Summit racing sent this SEMA Alert

[GEJ]

Take a peak at the link.What do you think??.


Dear Fellow Enthusiast,

As a SEMA Member Company, we have received an Urgent Legislative Action Alert from the association. You may be interested in this legislative alert and the possible impact it will have on your hobby.

The Specialty Equipment Market Association (SEMA) is a non-profit trade association composed of more than 6,800 member companies involved in all aspects of the automotive industry, from manufacturers to car clubs and race teams.

The SEMA Action Network (SAN) protects your hobby from unfair or unnecessary legislation on national and local levels. Through distribution of information and the collective voice of automotive enthusiasts and businesses, the SEMA Action Network has successfully impacted legislation concerning scrappage laws, equipment standards, registration classifications, emissions regulations, and more.

The following information is directly from SEMA. If you would like to contact the lawmaker, follow the instructions in the alert.


Thank you for your time,
Your Friends at Summit Racing Equipment





Washington lawmakers are drafting a large economic stimulus package to help create jobs and rebuild infrastructure. They want to include a nationwide scrappage program which would give U.S. tax dollars to consumers who turn-in older cars to have them crushed, as a misguided attempt to spur new car sales. The lawmakers need to scrap this idea.

The stimulus package is being drafted right now. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) wants to introduce the bill on January 6 and have it approved by Congress by January 20, so that President Obama can sign it into law after he is inaugurated.

Contact House Speaker Nancy Pelosi IMMEDIATELY To Oppose Cash for Clunkers!
Call: 202-225-0100
Click here to send an electronic message: http://speaker.house.gov/contact/
Talking Points
Feel free to use any of the statements below as a starting point for your message to Speaker Pelosi.

I am [calling/writing] to urge lawmakers not to include a “Cash for Clunkers” provision in the economic stimulus bill. Owners who turn in vehicles for crushing would receive a "minimal" payment to purchase a new car. This is a misguided attempt to spur car sales and claim that the country’s air quality or fleet fuel mileage is being improved.


I work for [company name] located in [city and state]. My company is part of the specialty automotive industry, an industry which enables consumers to enhance their vehicle’s appearance, performance, comfort, convenience and safety. “Cash for Clunkers” programs deny our small businesses the availability of older cars necessary to develop and market their products and services. The programs will hurt my company and our customers.


“Cash for Clunkers” programs threaten enthusiasts nationwide with the loss of valuable parts and parts-cars for repair, restoration, and customization projects. The programs also risk destroying classic, historic and special-interest vehicles, our American heritage.


Cars turned in for scrappage often barely run, or are rarely-driven second or third vehicles that have a minimal impact on overall fuel economy or emissions.


“Cash for Clunkers” programs will reduce the availability of affordable transportation and repair parts used by low-income drivers. It will also compete with the Salvation Army, the Purple Heart and other charities that rely on vehicle donations to raise money.


“Cash for Clunkers” ignores better policy options. If Congress wants to act, support for repair and upgrade is a better choice and a win-win for consumers, dealers, manufacturers and repair shops. Significant emissions and fuel economy improvements can be achieved in older vehicles through relatively simple and inexpensive means: repaired/replaced exhaust systems, tune-ups, etc.


We hope we can count on you to reject “Cash for Clunkers.” Thank you for your consideration on this very important matter.
If you choose to send a message to Speaker Pelosi, please send a copy of your message to SEMA also:
E-mail: briand@sema.org
Fax: 202/783-6024


I think it just another case where our federal government is getting involved in our freedoms and where they are trying to control us.

[Kabey's Van]

Canada has had a simular program in place for years. Most Provinces will offer you $1000 for any junker. Depending on where you live there are transit and tax incentives as well. It has never really taken off as a good idea unless you have a junker to get rid of.

[LiftedAWDAstro]

I agree with Peter. If a person has an old junker sitting out behind the barn that is worth real money, either they or someone in their family will know it has value. Classic car values have risen so much in the last few years that it would take someone with total ignorance of the happenings around then to scrap a classic. Besides, the guy driving the flatbed would know what he has on the rig...so an old rusted out 70' Charger or 67' Corvette would not end up crushed.

[mdmead]

I guess the problem with the program is spending "tax payers' " dollars on it. Why would we want to fund something like this? If you have an old junker, take care of it yourself!

[Kabey's Van]

Check out this link and you will see why this is a good idea. I do stand corrected in that the B.C. Government is now offering $2250 for a junker.
Not bad if your looking at buying a new car.
Peter
http://www.scrapit.ca/

[GEJ]

The one thing I can think of that is a negative effect of moves like this is the junk yards turning over scrap faster making finding no longer available parts impossible to find.

[Kidhauler]

This program has been running in Vancouver area for nearly 20years. It only gets rid of clunkers and POS cars that are not worth selling. The program here is based on your emmissions. You have to have failed the AirCare test at some point in the last 5 years and then they give you money towards a bus pass or bike or a newer car. The idea is to get high emmissions cars off the road. It has not gotten rid of the collector car market.

[scotter]

OK I have read the proposal and I dont like it, It is not a strait cash for clunker program. There are some requirements and conditions and not everyone qualifies for participation. The premis is to help bail out the auto industry but forces them to sell cars instead of just recieving a handout. So basically you get a $10,000 voucher to buy a new car with if you scrap and older one you are currently driving.

For the record I am not in support of bailout programs, I'm resposable with my money and would prefer to keep it

Here's the bill:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:S.3737:

[Kabey's Van]

I think you missed the point Scotter.
This has nothing to do with the recent bail-outs in the auto industry. SEMA has faught this proposal many times in the past, espiecially in the state of California and long before the auto industry fell.
As kidhauler mentioned a very similar program has exsisted here in B.C. for over 20 years.
It's a proposal to get poorly maintained vehicles off the road. It's not ment to help the auto industry.
Although, given the current situation the auto industry is facing I can see your confusion.
Peter

[scotter]

Here is the text of the proposed bill. It is very much a part of the stimus package being proposed. It is not just about removing old cars from the road but creating an artificial market funded by the tax payers for the benifit of companies producing vehicles in the USA. The conditions are very specific about who and what is eligible. At it's core this is about providing revinue to the automaker's with tax dollars. A $10,000 credit is a HUGE amount of tax money and it can only go to a product produced in the US. They are in effect expanding the potential customer base by offering this large sum of incentive money to those who would not normally be in a position to purchase a new vehicle (look at the income requirements). Giving someone $2000 to take their $500 beater off the road is one thing, giving someone $10,000 to purchase a brand new car from a company that is asking for help is another, I do not think I have missed the point ... read carefully (3)(A)(l) this is a bailout to protect the manufactures from failure.

S 3737 IS


110th CONGRESS

2d Session

S. 3737
To require the Secretary of the Treasury to carry out a program to enable certain individuals to trade certain old automobiles for certain new automobiles, and for other purposes.


IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

December 11 (legislative day, December 10), 2008
Mr. HARKIN (for himself and Mr. DURBIN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


A BILL
To require the Secretary of the Treasury to carry out a program to enable certain individuals to trade certain old automobiles for certain new automobiles, and for other purposes.


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Sell Fuel Efficient Cars Act of 2008'.

SEC. 2. PASSENGER AUTOMOBILE TRADE-IN PROGRAM.

(a) Definitions- In this section:

(1) AUTOMOBILE , FUEL, MANUFACTURER, PASSENGER AUTOMOBILE - The terms `automobile' , `fuel', `manufacturer', and `passenger automobile' have the meaning given such terms in section 32901 of title 49, United States Code.

(2) ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUAL- The term `eligible individual' means an individual--

(A) who does not have more than 3 passenger automobiles registered under his or her name;

(B) who filed a return of Federal income tax for a taxable year beginning in 2007, and, if married for such taxable year (as determined under section 7703 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986), filed a joint return;

(C) who is not an individual with respect to whom a deduction under section 151 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is allowable to another taxpayer for a taxable year beginning in the calendar year in which the individual's taxable year begins;

(D) whose adjusted gross income reported in such return was not more than $25,000 ($40,000 in the case of a joint tax return or a return filed by a head of household (as defined in section 2(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986));

(E) who has not acquired an automobile under the Program; and

(F) who did not file such return jointly with another individual who has acquired an automobile under the Program.

(3) ELIGIBLE NEW AUTOMOBILE -

(A) IN GENERAL- The term `eligible new automobile' , with respect to a trade of an eligible old automobile by an eligible individual under the Program, means a passenger automobile that--

(i) has never been registered in any jurisdiction;

(ii) was manufactured by an automobile manufacturer that has--

(I) operations in the United States, the failure of which would have a systemic adverse effect on the overall economy of the United States or a significant loss of United States jobs, as determined by the Secretary; and

(II) operated a manufacturing facility that produced automobiles or automobile components in the United States throughout the 20-year period ending on the date of the enactment of this Act;

(iii) was assembled in the United States; and

(iv) has a fuel economy that--

(I) is not less than 25 miles per gallon, as determined by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency using the 5-cycle fuel economy measurement methodology of such Agency; and

(II) has a fuel economy that is more than 4.9 miles per gallon greater than the fuel economy of such eligible old automobile , as determined by the Administrator using the 2-cycle fuel economy measurement methodology of such Agency for both automobiles.

(B) FUEL ECONOMY TESTING METHODOLOGIES- If a passenger automobile described in subclause (I) or (II) of subparagraph (A)(iv) has not been measured using the respective methodologies described such subclauses, the Administrator may estimate what such measurement would be if the Administrator were to use the respective methodology for purposes of determining the fuel economy under such subclauses.

(4) ELIGIBLE OLD AUTOMOBILE - The term `eligible old automobile' , with respect to a trade for an eligible new automobile by an eligible individual under the Program, means a passenger automobile that--

(A) is operable;

(B) was first registered in any jurisdiction by any person not less than 10 years before the date on which such trade is initiated;

(C) is registered under such eligible individual's name on the date on which such trade is initiated; and

(D) was registered under such eligible individual's name before December 1, 2008.

(5) FUEL ECONOMY- The term `fuel economy' means the average number of miles traveled by an automobile for each gallon of gasoline (or equivalent amount of other fuel) used, as determined by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.

(6) PROGRAM- The term `Program' means the Passenger Automobile Trade-In Program established under subsection (b).

(7) SECRETARY- The term `Secretary' means the Secretary of the Treasury, or the Secretary's designee.

(b) Program Established- The Secretary shall establish the Passenger Automobile Trade-In Program to provide eligible individuals with subsidies to purchase eligible new automobiles in exchange for eligible old automobiles.

(c) Duration of Program- The Program shall commence on the date on which the Secretary prescribes regulations under subsection (g) and shall terminate on December 31, 2009.

(d) Trades-

(1) IN GENERAL- Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, if an eligible individual and a seller of an eligible new automobile initiate a trade as described in subsection (e) for such new automobile with an eligible old automobile of the eligible individual, the Secretary shall provide to the seller of such new automobile $10,000.

(2) LIMITATION ON PURCHASE PRICE OF ELIGIBLE NEW AUTOMOBILES- The Secretary may not make any payment under this subsection for a trade for an eligible new automobile under the Program if the purchase price of such new automobile exceeds the manufacturer's suggested retail price for such new automobile .

(3) COMPENSATION FOR DELAYED PAYMENTS- In the case that a payment under this subsection to a seller for a trade under the Program is delayed, the Secretary shall provide to such seller the amount otherwise determined under this subsection plus interest at the overpayment rate established under section 6621 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

(e) Initiation of Trade- An eligible individual and the seller of an eligible new automobile initiate a trade under the Program for such eligible new automobile with an eligible old automobile of such individual if--

(1) the eligible individual, or the eligible individual's designee, drives such old automobile to the location of such seller;

(2) the eligible individual provides to the seller--

(A) such old automobile ; and

(B) an amount (if any) equal to the difference between--

(i) the purchase price of such new automobile ; and

(ii) the amount the Secretary is required to provide to the seller under subsection (d); and

(3) the eligible individual and the seller notify the Secretary of such trade at such time and in such manner as the Secretary considers appropriate.

(f) Disposal of Eligible Old Automobiles-

(1) IN GENERAL- A seller who receives an eligible old automobile in exchange for an eligible new automobile under the Program shall deliver such old automobile to an appropriate location for proper destruction and disposal as determined by the Secretary.

(2) COMPENSATION- The Secretary shall compensate a seller described in paragraph (1) for costs incurred by such seller under such paragraph in such amounts or at such rates as the Secretary considers appropriate.

(g) Regulations-

(1) IN GENERAL- Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall prescribe rules to carry out the Program.

(2) EXPEDITED PROCEDURES FOR RULEMAKING- The provisions of chapter 5 of title 5, United States Code, shall not apply to regulations prescribed under paragraph (1).

(h) Direct Spending Authority-

(1) IN GENERAL- There is authorized to be appropriated and is appropriated to the Secretary such sums as may be necessary to carry out the Program.

(2) EMERGENCY DESIGNATION- Amounts appropriated pursuant to paragraph (1) are designated as an emergency requirement and necessary to meet emergency needs pursuant to section 204(a) of S. Con. Res. 21 (110th Congress) and section 301(b)(2) of S. Con. Res. 70 (110th Congress), the concurrent resolutions on the budget for fiscal years 2008 and 2009.

[Kabey's Van]

I stand corrected, but this bill is very different than the bill that SEMA "has" been fighting for years.
This "is" a bill directed at bolstering the auto industry.
This makes buying a vehical pretty enticing.
It is similar to the mortgage deregulation approach to buying a house in the states.
It makes it very easy to get your foot in the door but then you still have years of payments after this bill is terminated on DEC. 31/09. In the long run will it really help, probably not as it will end up being another big waste of money.
The economy is going for a big dump, world wide. What I see happening with this is not much different than what Americans have expierienced in there housing market and there will end up being a whole lot of repossessed vehicles down the road.
I don't see it helping out the big three as much as I do Honda, Toyota, Hyundi and the like, as they have writen in stipulations that the big three are already having troubles coming to terms with.
All in all you have changed my mind as this is a "bad bill".
Thanks for informing me.
Peter

[scotter]

Thanks for informing me.
Peter

No problem, I've gone back and forth on just how I felt about this until I actually read it. SEMA's letter does not adress some of the bigger issues related to this proposal.

[Kabey's Van]

Well, SEMA has an agenda to keep the "classic" auto industry alive and they have lobbied Washington many times over the years to do just that.
Although there are many points that can legitimatly be argued with this bill. Those same points don't really effect SEMA so why would they make an issue over something that does'nt effect them directly.

[scotter]

Well if my discretionary income goes down to fund this type of proposal I wont be buying many aftermarket goodies...

But I understand your point, SEMA cant go out and take the type of politcal position on a bailout the way I can. Their focus has to be the immeadiate intrest of the automotive hobbiest.

[Kabey's Van]

And then there's me with an insatiable appetite for shiny aftermarket goodies.