Wednesday, June 10, 2009

Your Voucher is Coming - Thank You Lee Terry!


Yes, the house yesterday passed HR 2751 that will give you a either a $3,500 or $4,500 voucher when you trade in that gas guzzler for a vehicle that gets better mileage. We're not quite sure what this will cost the American public and we still don't see any provision that prevents us from buying that $9,000 Kia Rio when we trade in our gas guzzler, so apparently the bill might not even help Chrysler Fiat or Government Motors or God forbid a private American auto manufacturer like Ford.

Now, when you thank your Congress for this vote, keep in mind that Lee Terry voted for the bill while Adrian Smith and Jeff Fortenberry. While we certainly not be left behind at the voucher line, we wonder why Terry voted for this increased government spending?




6 comments:

Anonymous said...

This vote certainly deserves an explanation from Congressman Terry!
Perhaps he's thinking about those "independents" who voted for both he and Obama in the recent election!

Anonymous said...

Now wait a minute. Isn't this just a tax rebate? Since when are conservatives upset about getting their money back from the government? We should expect our congressman to return our money back to us more often. The less money in Washington, the more money in my pocket (and yours too when I spend it.)

Anonymous said...

Now wait a minute????? Somehow, I thought the "conservative" approach was to limit taxes, not not tax and then dole it back out as bribery to various individuals and interest groups! Guess my version of "conservative" must be WAY off base!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

Today's (Thurs.) Wall Street Journal has a guest editorial from Sen. Diane Feinstein & Susan Collins lamenting the "irresponsible" nature of the House version of the auto rebate bill, given that the House bill is less stringent in gas mileage restrictions, and thus in allowing purchases of larger U.S. made vehicles in the program. Perhaps this was partially Congressman Terry's rationale in voting for the House version - the lesser of two evils?????

Anonymous said...

The bill's purpose, according to Feinstein, was to reduce fuel consumption ($164 per year, per user) and greenhouse gases. Furthermore Lady Diane of Cali indicates that the House version did not specify the need for the new vehicle to have its fuel consumption go DOWN. (A fundamental difference between the House and Senate version).

Anyway, I trust Congressman Terry to do the right thing - all this kvethcing and second guessing.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps it was a Bill that the dealers wanted? Aren't most of our auto dealers also small business owners? Maybe, this was a way to assist them since NOTHING The White House is doing is helping them.

For the record, I am against this Bill, but at least this money helps my local dealers and sales staff keep their jobs.