Here's the link, I think you all should be able to see it. It's through the SEMA network.

Basically there's a bill that's been introduced trying to get trucks and SUV's off the road in a so-called "cash for clunkers" type program. They want to get newer vehicles off the road that don't get good gas mileage.

SEMA SAN - SEMA ACTION NETWORK

If the link doesn't work, here's the text from the link.


Urgent Action Alert
Oppose Federal Vehicle Scrappage Program

Our efforts to prevent Congress from including a nationwide “Cash for Clunkers” program in the economic stimulus package have been successful – so far. Thousands of SEMA members and SEMA Action Network (SAN) enthusiasts contacted House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in opposition to the plan. The Speaker’s Office informed us that your emails, calls and faxes were received and, thanks to your work, Cash for Clunkers was not included in the economic stimulus package passed by the U.S. House of Representatives. Unfortunately, new legislation (S 247 and HR 520) has been introduced in Congress to create a national vehicle scrappage program which will give U.S. tax dollars to consumers who turn-in their “gas guzzlers” to have them crushed. Lawmakers need to scrap this idea!

Contact Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) and Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) Immediately to Oppose S. 247 and H.R. 520

The so-called “Accelerated Retirement of Inefficient Vehicles Act” is Cash for Clunkers with a twist. Instead of focusing exclusively on older cars, this program would target vehicles with low fuel economy ratings of any model year. Vehicles targeted for the scrap pile will likely include Chevy Blazers, Chevy Silverados, Chevy S-10s, Chevy Tahoes, Dodge Dakotas, Dodge Rams, Ford Explorers, Ford F-Series, Jeep Cherokees, Jeep Wranglers and any other SUV or truck that obtains less than 18 miles per gallon. Participants would receive cash vouchers ranging from $2,500 to $4,500 based on the model year and whether the replacement vehicle was a more fuel-efficient new car or used car (MY 2004 or later). Fuel-efficient is defined as getting at least 25 percent better mileage for the corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) target for its class. It will be illegal to resell the scrapped vehicles. Bill sponsors want to destroy four million pickups and SUVs over the next four years.

__________________________________________________ __________________

Don’t Delay! Please contact Senator Diane Feinstein and Rep. Henry Waxman today to urge their opposition to S. 247 and H.R. 520. For those who responded to our first call for action, we need you again, along with everyone else.

Contact Sen. Diane Feinstein to oppose S. 247
• Click here to send an email: .: United States Senator Dianne Feinstein, California :: Contact Us :.
• Call: (202) 224-3841
• Fax: (202) 228-3954

Contact Henry Waxman to oppose HR 520
• Click here to send an email: Committee on Energy and Commerce - Contact the Committee
• Call: (202) 225-2927
• Fax: (202) 225-2525

 

I really really hope that this is not true. If it is we are in trouble. My truck can get 20 MPG but I have to try to get it, most of the time I average around 15ish.

 

I have an idea for an even better bill... Let's call it Accelerated Retirement of Inefficient Bureaucrats Act.
The only vehicle I own that wasn't on that list is my CJ-5. The amount of money they are offering wouldn't even make a dent in the amount I have tied up in any of them. If they want me to have more fuel efficient vehicles, how about sliding me 4500 bucks each towards converting my two Jeeps to 4BT power.

 

these guys can attempt to get my trucks. California already trys to buy my toyota off of me.

 

I'm with you there. IF and when I decide to give up any of my vehicles, it will be because that's the choice I made, not one they tried to sucker me into. The CJ5 has been in the family for a little over 25 years now, so it's not going anywhere anytime soon.

 

they can kiss my

 

While out campaigning, Old John stopped at a small village
and started looking around for a stand to make his speech
from.

All he could find was a big pile of horse manure, so he
climbed up on that and said, "Ladies and Gentlemen, this
is the first time
I have ever made a Republican speech from a Democratic
platform. "

 

Emails sent. Thanks for this information.

 

They should revise the bill to go by the average combined fuel economy of all vehicles owned by the vehicle owner or by household; this would make far more sense. That way, you could own a Smart Car, a civic, a Jetta TDI, or even a motorbike, and your big diesel truck, so that the average combined fuel economy would still be in the acceptable levels. I think this would be a far more widely supported or accepted proposal instead of just singling out trucks and attempting to get rid of vehicles that have been top sellers for over a decade. Change may be necessary, but when it's this radical, there will be some incredibly strong and negative feedback, and it could escalate. Using a combined fuel economy method would encourage people to have at least one efficient form of transportation, and the second vehicle could be considered more of a personal play toy or recreational vehicle. At this point, I wouldn't worry too much about something forcing trucks off the road right now...If it is the case, there's always a loophole to be found. Another alternative would be to use fuel consumed per person in the household - A jet plane, for example, uses an incredible amount of fuel, but when you divide it by the number of passengers, IIRC it's actually a really efficient form of transportation.

 

I agree with all the resistance, the latest SEMA eNews letter I got said they are still fighting the bills trying to get them defeated....It makes no sense to me, they should offer better development incentives rather than trying to destroy perfectly good vehicles.

One of the many things that irritates me.