Repeal of the Sane Automobile Policy Act (Awaiting Presidential Signature/Veto)

[HappyWarrior]

Repeal of the Sane Automobile Policy Act
FL 24-3 is repealed.

Sponser: SPC

[Franzl]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Franzl]

Well, I'm willing to work on this one.

First of all, the numbers in Section 1 directly contradict the standards outlined in the environmental bill we passed just a couple of days ago, so they definitely need to be eliminated in this bill, as they're already defined in the other one.

Furthermore, Section 1/4 is also a contradiction, as SUVs enjoy a seperate status from cars in the environmental bill, as well.


I'm also opposed to the part about compensating automakers for exceeding the lawfully mandated limit.


Actually, I'm willing to agree to eliminating the entire bill here with one exception:

Section 1/1 needs to be retained. Otherwise the standards outlined in the environmental bill will be pointless.

If you agree to keep that in your bill, SPC, I'll vote for repeal of the rest.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     As far as I can tell, section 1/1 is just increasing the penalty. The CAFE standards would still be relevant, though the punishment for failing to meet them would be less severe.

[Lief 🗽]

Well, we certainly don't want to ease the standards, especially not now. I agree with Franzl that much of this bill is superseded by the newly passed environmental act, though there's really no reason to repeal it, as I assume that newer laws automatically replace older ones. I also don't see any reason to strike Section II.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Well, we certainly don't want to ease the standards, especially not now. I agree with Franzl that much of this bill is superseded by the newly passed environmental act, though there's really no reason to repeal it, as I assume that newer laws automatically replace older ones. I also don't see any reason to strike Section II.

     Section 2 is pretty weak. The grant would need to be increased to something more like $15/vehicle to be worthwhile methinks (at which point it would border on subsidy). For that matter, what guarantee do we have that they will use it for fuel efficiency research? It would also need some clause to punish them if they don't.

[Lief 🗽]

I have an amendment:

The entire text of the bill is replaced with the following:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[SPC]

I will not accept any amendments as friendly.

[Franzl]

I will not accept any amendments as friendly.

In that case, I would urge Lief to ask for a vote on his amendment.

[Lief 🗽]

Yes, I assumed that's what I had done by introducing it.

[Franzl]

Yes, I assumed that's what I had done by introducing it.

I guess

[HappyWarrior]

On the Lief amendment:

AYE

[Lief 🗽]

Aye

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Nay

[RI]

Aye.

[MasterJedi]

Aye

[DownWithTheLeft]

Nay obvi

[minionofmidas]

SPC couldn't be summed up any better than by this act's title.

[SPC]

Nay

[Franzl]

Aye

[Bacon King]

Aye

[HappyWarrior]

The Amendment passes.  Does anyone else have any furthur amendments to suggest or should I just call for a vote?

[DownWithTheLeft]

24 hours no debate, call a vote

[Smid]

Well, we certainly don't want to ease the standards, especially not now. I agree with Franzl that much of this bill is superseded by the newly passed environmental act, though there's really no reason to repeal it, as I assume that newer laws automatically replace older ones. I also don't see any reason to strike Section II.

     Section 2 is pretty weak. The grant would need to be increased to something more like $15/vehicle to be worthwhile methinks (at which point it would border on subsidy). For that matter, what guarantee do we have that they will use it for fuel efficiency research? It would also need some clause to punish them if they don't.

Research and Development costs are certainly already accounted for because the manufacturers no doubt claim them as tax deductions. If this is the case, it would not be hard for them to account for R&D for fuel efficiency. Perhaps the subsidy could be capped at the amount spent on R&D during the previous tax year?

[HappyWarrior]

The time has come to vote on this act:

NAY