SENATE BILL: Stimulating Efficient Automotive Sales Act (Passed)

[Sopranos Republican]

Question, is the $8 billion from a section of our budget, or is this additional spending?

[Sopranos Republican]

Owning a bicycle or moped in place of a car, is simply not an option for many people. The best most of us can do, is try to buy the most fuel efficient automobile we can afford. Until we have a real breakthrough in electric cars or alternative energy, the vast majority of Atlasians will rely on gasoline fueled automobiles, and petroleum. The best we can do is try to promote a greener country, and try to help alternative energy come along.

[Sopranos Republican]

Stimulating Efficient Automotive Sales Act

Section 1: Rebates

1. An optional rebate of $4500-$5000 $1,500-$2,000 shall be given to consumers who purchase a compact automobile (car) with a rating of at least 37 miles to the gallon or more. An optional rebate of $500 shall be given to consumers who purchase a bicycle or moped.

2. An optional rebate of $3500-$4000 of $1,000-$1,250 shall be given to consumers who purchase a Sport Utility Vehicle or truck with a rating of at least 30 miles to the gallon or more.

3. The total amount of the rebate shall be determined by the amount of gas mileage to the gallon.

4. A total of $8 $3 billion shall be appropriated to this program.

5. This program shall come to an end eight months after being signed into law, or the depletion of the funds appropriated, whichever first occurs.

Section 2: Eligibility

1. To qualify for the rebate outlined in Section 1, Clause 1, the consumer must have a car that is a model manufactured at least ten years ago, and has been estimated by the EPA to travel 17 miles to the gallon.

2. To qualify for the rebate outlined in Section 1, Clause 2, the consumer must have a Sport Utility Vehicle or truck that is a model manufactured at least ten years ago, and has been estimated by the EPA to travel 14 miles to the gallon.
I am introducing this amendment, as I believe both those who buy a greener automobile, or bicycle and moped, should be included if we are going to do this program.

[Sopranos Republican]

I support this bill and I support including bikes and mopeds in as well. I also think we should keep the higher rebates, Matt.

Some are arguing that this will help automobile companies, but that is precisely the point. I understand that many times driving an older car is better for the environment, but this bill only gives you a rebate if you had a gas guzzling car.

If we make the rebates a bit lower, we may be able to make that $8  billion last longer, and be able to reach more with this program, and also if we add the bikes and mopeds, we may need to make room somewhere.

[Sopranos Republican]

One thing you guys might be missing is that there aren't a lot of cars out there on the roads that get less than 17mpg in the case of sedans and 14mpg in the case of SUV's and trucks. Especially the sedans. I suspect most get a higher mileage than that.

That's why the $8 billion price tag is too high. It needs to be one, two max.

I would think that might be enough, but I didn't want to change it too drastically. Also I would still like my original question about where the money is coming from answered.

[Sopranos Republican]

Yeah $8 billion is too much, I amended my amendment above to $3 billion.

[Sopranos Republican]

Yeah, I like the idea of combining the two rebate ideas together just fine, but I don't see a reason to so dramatically gut the car rebates.

I really think we need a higher rebate than what Matt is proposing.

I am more than happy to discuss what would work best. The only reason I proposed slashing the rebates, was because I thought we may need more room if we are going to include bicycles and mopeds.

[Sopranos Republican]

I like this idea, what about sport utility cars and trucks? How about somewhere around $2,500-$3,000?

[Sopranos Republican]

This is better, I will withdraw my amendment, and I intend to vote for Senator Napoleon's.

[Sopranos Republican]

I will very gladly support amendment 54:46, almost anything to help our businesses is a good thing in my book. I also can support 54:49. I do not support Nix's other amendments, for the following reasons:

54:47 $2,500 is far too much for a bicycle, even if you are purchasing it for commuting purposes, I would support a good sized rebate for those who aren't going to be using an automobile for the time being, but something less than $2,500-$3,000.

54:48 How about a one vehicle rebate for those described in these amendment? As in you only get a rebate for one of your fuel efficient vehicles, not multiple.

[Sopranos Republican]

NAY

[Sopranos Republican]

NAY