Senate Considers $454 Billion Swap to Nationwide Electrification

Matt Posky
by Matt Posky

On Thursday, Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) proposed a $454 billion plan aimed at converting the United States from a gasoline-powered nation to one driven primarily by electricity. Under the 10-year plan, automotive consumers would get rebates ranging from $3,000 to over $5,000 (based on efficiency), plus another $2,000 for low-income buyers, for the purchase of electric vehicles made in America.

“This proposal to bring clean cars to all of America will be a key component of the far-reaching climate legislation from Senate Democrats, and I’m proud it has a broad coalition of support,” the senior senator said in a statement.

Much like the haphazard way Schumer insists on wearing glasses at the outermost tip of his nose, begging for gravity to take them, his plan has us mildly concerned.

From Reuters:

The plan would “reduce the number of carbon-emitting cars on the road, create thousands of good-paying jobs, and accelerate the transition to net-zero carbon emissions by mid-century,” Schumer said.

It would adopt rules similar to the 2009 $3 billion “Cash for Clunkers” plan that sought to stimulate U.S. auto sales.

Schumer’s proposal would provide $45 billion for additional EV charging stations and $17 billion in incentives for automakers to build new factories or retool existing ones to assemble zero-emission vehicles or charging equipment with a goal that by 2040 “all vehicles on the road should be clean.”

Firstly, don’t we already have something like this? Standing EV tax credits already do a lot to offset the higher entry price of electric cars. While some manufacturers have already reached their 200,000-vehicle quota, kicking off a phase-out, other companies can continue taking advantage of it, with consumers writing off a significant portion of their purchase. Schumer’s plan would continue subsidizing these vehicles — to the tune of $14,500 in some cases.

Its relationship to Cash for Clunkers is also mildly alarming. The 2009 program actually ended up being terrible for the environment by ignoring the key tenant of conservation. Old cars were simply disposed off, with few seeing any recycling action, while factories had to emit more pollution to build their replacements. That effectively created an abundance of waste in a bid to stimulate the U.S. economy.

While largely incongruent with the Trump administration’s fuel rollback idea, which would freeze existing emission mandates at 2020 levels through 2026, Schumer said the plan would massively cut down on oil consumption. It’s currently supported by multiple environmental groups, among them the Sierra Club, Natural Resources Defense Council, and League of Conservation Voters.

United Auto Workers President Gary Jones claimed Schumer’s proposal “honors the sweat and sacrifice of American autoworkers by investing in domestic manufacturing of electric vehicles and incentivizing high quality jobs across the auto supply chain.” Ford Motor Co. and General Motors also expressed appreciation for the effort taken to advance electrification, especially in regard to infrastructure support and consumer incentives. However, both have a vested interest in EVs and have dumped billions into development programs.

Presently, there’s no legislative text for the proposal — and with good reason. Democrats would need a majority in the Senate for it to go anywhere. Schumer is likely running it up the flagpole to create buzz in the event that Republicans lose their majority in the 2020 election. He claims the plan’s ultimate aim is to make all vehicles sold in the U.S. “clean” by 2040, estimating that roughly 25 percent of U.S. vehicles could be electrically driven within the next 10 years.

[Source: Reuters] [Image: michelmond/Shutterstock]

Matt Posky
Matt Posky

A staunch consumer advocate tracking industry trends and regulation. Before joining TTAC, Matt spent a decade working for marketing and research firms based in NYC. Clients included several of the world’s largest automakers, global tire brands, and aftermarket part suppliers. Dissatisfied with the corporate world and resentful of having to wear suits everyday, he pivoted to writing about cars. Since then, that man has become an ardent supporter of the right-to-repair movement, been interviewed on the auto industry by national radio broadcasts, driven more rental cars than anyone ever should, participated in amateur rallying events, and received the requisite minimum training as sanctioned by the SCCA. Handy with a wrench, Matt grew up surrounded by Detroit auto workers and managed to get a pizza delivery job before he was legally eligible. He later found himself driving box trucks through Manhattan, guaranteeing future sympathy for actual truckers. He continues to conduct research pertaining to the automotive sector as an independent contractor and has since moved back to his native Michigan, closer to where the cars are born. A contrarian, Matt claims to prefer understeer — stating that front and all-wheel drive vehicles cater best to his driving style.

More by Matt Posky

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 118 comments
  • Joe K Joe K on Oct 28, 2019

    Politics aside, this wouldn't get me to buy a electric car, or for that matter any new car. At 30-35K that's a lot of money to pay for a throw away car, which is what most new cars are.

    • Highdesertcat Highdesertcat on Oct 28, 2019

      Joe K, "this wouldn’t get me to buy a electric car" A very good friend of mine in Visalia, CA has two Tesla Model S, one for him, one for his wife. This past summer they undertook a road trip from Visalia, CA to Littleton, CO, and back in his Tesla. Using "A Better Route Planner" they had to make 15 re-fueling stops to get to Littleton. To me, that's insane. I fill up with gas ~every 300 miles or so, or whenever one of us needs to pee. But that does not amount to 15 refueling stops in each direction.

  • Art Vandelay Art Vandelay on Oct 28, 2019

    I'm cool with it. If they are going to take the giant chunk of my income every year that they currently do, I may as well have a means to "redistribute" some of it back to me instead of giving ot to a bunch of societal leeches.

  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X GM is dead to me. Until I rebuy a '96 Chevy Impala SS or '87 Buick Grand National.
  • MaintenanceCosts I was last in the RenCen way back in 2011, when a friend of mine got married there. Even at the time, the place seemed very underused.Footnote: I drove a GM product from Washington DC to that wedding and back. It did not get me any apparent special treatment.
  • Jeff I doubt most people care. Care more about their vehicles but after being a loyal gm customer for almost 50 years and having family members all the way back to my grandparents I no longer care. The last gm vehicle I owned was 2 years ago. To me gm can go into the dustbin of history.
  • Cprescott I'm surprised they didn't move to China. That is who bankrolled their bankruptcy bailout plan.
  • Analoggrotto You ask as if I should care. Well I don't. Any more questions?
Next