SUV Owners Say "Not So Fast"

[GasSavers_roadrunner]

SUV Owners Say "Not So Fast"
Friday, May 25, 2007



As Capitol Hill considers legislation that would force automakers to increase the fuel economy achieved by the array of vehicles they sell, at least one group is urging a more measured approach to the issue.

"In the rush to 'do something' to lessen our dependence on foreign oil and cut greenhouse gases, the Senate Commerce Committee's actions may have done more to hurt consumers than solve either of these problems," said Barry W. McCahill, president of SUV Owners of America.

What the committee did is considered to be another round in what is expected to be a multi-round bout on legislation that would dramatically raise fuel economy standards (called Corporate Average Fuel Economy -- CAFE) for passenger cars and trucks, including pickups and SUVs. For the first time, the proposed law would extend fuel economy mandates to heavy tractor-trailers and buses.

McCahill pointed to history as an insight into what the future might hold. "Fuel economy requirements were put in place more than 30 years ago with the intent of reducing our dependence on foreign oil. In 1975, the U.S. imported 35 percent of its oil supply," he said in a statement. "Today, we import more than 60 percent of our oil. Clearly, it is an energy policy that has failed. But what does the Senate Commerce Committee do? It mandates more of the same. Why should we believe that making changes to a program that has provided no benefits in the past would work now? Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) is a tired horse with a performance record so bad that nobody should even bet a penny on it."

McCahill suggests a better approach would be to get America off of oil and onto bio-fuels and incentivize new technologies like highly fuel-efficient clean diesels and other clean burning technologies. He says that only then will we make progress toward cutting our oil use, further cleaning the environment.
"There's no free lunch at this CAFE and consumers need to know it before they are served a very expensive meal," McCahill concluded.

[minic6]

Alot more elequent than the way I put it. Same jest though.

[omgwtfbyobbq]

Originally Posted by roadrunner

McCahill pointed to history as an insight into what the future might hold. "Fuel economy requirements were put in place more than 30 years ago with the intent of reducing our dependence on foreign oil. In 1975, the U.S. imported 35 percent of its oil supply," he said in a statement. "Today, we import more than 60 percent of our oil. Clearly, it is an energy policy that has failed.

If by failed he means we put a freeze on CAFE about twenty years ago, then yes. It failed. In the same way I can fail a test if I stop half way through, turn it in, and walk out.

[repete86]

They forgot to mention that the SUV Owners of Amerikkka is largely financed by Ford, GM, and various oil companies.

[Hockey4mnhs]

yup idk wut i think yet

[Silveredwings]

Well, the more of this kind of blatant FUD I hear, the more certain I am that getting CAFE back on track is EXACTLY what we need. Sure, we can always invest in bio-fuels and such, but we can't keep consuming at an ever-growing rate just to benefit the very corporations that helped us into this mess. SUVs will not go away overnight so maybe we should be asking consumers if they'd like to trade their $100 tanks of petroleum today for $200 tanks of bio-fuel tomorrow (and coresponding high food costs).

Speaking of failed policies, GM and Ford are perfect examples of perpetrating the very same old self-destructive insanity while promising different results. Are we to believe that SUVs are the future? IS that the responsible direction the country should pursue? Yet when they fail as corporations, they'll beg the public for bailouts. If they spent a tenth of the effort improving their products as they do confusing the public and lobbying the government, there would fewer problems for all of us.

[Bill in Houston]

There will be nearly 100% transfer of FE-improving ideas from gasoline powered vehicles to whatever is next. Resurrecting CAFE will be just the ticket.

[OdieTurbo]

Originally Posted by Silveredwings

Speaking of failed policies, GM and Ford are perfect examples of perpetrating the very same old self-destructive insanity while promising different results. Are we to believe that SUVs are the future?

Not only GM and Ford, have you seen the Suzuki XL-7, the Honda CR-V, and the Toyota RAV4? All have gotten BIGGER! The SUV craze is in every major auto maker. Higher CAFE standards should be placed on SUV's! They're all nuts!

[GasSavers_roadrunner]

Speaking of failed policies, GM and Ford are perfect examples of perpetrating the very same old self-destructive insanity while promising different results. Are we to believe that SUVs are the future? IS that the responsible direction the country should pursue? Yet when they fail as corporations, they'll beg the public for bailouts. If they spent a tenth of the effort improving their products as they do confusing the public and lobbying the government, there would fewer problems for all of us.
That is so true.........I could not say it better.

[thisisntjared]

... he still doesnt say how CAFE hurts the consumer.
10 out of 10 on t3h B S o meter

anyone who took rhetoric + comp or the argument of persuasion in college can see the disconnect between his facts and his point.