REPORT: D.O.T. withholding Cash For Clunkers info; Senate warming to more funding
Another day, another bunch of news items about Cash For Clunkers (a.k.a. C.A.R.S.). With Friday's Senate recess date fast approaching, the Obama Administration is reportedly pushing the body's 100 members there to get their acts together and vote for more funding to keep the program alive. Two senators who had been seen as potential roadblocks to getting C.A.R.S. the quick $2 billion that the House has approved, Dianne Feinstein (D) and Susan Collins (R), have now said the Administration had "eased their concerns" and are now in favor of granting the funds.
Not everyone is pleased with how the White House is dealing with the program, though. After campaigning on a platform of more transparency, the Obama Administration is reportedly now refusing to release C.A.R.S. records on the 157,000 rebate requests that it has received thus far. The Department of Transportation is still saying it will make this information available "soon," but hasn't given any specific time at to when it will do so. Without a glimpse into the full details of which cars are being sold and which are being traded in – and where all of this is happening – it won't be truly clear to see who is winning and who is losing with the initiative. We have some ideas, of course, but we'd like to see the big picture already.
[Sources: The Associated Press; Reuters | Image: Kevork Djansezian/Getty]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Purplewon 5:37PM (8/04/2009)
well, enough has been said about clunkers, but that Dodge Ram Truck/Van is pretty sweet
Reply
letstakeawalk 5:46PM (8/04/2009)
Agreed. Vans have pick-ups beat by a mile in terms of usable secure cargo space, but that thing is awesome.
Like the old VW van-pickups...
Paul 8:40PM (8/04/2009)
"Refusing" to provide the info?! Think about that. Almost 200,000 sales in ONE WEEK and they wanted the data from the administration yesterday, literally?! Sorry, but anyone who's ever bought a new car knows that F&I paperwork is lengthy and 200k sales, plus, is not exactly "send over the spreadsheet" easy.
Sounds like politics to me.
Luis 8:36AM (8/05/2009)
Paul - you contradict yourself. You write "it's not easy" and they "sounds like politics". Which is it? Your argument that it's not easy and deals take a while to process is exactly right. Just wish the Obama people would say it that way instead of the way they are. Unless AB is not giving the full details, which is also totally unsurprising.
Stephen 8:57AM (8/05/2009)
I agree with Paul. I don't think anyone was prepared for how successful the C4C program turned out to be; including the people administering it. It seems like everyone has been scrambling to catch up. I'm not at all surprised that the data collected hasn't had time to be properly QC'ed and prepared for release to the general public.
audi_arena 1:07PM (8/05/2009)
Thank you, Paul; I personally am STILL cleaning up paperwork from JUNE on some deals. This is another rediculous story portraying the C4C program to be negative in any way it can.
Clavius 5:53PM (8/04/2009)
As the days go by I am starting to dislike C4C more and more. Mind you I liked the idea but as we learn more about the inner workings (or lack thereof) it seems even those in charge have no idea how it works and that just makes me dislike it.
Reply
Dissident 7:54PM (8/04/2009)
If the government was smart (yeah, I know), They would dismantle the cars, give them to junkyards, and take a cut of the profits from the parts and feed the money back into the program instead of trashing all of these cars. I'm sure there'd be some issues with that too but it'd be a vast improvement over what they're doing.
Luis 9:06AM (8/05/2009)
The idea about dismantling and using the parts is antithetical to the premise of Clunkers... one of the primary motivations was to get people into more efficient cars. By keeping the parts around you're creating a loophole to keep other inefficient cars on the road longer as well. Say they didn't destroy that '95 V8 Aurora and re-used the engine in another Aurora...well, that guzzler would still be on the road. This way, the parts market is subtly affected so that there aren't a glut of cheap parts on the market and perhaps that Aurora owner will also trade it in or buy something else, perhaps another used but more efficient car. I think by requiring the destruction of the inefficient gas hog and replacing them with a bunch of modern efficient cars, the program is working as intended. It's just a victim of it's own success.
bc 6:01PM (8/04/2009)
Based on what I saw at local lots Sunday, almost half the trade-ins were '90s Cherokees, Grand Cherokees, Explorers, Chrysler minivans, Windstars and full-size pickups. I was surprised to see a relatively recent Nissan Xterra and Kia Sedona. Among the more unusual were a Land Rover Discovery, an early '80s Mazda RX-7, a 90-ish Lincoln Mark VII LSC Special Edition (metallic red paint faded to fuchsia), and a '95 Thunderbird 40th Anniversary Edition.
A lot of the dealers' employees were having fun with the markings to set the CARS tradeins apart--BIG KLUNK on a particularly ratty early-80s F150; Clunk in the Trunk on a Seville; I Clunk, therefore I am--don't remember the vehicle; Clunker Woodie on an early-80s Caprice Classic Estate.
Reply
letstakeawalk 6:06PM (8/04/2009)
I doubt the Chrysler minivans were C4C trades, they are ineligible due to mpg requirements.
bwzd7p2 7:27PM (8/04/2009)
Yes, some of the Chryslers with the 3.8L V6 do indeed qualify at 18MPG. But no EARLY 80's anything would qualify. The car couldn't have been made before July 1, 1984, which means mostly '85 and later vehicles.
bc 9:48PM (8/04/2009)
They were clearly marked as clunkers and parked in the sequestered area. 1984 is technically the early 1980s, and I lack the skill to tell the difference between a 1983 and 1985 RX-7 even though my then-roommate owned a 1985; it was a GSL and not a GSL-SE, so it was still the smaller-displacement (1.1l?)rotary. Likewise, there usually aren't major differences between F150s between redesigns, and I can't remember the model year differences in the Caprice Classic's grille pattern since I'm not a GM afficianado.
Todd 6:11PM (8/04/2009)
"Without a glimpse into the full details of which cars are being sold and which are being traded in...it won't be truly clear to see who is winning and who is losing with the initiative."
Easy. Ratio of cars purchased is:
Kia, Hyundia, Toyota, Honda, Mazda and Nissan 98%
VW 2%
Ford 0.0000001%
GM 0.0000000000001%
Fiat (Chrysler) 0.000000000000000000000000001%
Why else would the data be withheld?
Reply
Robert 6:13PM (8/04/2009)
Really?
Is that why the Focus is the most purchased vehicle under the program?
Oh, wait. I guess that isn't possible in your scenario. Well, the government must be the one who is wrong here, of course.
VeeArrrSix 6:25PM (8/04/2009)
If the Focus was the best seller they would have to rename it "Your Tax Dollars for a Fugly Ford"
hector000 6:55PM (8/04/2009)
you know autoblog did a post about 24 hours ago saying that 54% of the new cars bought are American with focus being number 1, so much for your bull crap ratio.
VeeArrrSix 7:09PM (8/04/2009)
Yeah... except that that article wasn't based on the actual figures Hector. This article is about how the numbers are being suppressed for some reason and that reason is probably that most of the vehicles being purchased are from foreign automakers. You tax dollars at work
/fail
Adam 7:31PM (8/04/2009)
So VeeArrrSix, when specific numbers havent been release, they are automatically suppressed? And assuming you dont have the data with you, you can safely "predict" the outcome of the data? Aren't people taking advantage of the rebate also paying taxes? But im sure if someone called it a TAXCUT, you might consider it. Im not sure whose post is really fail.
jpm100 7:46PM (8/04/2009)
There will be some truth in Todd's smear attempt.
The Japanese makers, in particular, were slow in curtailing their production. Meanwhile GM & Chrysler especially had their inventories heavily depleted by mandate and Ford scaled back too.
Hence, the Japanese have a ton of 09's on hand with the model year about ready to clock over to '10.
And here come Congress just in time to help dealers clear their lots of '09s, especially to the benefit of the Japanese dealers. The same Congress that was willing to let the domestics go under. No theme there.