Comments on: Fuel Bill Delivery Vehicle Pisses Off Michigan Representatives

By: carlisimo

carlisimo — Sun, 23 Dec 2007 20:23:17 +0000

Some people see conspiracies everywhere!

Lighten up with the PC stuff…

By: MaxHedrm

MaxHedrm — Sun, 23 Dec 2007 20:04:57 +0000

KixStart:

I’m pretty sure the President has a printer. & He would only have to print the signature page, if it were done properly. Or, they could adopt 21 CFR Part 11 which has all sorts of confusing requirements for electronic records and signatures.

By: 50merc

50merc — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 23:25:57 +0000

Actually, the bill was delivered by car because Congress doesn’t trust the Postal Service.

By: jthorner

jthorner — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 16:25:25 +0000

Isn’t the real question why Toyota was so far out ahead of Detroit in bringing Prius class vehicles into high volume production?

Our tax dollars have been funding the “Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles” since 1993.

The PNGV Challenge

“Build a car with up to 80 miles per gallon at the level of performance, utility and cost of ownership that today’s consumers demand.”

“In 1993 the U.S. government and the U.S. automotive industry joined in a partnership to establish U.S. leadership in the development and production of affordable, fuel-efficient, low-emission vehicles that meet all customer needs. This partnership involves 7 federal agencies, the national laboratories, universities, suppliers and the United States Council for Automotive Research (USCAR); DaimlerChrysler Corp., Ford Motor Co., and General Motors Corp.”

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/pngv.shtml

That was 14 years ago, and yet today Detroit claims that the need for better fuel economy surprised them and that higher fuel economy standards will put them out of business. Too bad there is such a long paper trail to contradict them. Note that the actual new technology leaders in the US market are Toyota and Honda, which companies didn’t participate in the PNGV taxpayer funded charade.

By: cynder

cynder — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 11:33:46 +0000

The whole situation is over analyzed.

Using THE poster-child for fuel efficiency was a marketing ploy to demonstrate that the efficiency standard can be met and is in fact already met.

Cynics will articulate positions about a variety of ways the Prius doesn’t achieve it’s fuel efficiency and may create more waste with depleted batteries. That isn’t the point.

Detroit’s auto executives are not as worried about meeting an efficiency standard they already achieve in many parts of the world. They object to competing with Toyota and Honda on equal terms in the worlds largest auto market.

By: Terry

Terry — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 00:06:21 +0000

What’s really the slap in the face isnt that a Prius was chosen for the task, but that it was a TOYOTA.
Yes, the Prius has name recognition, but dont you think many Prius owners bought the vehicle because it was a Toyota?
Many years ago a joke went around about a gal telling her husband while car shopping: “I don’t want a foreign car–I want a Volkwagen”.
Right now I see those that dont think import OR domestic–they just want a Toyota.

By: ihatetrees

ihatetrees — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 23:28:37 +0000

These clowns chose a Prius to make a holier-than-thou statement. The fact that they pissed off UAW sympathizers is incidental. (If they’d have driven a Yaris or a Jetta TDI, no one would have known about it (or given a sh*t)).

Legislation like this makes me want to go out and get a used Ram2500 Turbo-diesel. I’d have a bumper sticker that says:
“Studies show Cummins Turbo-diesels maintain 99.7% of horsepower/torque even after 100,000 Miles Driven or 7 Priuses crushed under the front bumper.”

By: Redbarchetta

Redbarchetta — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 21:01:50 +0000

Rep. Mike Rogers echoed that sentiment, calling it a “slap in the face of every American auto worker.”

If I remember correctly there are auto workers in states other than Michigan like, OH, KY, LA, AL, etc. Why would this be a problem for them, especially the ones making fuel efficient cars like Toyota and Honda. There are more auto workers in this country than just the ones in Detriot, they may not be unionized but they still work in the industry.

By: joeaverage

joeaverage — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 21:00:20 +0000

What exactly is a domestic vehicle these days??? A GM built in Mexico? A Chrysler built in Canada? A Hyundai built in Alabama?

I think the import vs domestic debate is a dead horse. It died about the time you could drive your Mexican assembled Chevy truck to Wal-Mart (K-Mart/Target/Costco/etc) to buy Chinese produced goods using Saudi Arabian oil/gasoline…

Yeah somebody was definitely cruising for an argument with the Prius. Maybe they could have asked GM for a museum kept EV1 or a pre-production Volt? Seriously a GM or Ford sourced hybrid might have been more welcome. I would have preferred a 70 mpg VW Polo TDI.

Seriously – how about a whole parade of efficient cars instead of “patting” one on the back.

GM and Ford have had every chance to build and mature a hybrid and an electric car too but they were naysayers until the Asians were selling ‘em fast and hard.

The big 2.8 have the expertise but instead time after time they choose to be the naysayers and the late-adopters of the tech. I can remember GM and Ford putting badges on their cars celebrating some bit of tech that the imports had for years… Multiport injection, ABS, 5 speed transmissions, IRS, AWD – whatever…

Bring us more European sourced vehicles please. Love my VW and would like to see more Opels (Saturns), E-code Fords, Renaults, and so on… Have zero interest in anything heavier than 3500 lbs – thanks…

By: rpn453

rpn453 — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 19:50:06 +0000

Rep. Mike Rogers echoed that sentiment, calling it a “slap in the face of every American auto worker.”

Is he suggesting it’s their fault the domestics can’t/won’t build anything to compete with the Prius? What input do they have into the vehicles their employers choose to build? If anything, it’s a slap in the face of GM, Ford, and Chrysler management.

By: red60r

red60r — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:46:29 +0000

The proposed standard’s reliance on E85 is a cynical move, mostly to prop up political support from ethanol-corn producers. More noise needs to be made about the huge drop in milage that results from diluting octane in the fuel. Add in the unacceptable wastage of water, diesel, and the drain on available cattle feed that results from switching to more corn-based alcohol, and we pay a high price for a supposed improvement in the fuel mix. The true overall energy and environmental gains from ethanol-based fuels is only a small increment. There needs to be a quick upswing in development of cellulosic alcohol production if we want a genuine gain in overall economic benefits from reducing petroleum consumption by automobiles. No more quick fixes — let’s get on with a real solution before all we have is two-dollar “gas”, twenty dollar-a-pound beef, ten dollar-a-gallon milk, and five-mpg SUVs.

By: KixStart

KixStart — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:42:27 +0000

Miller and Rogers can stop their political posturing and make some calls to Detroit, demanding to know why it wasn’t an American car delivering that bill… demanding to know why American cars aren’t best-in-class in fuel economy.

This isn’t a slap in the face, the Prius is the gauntlet thrown down.

By: KixStart

KixStart — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:38:57 +0000

The President must have a physical document which to sign his name.

Or, in the case of the current President, make his “X”.

By: Ralph SS

Ralph SS — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:21:19 +0000

“After all, if the Democrats were that keen on conservation, they could have transmitted it electronically.”

Amen

By: morbo

morbo — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:17:41 +0000

I think it’s funny that they needed to cut down all those hundreds and thousands of trees to craft a document which had to be hand delivered in a gasoline powered vehicle (hybrid or not) when they could have just sent the legislation as a secured pdf over a secure document server to each member.

Just sayin’

By: Sherman Lin

Sherman Lin — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 17:40:47 +0000

What does the UAW have to do with this Jazzbo? This is more of a Michigan delegation being beholden to the Detroit 2.5 thing than a Republican or Democratic or UAW thing.

By: Juniper

Juniper — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 17:32:08 +0000

It pisses me off too!

By: driving course

driving course — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 17:16:18 +0000

A Prius – a harbinger of death – to an industry that effectively died at the end of the 70’s…
and it died because its leaders ignored fuel prices.
US auto industry didn’t blame itself then and it doesn’t blame itself over two decades later for the same head in sand attitude.
Just for the record if any US auto industry people are reading this… gas prices will go up and many people will care whether they spend $50 a week on gas rather than $150 doing the same mileage.
In this context environment and politics don’t matter; it’s price and efficiency.

By: BuckD

BuckD — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:45:46 +0000

The big 2.8 need a slap in the face. In fact, they needed one years ago, along with a bucket of ice water, and maybe a knee to the groin. A Prius delivering the energy bill is the harbinger of death of the American auto industry. Ingmar Bergman couldn’t have concocted better symbolism.

By: jazbo123

jazbo123 — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:38:24 +0000

Don’t the UAW workers, in fact all unions, vote overwhelmingly Democrat?

Cry me an effing river.

By: N85523

N85523 — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:30:54 +0000

The photo has inspired me. I think I’m going to have some vinyl lettering made for the side of my Jeep that proclaims its fuel economy.

Seriously, I think that green, high-profile vehicular appearances are asinine and often hypocritical.

By: tony-e30

tony-e30 — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:26:46 +0000

In true Democratic style, majority rules. I believe that disregarding the domestic auto industry is what a majority of the nation is in the process of doing.