[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 144 (Monday, October 12, 1998)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E2097-E2098]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     NATIONAL SALVAGE MOTOR VEHICLE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT OF 1998

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                          HON. JOHN D. DINGELL

                              of michigan

                    in the house of representatives

                        Friday, October 9, 1998

  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, at some point, I hope that my Republican 
friends will explain to me their views on federalism. With this bill, 
the Majority is embracing the notion that the Federal Government 
possesses wisdom superior to the states on the subject of issuing motor 
vehicle titles.
  The legislation stops short of a federal takeover of the state 
function of titling motor vehicles or creating a new Federal Department 
of Motor Vehicles. However, it tells every state in the country that it 
must comply with new federal regulations governing how states title 
motor vehicles. These new regulations will establish, and I quote, 
``uniform standards, procedures, and methods for the issuance and 
control of titles for motor vehicles and for information to be 
contained on such titles.''
  In Committee, Democratic Members raised a number of concerns about 
this legislation. Those problems still remain in the bill we have 
before us today.
  First, this legislation gives no money to the states to perform 
inspections, if required, nor

[[Page E2098]]

does it provide funds to carry out other new, federally imposed duties. 
I must admit I'm a bit perplexed. I thought my Republican colleagues 
had committed not to impose costly new burdens on state and local 
governments without compensating them for their expense.
  Second, the bill could still preempt state laws that give the 
consumer greater protection. Although, under certain circumstances, the 
amendment before us lets the states set the percentage of value loss 
that will define what a salvage vehicle is, this bill could still 
preempt state laws that provide greater consumer protections in other 
areas of salvage vehicle title branding.
  Third, the bill gives the Department of Transportation authority to 
issue regulations covering all aspects of vehicle titling by the 
states. That may be more than needed to accomplish the bill's stated 
purpose, which is to require title branding for salvage vehicles 
nationwide.
  Mr. Speaker, for these reasons, the National Association of Attorneys 
General has opposed this legislation, as has a broad-based coalition of 
consumer groups. Among the consumer groups opposing the bill are: the 
Consumer Federation of America, Public Citizen, Consumers Union, and 
the U.S. Public Interest Research Group.
  Clearly, there are legitimate theft prevention and consumer 
protection issues involved in the way the states title motor vehicles. 
I am not opposed to addressing these in a prudent and careful manner 
which respects the rights of the states.
  I, therefore, suggest strongly that this bill simply needs more work 
and that it should not be enacted into law in its present form. This 
legislation seeks to address important public policy goals. However, we 
should be careful that our solution to these public policy concerns 
does not create new problems that we are not prepared to deal with.

                          ____________________