[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 12]
[Senate]
[Page 15700]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                      SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I wanted to go into a bit more detail 
about the cash for clunkers provision the Senate passed yesterday as 
part of the $105 billion war supplemental. I continue to believe that 
the American people would be appalled to learn the specifics of this 
lemon legislation. Here is a quick summary:
  Any person who trades in a car he or she has owned and insured for at 
least 1 year that has a combined fuel economy value of 18 miles or less 
per gallon is eligible for: $3,500 toward the purchase of a new car if 
it has a fuel economy value at least 4 miles per gallon higher than the 
trade-in, or a new truck if it has a fuel economy value at least 2 
miles per gallon higher than the trade-in; or $4,500 toward the 
purchase of a new car if it has a fuel economy value at least 10 miles 
per gallon higher than the trade-in, or a new truck if it has a fuel 
economy value at least 5 miles per gallon higher than the trade-in.
  The auto dealer that sells the new car, must accept the trade-in and 
crush it, then submit paperwork to the Department of Transportation, 
DOT, and the money is directly wired to the auto dealer. This is ripe 
for fraud and abuse and the bill provides a penalty of a mere $15,000 
fine for each abuse.
  Only cars costing less than $45,000 and purchased between July 1, 
2009, and November 1, 2009, are eligible.
  Lastly, I want to talk about how this clunker was salvaged by the 
Democrats placing it in a war supplemental bill. On January 14, 2009, 
several Senators introduced a cash for clunkers bill that would provide 
between $2,500 and $4,500 toward the purchase of a new or used car as 
long as the trade-in had a fuel economy rating of less than 18 miles a 
gallon and the new or used car had a fuel economy rating exceeding 
target for that class of vehicles by at least 25 percent, as determined 
by DOT.
  Then on May 21, 2009, a new cash for clunkers bill was introduced by 
a different group of Senators who limited the benefit to only the 
purchase of a new car, and removed the requirement that the new car 
must have a fuel economy rating exceeding the target by at least 25 
percent and replaced it with a more lax requirement that a new car 
merely had to be 2 miles per gallon more fuel efficient.
  Senators Collins and Feinstein wrote an op-ed in The Wall Street 
Journal on June 11, 2009, stating:

       It's amazing how quickly a good idea can go bad in 
     Washington . . . Our ``Cash for Clunkers'' proposal was a 
     win-win for the environment and the economy. Then Detroit 
     auto industry lobbyists got involved. Soon a rival bill 
     emerged . . . tailored perfectly to the auto industry's 
     specifications. They claim their bill would have resulted in 
     32 percent more oil savings and reduce greenhouse gas 
     emissions. And then Detroit's bill was placed into the war 
     supplemental and will likely be signed into law without ever 
     having been reviewed by the committee that has jurisdiction 
     over such legislation or being available for amendment by the 
     full Senate.

                          ____________________