http://www.autoblog.com/2011/09/28/white-house-delaying-release-of-new-fuel-economy-standards
Sources claim regulators are moving slower than anticipated on details of the official proposal to ensure it covers issues likely to be voiced during the public comment period. .
The oil lobby is putting pressure on the congress through it’s upcoming reelection contributions who in turn is shifting their support for legislation the White House needs past in other areas. Everyone will be happy when a watered down version or one with no teeth is released.
Let’s make up a different reason; oil doesn’t mind increase mileage requirements what so ever as long as the cost per barrel goes up along with it to maintain their profit margins. What they don’t want is competition until they are ready to assume control of these other resources. Same old, same old.
Our economy is being stagnated as much by high energy costs as anything…a balancing act will ensue.
There’s a conspiracy theory to explain everything, but a more likely reason is that these new CAFE standards are unrealistic unless we are willing to let the government force us to drive tiny slow little bubble-cars and/or hybrids so expensive that the lower middle class will be priced out of driving.
The pressure on congress is likely comming from the most powerful lobby that congress ever has to face, voters.
Obama is the best Republican President ever!
“, but a more likely reason is that these new CAFE standards are unrealistic…”
That’s the real conspiracy theory many have bought into. That oil producers have a strangle hold on needed legislation is fact.
This is a conspiracy too…not.
“Individuals and political action committees affiliated with oil and gas companies have donated $238.7 million to candidates and parties since the 1990 election cycle, 75 percent of which has gone to Republicans.”
http://www.exxposeexxon.com/ExxonMobil_politics.html
Is it a conspiracy theory that we had two oil men in the White House for 8 years ? That worked real well !!!
"Obama is the best Republican President ever! " At times it really seems that way.
Two parties, Republican and Republican light.
I’m still on the fence about if the new Cafe’ standards are unrealistic. They do seem to be…but I’ve also read some articles that it may not be as unrealistic and costly as previously thought. I know that the Big-3 (then the Big-4) were screaming about the Cafe’ standard when it first came out some 30 years ago…saying how it was IMPOSSIBLE. Not only was it possible…but we’ve exceeded those original numbers by a LOT…
“Obama is the best Republican President ever!”
I definitely wouldn’t go that far, but at least he’s listening to the republicans (and the majority of people in the country) who know that all these regulations are what is really destroying the economy.
There’s not much that I can agree with Obama on, but I’ll give credit where it’s due. All these destructive regulations coming from the left have got to stop to get the economy going again.
Obama’s probably thinking ahead to the elections, too, but I think it’s a little late.
CSA
High mileage legislation is indeed unrealistic without either very expensive gas (like in many countries) or very high purchase (gas guzzler) taxes and high annual road taxes.
There is little or no profit in making small cars in North America, and Detroit has tradditionally needed trucks and SUVs to stay in business. These high fuel standards are a real danger to the “Big Three’s” ongoing viability.
The reason these things work in Europe and other areas is they combine high gasoline prices ($7/gallon in France) with high Purchase taxes ($25,000 on a Jeep Grand Cherokee in Holland) and high road taxes ( such as $2000 per year on a full size V8 in France) to force the public into smaller, but very efficient cars.
Compact cars cost the same or less in Europe, and the annual road tax is very low.
Finally, ther is the EFFICIENCY PARADOX; the less something costs, the more will be consumed. Cheap gas has meant there are more vehicles than licensed drivers in the USA. and cars are used for nearly all travel.
The only way to reduce consumption of oil (the real goal) is to make driving large cars more expensive.
CSA: “‘Obama is the best Republican President ever!’ I definitely wouldn’t go that far,”
Why not? He’s cut taxes for the rich, increased gun rights, deported more illegal aliens than any other President in American history, kept the Guantanamo Bay detention facility open, been strong on the war on terror, and sustained military funding for obsolete hardware. That sure sounds like a Republican to me. In some ways, he’s more conservative than George W. Bush.
“That sure sounds like a Republican to me.”
It sounds that way to you, but not to the majority of Americans, apparently. It’s little things like Obamacare that are holding the economy down. Not even Republicans or Conservatives can take responsibility for that. Recent polls show that most think the economy won’t recover until we get new leadership and most predict the new leader will be Republican. People are finally understanding what the real problem is.
Once some of these regulations are relaxed under the new Republican controlled majority of branches of government the economy will come roaring back.
By the way, you make it sound like that list of things that you say make Obama seem Republican, are bad things.
Throttling back the EPA was a start. People have short memories. Who knows ? Maybe if Obama keeps acting like a Republican and supporting things like “cut[ting] taxes for the rich, increased gun rights, deported more illegal aliens . . . strong on the war on terror, and sustained military funding for obsolete hardware.” he’ll be reelected, but not until Obamacare is dead.
Oh, and George Bush was a Conservative ?
CSA
People are finally understanding what the real problem is.
The REAL problem left office 2 years ago…Still trying to recover from the trillion dollar mess he left this country in.
If Obamacare is really so bad for the economy, why has Canada fared so well in recent years? Why have jobs (including auto manufacturing jobs) been shipped to Canada, where insurance is socialized, and you can’t be dumped from your insurance for being sick?
Surely, if regulation was the problem, Canada, which didn’t deregulate its banks when the USA did, shouldn’t be faring as well as they have been economically.
To be honest, when you poll Americans on whether they think insurance companies should be allowed let you die when you paid for your insurance and have a treatable or curable disease, they are overwhelmingly against it. If Ford and GM could rely on socialized healthcare or socialized medicine, we would see them bring a lot of manufacturing jobs back home. It’s only Republicans who cheer when a candidate says “let him die.” The rest of the country, including the moderates, cringe at that kind of indifference.
Obamacare and environmental regulations are not our problem. Having clean air and clean water isn’t what’s hurting our economy. Our problems come from reliance on a consumer-based economy. Consumerism can’t sustain an economy long term like agriculture and manufacturing can. We’ve given Big Business everything they wanted. The banks wanted bailouts, and we gave it to them. They wanted their taxes cut, and we gave it to them. They wanted deregulation, and the Bush Administration gave it to them. The government gave them all these things, and yet they still laid people off and shipped jobs across boarders. We gave them all these things, and still they didn’t hire Americans. When are we going to learn from our mistakes? Big Business has learned how to make profits during a recession without hiring Americans. Americans are learning that consumerism isn’t sustainable, and we need to do more saving and less spending. Americans are finally letting go of immediate gratification and behaving like grown-ups, and when that happens, demand goes down and people lose their jobs. No American President can stem the tide.
Since your memory seems so short, this recession started when Bush was still President. That’s right. None of Obama’s environmental regulations were in force when this recession started, so seeing you blame Obama for the recession demonstrates some very selective memory.
He Left Office A Year Ago.
Make That 2 Years Ago.
Now We Can Almost Make It 3 Years Ago.
Right Before The Next Election We Can Still Blame Him 4 Years Later !
CSA
One cannot compare the Canadian system with Obamacare. They’re entirely different systems. The Canadian system provides healthcare, funding it through taxes. Obamacare simply mandates that we each buy health insurance policies, and/or that companies buy insurance for their employees (if the fit mandated criteria). The successes and weaknesses of the Canadian system would have to be discussed totally seperately from Obamacare.
If you really want to benefit from Obamacare, buy insurance company stocks. They’re about to realize a windfall. Mark my words.
It is not the job of “big business” to turn the economy around. It’s their job to make money. By doing that, they grow, proper, and create jobs and wealth…unless encumbered by legislation that makes it unprofitable to do so. It is the government’s job to turn the economy around. The way they can do so is to free business from encumbrences not related to preventing corruption, and to create legislation that ALLOWS them to grow and proper.
Government expenditures will not save the economy. Prosperity in the business sector will. Penalizing them for making profits does not encourage that prosperity.
If you understood economics…it takes YEARS to recover from a recession…and longer when the recession was a large as this one.
Although I do partly blame Obama…but the vast majority of the blame goes to GW…
http://www.urbandictionary.com/author.php?author=Jer+Mack
To paraphrase a conservative friend of mine (during the Bush years, of course), government policy changes take a long time to show their effects. Of course, now that we have a Democrat in the Whitehouse, he’s changed his tune.
“same”
“Obama care simply mandates…”
I thought so at first. But, as the details start to come out, there are indeed worthwhile features. When the limits on profit margins are in place for insurers, it gets very close to what non profits are allowed to declare for overhead. Also, the govt. will issue tax credits based on income and family size toward the purchase of health insurance. Low income levels could essentially have free healthcare.
There are also caps on total costs at ten percent of total income. Over time, if left in tact, it could easily evolve into a non profit universal healthcare with all insurance companies required to provide a basic plan and offer more extensive plans for their profit. This happens with the mandatory insured protection clauses and the profit margin limits.
If we support this thing now, our overall healthcare cost will go down according to the CBO and eventually become non employer based, which will be a huge boon for small business hiring practices. It is much better thought out then I originally thought and only the facts are needed to educate the “do nothings”. Who by the way will gladly buy into it as they find they will never become the filthy rich, conservative or not.
But of course, the true conservative would rather the “poor” become the ingredients in the “Soylent Green Biscuit Co.” for profit then provide healthcare for all.
Docnick, great comments. Without disincentives to buy smaller cars, we will continue to buy large ones. It seems to me that extending gas guzzler taxes to all non-commercial vehicles would be a good start. We also need to dramatically increase the tax rate on fuel. Hey, it’s not an increase in revenues, it would just keep even with the rise in fuel economy. That way we can pay for roads. The amount of federal fuel tax has not changed since 1993, although the way it is used was changed in 1997. Almost 20 years with no change.
Dagosa: “Without disincentives to buy smaller cars, we will continue to buy large ones.”
Did you mean to say “incentives”?
Don’t you think $4/gallon gas once or twice a decade is enough incentive to buy a fuel efficient car when time comes to replace the car you have? If it isn’t enough of an incentive, I don’t think anything will be. Any consumer what that short of a memory will get no sympathy from me.
Whitey, that’s "jt"who wants bigger less efficient SUVs. I bet he drives an Escalade.