[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 164 (Thursday, November 18, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S14831-S14832]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




         NATIONAL SALVAGE MOTOR VEHICLE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I am proud to add the American Automobile 
Association (AAA) and the California DMV to the long list of 
organizations that support S. 655, the National Salvage Motor Vehicle 
Consumer Protection Act that I introduced during this session to 
protect consumers from title fraud.
  Other supporters of my title branding legislation include the 
American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA), state DMV 
directors around the country, the Michigan Secretary of State and other 
Secretaries of State, the International Union of Police Associations 
AFL-CIO, International Association of Auto Theft Investigators, 
National Odometer and Title Fraud Enforcement Association, American 
Automobile Manufacturers Association, Association of International 
Automobile Manufacturers, National Automobile Dealers Association, 
National Association of Minority Automobile Dealers, National 
Independent Automobile Dealers Association, Honda North America, Nissan 
North America, Carfax, CarMax, American Service Industry Association, 
American Automotive Leasing Association, American Car Rental 
Association, American Salvage Pool Association, Automotive Engine 
Rebuilders Association, Automotive Parts and Accessories Association, 
Automotive Parts Rebuilders Association, National Association of Fleet 
Resale Dealers, National Auto Auction Association, and State Farm 
Insurance.
  I also think it is worth recognizing 23 of our colleagues who have 
actively signaled their intention to protect motorists in their state 
and throughout the nation by formally supporting S. 655. Senators 
McCain, Breaux, Stevens, Conrad, Burns, Hutchison, Frist, Abraham, 
Mack, Warner, Bennett, Sessions, Murkowski, Shelby, Inhofe, Grams, 
Thomas, Roberts, Hatch, Thompson, Enzi, Kyl, and Hutchinson are to be 
commended for cosponsoring this important consumer protection measure.
  The American Automobile Association represents over 40 million 
drivers. It is a nonpartisan organization that champions the interests 
of the driving public in virtually every city, county, and state across 
this great land. AAA supports S. 655 because it shares my belief that 
national standards for titling salvage, rebuilt salvage, non-repairable 
and flood damaged vehicles will help prevent the fraudulent sale of 
damaged vehicles and protect consumers from unknowingly purchasing 
them. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to print AAA's letter of 
support for S. 655 in the Record.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                        AAA Washington Office,

                                Washington, DC, November 17, 1999.
     Hon. Trent Lott,
     Majority Leader, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Lott: As a representative of 42 million 
     motorists, AAA appreciates your effort to establish more 
     uniformity in the titling and registration of salvage and 
     other damaged vehicles.
       AAA shares your concern about the practice of unscrupulous 
     individuals buying damaged vehicles at low cost, rebuilding 
     them, and then retitling them in another state with less or 
     no protections. A ``washed'' title does not disclose previous 
     damage to a vehicle and therefore, subsequent purchasers have 
     no knowledge of the damage. Unwitting consumers are the 
     victims of such fraudulent practices.
       In an effort to help AAA members avoid the pitfalls of 
     buying damaged or rebuilt vehicles, AAA provides tips on ways 
     to identify damaged or flood vehicles. AAA also recommends 
     that consumers have used cars checked for safety and 
     reliability by a reputable auto technician before they 
     purchase the vehicle.
       Minimum standards for titling salvage, rebuilt salvage, 
     non-repairable and flood-damaged vehicles will help present 
     the fraudulent sale of damaged vehicles and protect consumers 
     from unknowingly purchasing them. However, because states 
     often have unique and various problems relating specifically 
     to salvage vehicles, AAA believes states should be provided 
     flexibility to enact stricter standards that address 
     individual state concerns as your bill allows.
       S. 655 represents an important step toward addressing the 
     problem, while recognizing the legitimate role states have in 
     motor vehicle licensing and titling laws. AAA commends your 
     leadership in working with all parties to craft a workable 
     solution and is pleased to support your bill.
           Sincerely,

                                         Susan G. Pikrallidas,

                                           Interim Vice President,
                                    Public & Government Relations.

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, my goal from the outset has been to protect 
used car buyers from title fraud. The solution I proposed was simple, 
straightforward, and modeled after the recommendations of the Motor 
Vehicle Titling, Registration, and Salvage Advisory Committee. S. 655 
merely establishes model uniform definitions and disclosure 
requirements for four basic terms: salvage; rebuilt salvage; flood; and 
nonrepairable vehicles. Under the legislation reported out by the 
Senate Commerce Committee, states would be free to utilize additional 
terms and to provide additional disclosures beyond those provided for 
in this bill. States that choose to adopt the four uniform terms and 
related provisions would be eligible for incentive grants. No state

[[Page S14832]]

would be penalized for non-participation or for retaining different 
standards.

  While there is substantial and broad support for this much needed 
legislation, there continues to be resistance to moving forward with 
this legislation in the Senate. Unfortunately, this resistance has the 
effect of allowing unsuspecting consumers to continue to purchase and 
drive potentially life-threatening vehicles. Delaying this legislation 
will cost used car buyers another $4 billion this year and place 
millions of structurally unsafe vehicles back on America's roads and 
highways. Roads that our family, friends, and neighbors share every 
day.
  Even though S. 655 has wide-spread support and follows the 
recommendations of the Congressionally-chartered Salvage Advisory 
Committee, a few groups have attempted to undermine this measure at 
every stage of the process. Unfortunately, these groups seemed to have 
convinced some of my colleagues that it is better to delay the 
implementation of clearly needed consumer protections and continue to 
press for the imposition of untried, untested and in many cases anti-
consumer requirements. Requirements that states have rejected time and 
again. Provisions that focus on post-purchase redress rather than pre-
purchase disclosure. Definitions and standards that would perpetuate 
confusion rather than promote uniformity among the states, undermining 
the very purpose of this legislation. These groups claim to have the 
interests of consumers in mind, yet the best representative of car-
buying consumers, the American Automobile Association, has rejected 
their approach and supports passage of S. 655.
  As I am sure my colleagues will agree, advancing titling definitions 
and standards that states have rejected, and will continue to reject, 
will only exacerbate title fraud. Such an approach only benefits those 
who prey on unsuspecting car buyers and would jeopardize the minimum 
standards required to make the program work, unnecessarily harm many 
vehicle owners and buyers by needlessly reducing the value of their 
vehicles, create unreasonable or untested standards, foster unnecessary 
litigation, impinge on states rights, and promote a scheme that states 
will reject.
  During the 104th and 105th Congresses, this was a bipartisan, better 
yet nonpartisan, initiative. My only interest has been to protect 
consumers by encouraging the use of minimal uniform disclosure 
standards for severely damaged vehicles--those involved in a serious 
accident, severely damaged by falling objects, or vehicles that have 
sustained significant and lingering water damage. Whether the used car 
buyer is in Mississippi, California, Nevada, Minnesota, or in any other 
state, he or she needs the pre-purchase disclosure information that S. 
655 would provide.
  I have made every effort to reach consensus on this legislation. In 
that vein, a number of changes were incorporated throughout the 
legislative process to address the concerns of State attorneys general, 
certain consumer groups, and many of my colleagues. The latest version 
of this legislation incorporates the full range of changes that DMV 
administrators, including California's Administrator, believe are 
practicable. The substitute makes it very clear that there is no 
preemption of state law. The substitute also mirrors much of the State 
of California's current titling requirements, ensuring that minimal 
change will be required by our largest state should it choose to apply 
for the bill's grant monies.
  Mr. President, even though I have made numerous compromises on this 
legislation, the goal post continues to move further away. Instead of 
gaining acceptance, I was recently presented with yet another round of 
proposed modifications. AAMVA reviewed these proposed changes and 
determined they would eviscerate the purpose of this legislation. AAMVA 
opposes these additional changes because they could potentially harm 
the very people this legislation aims to protect, create a mountain of 
unnecessary paperwork, and would create a substantial amount of 
bureaucracy with no added value.
  It makes no sense to adopt provisions that the experts on titling 
matters believe are harmful to used car consumers, the very people this 
balanced legislation aims to protect. AAMVA, Secretaries of State, 
local and state law enforcement, state legislators, and the automotive 
and insurance industries have repeatedly pronounced their support for 
S. 655. AAA and the California DMV also agree that my substitute bill 
is the right legislative solution.
  Mr. President, if we do not pass this legislation, the real loser is 
the unfortunate used car buyer in these and other states who 
unknowingly purchases a wreck on wheels, perhaps a previously totaled 
government crash test vehicle. Every day that Congress fails to act on 
this prudent title branding legislation, thousands of individuals are 
harmed and millions of dollars are lost to the unscrupulous practice of 
title laundering. Let's pass this bill now.

                          ____________________