricts automobile owners (except not-for-profit organizations) from turning in more than one passenger automobile and one light-duty truck in a 12-month period;

(5) provides an appropriate payment to the person recycling the scrapped passenger

automobile or light-duty truck for each turned-in passenger automobile or light-duty truck;

(6) provides a minimum payment to the automobile owner for each passenger automobile and light-duty truck turned in; and

(7) provides, in addition to the payment under paragraph (6), an additional credit that may be redeemed by the owner of the turned-in passenger automobile or light-duty truck at the time of purchase of new fuel-efficient automobile.

(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS- There are hereby authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section such sums as may be necessary, to remain available until expended.

(e) ALLOCATION FORMULA- The amounts appropriated pursuant to subsection (d) shall be allocated among the States on the basis of the population of the States as contained in the most recent reliable census data available from the Bureau of the Census, Department of Commerce, for all States at the time that the Secretary needs to compute shares under this subsection.

(f) DEFINITIONS- In this section:

(1) AUTOMOBILE- The term `automobile' has the meaning given such term in section 32901(3) of title 49, United States Code.

(2) Fuel-efficient automobile-

(A) The term `fuel-efficient automobile' means a passenger automobile or a light-duty truck that has an average fuel economy greater than the average fuel economy standard prescribed pursuant to section 32902 of title 49, United States Code, or other law, applicable to such passenger automobile or light-duty truck.

(B) The term `average fuel economy' has the meaning given such term in section 32901(5) of title 49, United States Code.

(C) The term `average fuel economy standard' has the meaning given such term in section 32901(6) of title 49, United States Code.

(D) The term `fuel economy' has the meaning given such term in section 32901(10) of title 49, United States Code.

(3) LIGHT-DUTY TRUCK- The term `light-duty truck' means an automobile that is not a passenger automobile. Such term shall include a pickup truck, a van, or a four-wheel-drive general utility vehicle, as those terms are defined in section 600.002-85 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations.

(4) PASSENGER AUTOMOBILE- The term `passenger automobile' has the meaning given such term by section 32901(16) of title 49, United States Code.

(5) SECRETARY- The term `Secretary' means the Secretary of Energy.

(6) STATE- The term `State' means any of the several States and the District of Columbia.

[gcruse]

Yawn.

[nomad]

Damed watermellons again! I`ll e-mail my congresscriters.

[dcwusmc]

FREEDOM bump

[Not now, Not ever!]

Daddy, what's a little duece coupe?

[BluesDuke]

It almost figures. And it will not be, likely, just the vintage muscle cars of the 1960s which get nicked by this one. What about those of us with passions for classic pre-1960s cars - mine own is for the vintage Packard, my fantasy is ultimately to own a nicely restored vintage Packard. What about folks (I have met many over the years) who love restoring other antique automobiles? What about those members of the clubs who restore old Corvairs (Mr. Nader's favourite compact, of course), or old Lincolns (I have a fondness for those, too; in fact, there but for the lack of $10,000 could I have had a pair of fully-restored 1950s Lincolns about ten years ago - a 1959 Continental convertible, and a 1957 Premier sedan), or the Edsel (don't laugh, they do it, and those cars were better than their rep cracked them up to be), or the Hudson, or the Nash Rambler, or even the Kaiser (you probably know this one best as the cars the bad guys normally drove in the early seasons of the television classic The Adventures of Superman)? Will they, too, have their labours of love consigned to the scrap heap because they are older than 15 and by today's arbitrary enough standards fuel inefficient?

[US_MilitaryRules]

A dinosaur. These bashturds just want to take away anything that is fun or rewarding to put together or build or do.

[BluesDuke]

These bashturds just want to take away anything that is fun or rewarding to put together or build or do.

I'm getting even more nervous. One of my hobbies is antique small appliances, the vintage Sunbeam Mixmaster in particular. (I love those old monsters and, yes, I own one, a fully-restored 1955 and I cook with it as often as I can.) I planned to teach myself to restore them back to factory-fresh when I'm able to buy a house next year. What's next - some Crapola Hill bulb-head going to decide that appliances older than 20 years which don't meet contemporary energy-saving standards go to the scraphola heap? (Don't laugh - I know many in this peculiar hobby, who love to restore anything from vintage old Kenmore tabletop washing machines to Hoover Constellation and Electrolux - I call it, because its maiden automatic bag ejector ejected it all right...as in, four feet across the floor! - "Shoot the Bag" vacuum cleaners, not to mention those vintage Hamilton Beach drink mixers and the like. And I'd bet you they would be ready to pound the bastards through their vintage Dormeyer squarebox blenders on speed frappe - oops! they called it "puree" in the olden days! - if they even think about it!)

[John Jamieson]

The way I read it, you can keep your Corvair if you want to. I object to the waste of my taxes however. Why should you get more than its real market value out of my taxes?

[BraveMan]

I wonder what they'd consider appropriate payment for this old girl?

I'm averaging around 3MPG . . . (heh heh heh)

[BluesDuke]

The way I read it, you can keep your Corvair if you want to. I object to the waste of my taxes however. Why should you get more than its real market value out of my taxes?

You shouldn't. Then again, you also shouldn't have to tolerate the Sixteenth Amendment, either...

[BluesDuke]

Are you kidding? For 3 mpg, they'll make you pay - through your intestines!

[gwmoore]

Thanks for the ping, Neil.

I have been waiting for the shoe to drop on this crap. It was only a matter of time before the environazis went after the cars still left that actually work without their stupid on board computers.

I will be contacting my PA legislators on this SAP.

Who was the @$$hole who drafted this piece of garbage? and especially, who is signing on for this POS socialist legislation. I think I know one, already ;-)

Nader killed off, frankly the best car for the money in the early '60s (the Corvair), as well as killing off the source of some FINE engines for experimental homebuilt aircraft (I was burnt big time by this one). Every time one thinks that the ultimate in stupidity had been reached, someone outdoes it. First the firearms, then the cars, then meat, then the constant fugue of the demil provisions which the D@$holes keep sticking in every appropriations bill... I am now at WAR!!!

Keep the Faith for Freedom

MAY GOD BLESS AND PROTECT THIS HONORABLE REPUBLIC

Greg

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

Our Nation is at War and Congress has time to dream up this type of legislation?
Any idea who the "brain" of this is, and the co-sponsors?

[gwmoore]

*ping*

Greg

[Victoria Delsoul]

Bump.

[BraveMan]

It seems to me that this could be a benefit to collectors and restorers. If the vehicles are scrapped while operational, that means less wear and tear on parts, as opposed to units that hit the boneyard only after they've expelled their last hydrocarbons. Less units on the road makes the remaining ones more valuable. Scrapped doesn't necessarily mean crushed. Subsidies to the boneyards would drive the cost of the parts down . . .

Having said all that, the thought of using money fleeced from the taxpayers wallets to pay for this Shinola is detestable . . .

[womanvet]

It's not fuel efficiency they are worried about, it is the lack of electronics that can be shut off with EMF. If "they" don't want your car to run, "they" want to stop it immediately.

It's OK if you want to tell me to put on my tin hat, just be sure to write. there are some beautiful old cars out there that Big Brother wants to do away with.