Dealers claim $1.03 billion worth of Cash for Clunkers
As of last Friday, August 7, US dealers submitted 245,384 Clunker claims totaling $1,030,000,000. That's an awful lot of government cheese, so to speak. According to data released by the Department of Transportation (DOT), claims were up an amazing 33% in two days since Wednesday, August 5. There's no information on how many of the dealer claims Uncle Sam has approved for reimbursement, but the DOT data does show the average claim per vehicle is for $4,197, meaning most consumers are getting $4500 C4C rebates, as opposed to $3500 ones.
What's notable about the 33% jump from Wednesday to Friday is that there was no guarantee that the Senate would approve an additional $2 billion in C4C funding on Wednesday. So the dealers selling new cars were flying without a net. Luckily, for those same dealers, the Senate approved the extra dollars on Thursday and President Obama signed the extension into law on Friday. Also, the technical glitches that were haunting C4C early on have largely been worked out and the entire process is reportedly flowing more smoothly. Any guesses as to when the new $2 billion is maxed out?
[Source: Automotive News - Sub. Req. | Image Source: Gabriel Bouys/Getty]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
gbgcarguy 5:08PM (8/10/2009)
The original 1 billion was supposed to last thru November????? Someones math needs help.
And these are the same people that want to manage your health care!! God Help Us All!!
Welcome to the United Socialist Association.
Reply
cdwrx 5:10PM (8/10/2009)
I suppose you'd rather they stop managing your military too, right?
CapnBoost 5:28PM (8/10/2009)
The military is a mandate, cash for clunkers is not.
Are we going to fund this through November on Chinese bonds? How many weeks in and 1/3 of the total funding is already gone.
ebleyes 5:35PM (8/10/2009)
Being from a country that is blessed with great "Government" healthcare I really wish you get the peace of mind I get from guaranteed healthcare and believe me many of your competitors hope you keep your crappy healthcare.
Sean 7:05PM (8/10/2009)
They didn't think it would be this popular, which is why they thought the money would last through November.
It was MORE POPULAR THAN THEY EXPECTED.
As in, people expected the Michael Jackson concert to sell out in two days, but it sold out in 15 minutes.
HOLY CRAP, THEY SHOULD HAVE HAD MORE TICKETS WHAT WERE THEY THINKING OH MY GOD.
I wish people like you weren't such idiots. And by that I mean I wish you weren't such a jerk.
bwzd7p2 7:26PM (8/10/2009)
I hardly thing that anyone at DOT will be handling any aspect of health care. And they got the program to fully set up in about a month. Including getting the funding program in place, the disposal program in place, and anti-fraud measures in place, not to mention all the attendant systems. If you have an example of any industry setting up such a large program more or as successfully in less or as little time, please do share.
If you're referring to Congress, Congress doesn't actually manage anything; they give a broad outline and leave it up to an agency presumably with the expertise they can't possibly all have. And any such agency wouldn't need to be under a month-only deadline since it wouldn't be an emergency measure, at least not yet.
Osprey 8:11PM (8/10/2009)
@ bwzd7p2
Finally someone with some sense! I'm tired of people that just blurt out what they hear on Fox News.
British_Rover 8:40PM (8/10/2009)
@bwzd7p2
Holy crap an intelligent person + a million
tankd0g 11:41PM (8/10/2009)
Ya and they want to manage automobile safety, and the electrical grid and you drinking water and the military and they think they can build bridges and subway systems! Crazy!
cdwrx 5:08PM (8/10/2009)
I don't so much mind the additional funding, but I wish they'd reduced the payout a bit to draw it out more over time and reduce the inevitable sales drop at the program's end. And it should end soon. I hope.
Reply
Kumar 5:37PM (8/10/2009)
Right,
Would have preferred a delay to begin after the current plan was to end, so that the plan could be tweaked to promote more efficient cars. By then, US auto companies would have had enough time to roll out more efficient models, instead of trying to clear lots of over-produced gas guzzlers. As it is, it's definitely spurring sales, but the lots are emptying quickly too. It was hard to fight, as the majority-repub dealers were leaning on their reps and senators, and the buying public was speaking with their wallets.
I fear, as I'm sure many do, that the auto companies will use higher than normal SUV sales now to justify producing more, getting them right back into trouble.
Mr.Oak 7:35AM (8/11/2009)
cdwrx & Kumar: The next you or a loved one become "GRAVELY" ill, please remember to suggest to your doctor, cut the prescribed dosage so that you can s t r e t c h your medecine over a longer period of time.
You folks employ rationale that is not applicable here.
Cash for Clunkers:
Priority 1 - Jump start the ailing ECONOMY.
Priority 2 - Prevent additional layoffs.
Side benefits:
Help (in the short term) to stimulate stagnant auto-sales.
Removal of Gas guzzlers from the national Fleet.
Provide work for recyclers.
Fewer lumbering barns on wheels clogging the highways.
Lowers national fuel consumption.
If the program manages to only move 200,000 cars.
200,000 cars x 6.2 gals. per car =1,240,000 mile farther on every gallon for the entire fleet.
Does any of this register with either of you?
cdwrx 12:24PM (8/11/2009)
As a moderate I'm thrilled to take crap from both sides on the same subject. Mr. Oak, I reject your argument of an emotional plea. I prefer to stick to facts and logic but if you better understand medical analogies, here's one for you. Your unqualified doctor just administered your loved ones massive amounts of morphine and now they're addicted. Next week they will be discharged without insurance. If morphine was the answer, maybe it would have been better to have given them less morphine to begin with and weened them off slowly so they didn't hit rock bottom in the gutter.
James 5:10PM (8/10/2009)
Imagine if Dubya allocated the 1st Bank Bailout...the $700B to the C4C Program, thus trickle down to the masses aka Great Unwashed....
The Economy would go Bonkers!!
Reply
Mr.Oak 10:31AM (8/11/2009)
Two things:
DUBYA does not belong in this conversation. If he were still President, the country would be mired in a 1920s style DEPRESSION. Dubya was/is a freakin' MORON. Much as I dislike Dick Chaney, Imagine how much worse off the country could have been if he wasn't there to babysit this a$$wipe.
$3 Billion is not $700 Billion. What the hell is your point?
James 4:19PM (8/12/2009)
Oak..my point is bailouts should be aimed at the US Public, to directly stimulate spending (i.e. C4C) and thus give a sputtering economy a much needed boost...and not by bailing out pandering money masters/crony bank buddies of IDIOT Dubya using obscene amounts (like $700B). Evidently, most of those funds intended for lending by these bailed out banks apparently kept it for "themselves" (the exratravagant expenses/bonuses continue, etc)...lending is still tight. NO immediate/direct benefit to the US Economy.
Now if programs for the American Public like C4C would continue and funded more (akin to bank-like bailout amounts, not a measly $1-2B...known to be kaput in a mere week or two)...then the recession would be over rather quickly.
Smokem 5:19PM (8/10/2009)
If we can spend billions on war then why not spend billions in America?
Reply
Dan 5:30PM (8/10/2009)
Maybe because after spending billions on the war we're now overdrawn?
Two wrongs don't make a right, they make you go bankrupt faster.
adam1drift 5:52PM (8/10/2009)
@dan good point. plus war is a function of the government... incentives on cars is not
mikemaj82 5:32PM (8/10/2009)
they were rushing to get more money when they barely maxed out what they were already allowed. wow.
Reply