SENATE BILL: Efficient Automobile Rebate System Act (rejected)

[bgwah]

Efficient Automobile Rebate System Act

Section 1: Rebates

1. An optional rebate of $4500-$5000 shall be given to consumers who purchase a compact automobile (car) with a rating of at least 31 miles to the gallon or more.

2. An optional rebate of $3500-$4000 shall be given to consumers who purchase a Sport Utility Vehicle or truck with a rating of at least 25 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 billion shall be appropriated to this program.

5. This program shall come to an end six 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 21 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 18 miles to the gallon.

Sponsors: Marokai, Duke

[MOPolitico]

According to my reading of the bill, in order to qualify for a rebate, one must own a car which gets 21 miles to the gallon, no more, no less, or an SUV which gets 18 miles to the gallon, no more, no less. What were the authors' intentions?

[Senator Napoleon]

No way. Way too much money and encourages the destruction of the environment by making access to polluting automobiles cheaper. My region's citizens don't want to subsidize your dirty habits.

[Marokai]

No way. Way too much money and encourages the destruction of the environment by making access to polluting automobiles cheaper. My region's citizens don't want to subsidize your dirty habits.

Destroys the environment? By markedly improving fuel efficiency? Following your logic we may as well just ban cars, for Christ's sake.

It should also go without saying that this program is based on the Cash for Clunkers program of the real world America circa. 2009. Aka, perhaps the most successful stimulus program we implemented.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Yes it most certainly was successfull. We haven't been able to find a reasonably priced used car since then.

Hope the old ford holds up.

[Senator Napoleon]

Subsidizing automobiles for only minimal environmental benefit per dollar actually results in a net environmental loss when you consider how many people will be able to drive now that their automotive efficiency and rebate lower costs. I pushed for high speed rail and metropolitan transportation infrastructure improvements in my first term. That law has taken cars off the roads, let's not disturb that trend. Mass transit is superior to heavier traffic and more auto traveling, especially for my region, you know, the one that is the wealthiest region and decided to develop a mass transit program that works.

[bgwah]

We are now at a final vote. Please vote aye, nay, or abstain.

[Senator Napoleon]

Nay

[Marokai]

Aye.

Not that I expect this to pass, or be signed.

[MOPolitico]

I must vote Nay, due to my earlier question having never been answered.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Nay

[Jbrase]

nay

[Prez Duke]

Aye

[bgwah]

aye

[So the Heroes Fall]

Aye

[bgwah]

The current tally is 4-4. I believe Nathan is the remaining Senator.

[Senator Napoleon]

Subsidizing automobiles for only minimal environmental benefit per dollar actually results in a net environmental loss when you consider how many people will be able to drive now that their automotive efficiency and rebate lower costs. I pushed for high speed rail and metropolitan transportation infrastructure improvements in my first term. That law has taken cars off the roads, let's not disturb that trend. Mass transit is superior to heavier traffic and more auto traveling, especially for my region, you know, the one that is the wealthiest region and decided to develop a mass transit program that works.

[Snowguy716]

Ugh... I'm regretting not chiming in earlier.  I think the rebate amount should be lowered a bit and the qualifying vehicles' fuel efficiency raised a bit.  Then create a fuel efficiency CEILING for eligibility rather than a floor.

Like... a car with fuel efficiency of under 24 mpg makes you eligible for a $3000 rebate on a car with a fuel efficiency rating of 35mpg or higher.

People driving cars with fuel efficiency over 24mpg aren't the ones we should be encouraging to trade up.

[Senator Napoleon]

Besides the fact that this legislation is anti-envitonment with a nice wig, I really think that subsidizing more automobiles weakens the move away from car culture and hurts the mass transit programs we've invested so much in. We're not going to change our transportation habits if we promote the automobile in such a way. Atlasia has made a commitment to green energy and mass transit bolth. Let us honor it.

[Snowguy716]

Besides the fact that this legislation is anti-envitonment with a nice wig, I really think that subsidizing more automobiles weakens the move away from car culture and hurts the mass transit programs we've invested so much in. We're not going to change our transportation habits if we promote the automobile in such a way. Atlasia has made a commitment to green energy and mass transit bolth. Let us honor it.

At the same time you have to recognize that Atlasia is still a car dependent nation, and that much of it will rely on a personal transportation indefinitely.

While we should be making transit systems that are efficient and convenient while also promoting its use through planning and development... there are still places that will require cars for travel.

In such cases, car pooling, bicycles, etc. need to be promoted.. along with more fuel efficient cars.

We can't hobble ourselves into a green, car-less economy.  We have to use the transportation options that are most efficient and convenient for the given situation.

[Senator Napoleon]

People choosing to use cars can certainly pay a fair market value for the product, no?

[asexual trans victimologist]

Nay.

If our hearts are set on doing something like this, we can always draft better legislation and then introduce it again.

[bgwah]

This has enough votes to fail. Senators have 24 hours to change their votes.

[bgwah]

With 4 ayes and 5 nays, this bill has been rejected.