Decision day for Webb, Mikulski.
By on Jun 20th, 2007 at 10:43 am
Decision day for Webb, Mikulski.
The Senate will vote today on whether to weaken proposals to make our cars run farther on less gas. The current energy bill includes a provision that requires all cars and light trucks to get 35 miles/gallon by 2020 — the first fuel economy increase in decades. Sen Carl Levin (D-MI) has proposed an amendment favored by automakers that would severely weaken these standards. The two key swing votes in the Senate are Jim Webb (D-VA) and Barbara Mikulski (D-MA). Call their offices toll-free through the Capitol switchboard at (800) 828-0498, and tell them to take the climate crisis seriously and oppose the Levin energy amendment.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
McCain
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
The market will have taken care of it by 2020. This is just to get your votes. Hope you like it. sheep.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:47 amMikulski is D-MD
June 20th, 2007 at 10:47 amYeah, I don’t get what GM and Ford keep missing the message about why Toyota is kicking their ass. People want efficient cars. I want to buy American – but I couldn’t find anything that touched the gas milage on my Japanese car in the American market.
The real bill will not only be good for our enviroment, and national defense, it will actually be good for the automakers. Clearly, their out-moded business model needs a kick in the pants.
China is already at 36 mpg this year!
June 20th, 2007 at 10:50 amcan you imagine a congress person that would vote against this? They would display treason and show they are in the pay of saudi and opec interests.
I do hope folks realize that the automakers have told our government they will go out of business because they can’t compete on mileage, and yet they want to lower the requirements so they can go out of business?
makes a lot of sense to kill your company, country, planet. I can’t believe we are even having this conversation?
June 20th, 2007 at 10:55 amWhen they voted on raising CAFE standards back in 2003, Barbara Mikulski argued against it. She said soccer moms “like their SUVs the way they are.”
She gets a second chance to pull her head out of her ass and do what’s right instead of what she thinks will win her votes from one particular demographic. She guessed wrong about that demographic anyway.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:55 amMikulski is from Maryland, not Massachusetts. D-MD not D-MA
June 20th, 2007 at 10:58 am35 MPG by 2020? Give me a break! Far too little and way way way too late.
How about 50 MPG by 2010? How about 50% of all mfgr’s fleet must be hybrid?
This is a joke…even IF it passes…which in itself, is a joke.
C’mon people.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:00 amLevin is a whore.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:01 amcan you imagine a congress person that would vote against this?
Comment by oldtree — June 20, 2007 @ 10:55 am
People that know how the free market works would vote against it. The car manufactures know they have to adjust the way they make cars. They don’t need the government telling them too. The market has let them know what to do. This bill is just to make you folks think the government is responsible for the change. The power of the consumer trumps the government every time.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:01 amMikulski is a whore.
Soccer moms are bimbos.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:05 ama note to all trolls. Notice how this site is not following lock step behind Levin just because he’s a Democrat.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:06 amAmerican automakers are dinosaurs.
Their managers are too.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:07 am35 MPG by 2020? Give me a break! Far too little and way way way too late.
How about 50 MPG by 2010? How about 50% of all mfgr’s fleet must be hybrid?
This is a joke…even IF it passes…which in itself, is a joke.
C’mon people.
Comment by MsJoanne — June 20, 2007 @ 11:00 am
Excellent post!!
June 20th, 2007 at 11:11 amWhat a joke. Most of us will be driving foreign cars getting 50 mph by 2020.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:16 amHey ThinkProgess people. You might want to fix your “unsubscribe” link from your Progress Report email. It hasn’t been working for a while and I’d like to unsubscribe.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:19 amThe American automakers don’t get it. Last year when we went in the market for new cars, there wasn’t one car made by the big 3 that came close to the quality and gas mileage that we could get with Honda. Further, there was not a truck on the market as innovative as the Ridgeline, and I am averaging 21 MPG. Not great, but far better than anything else in its same class.
The market will take care of this situation. When gas gets to $5 a gallon, the Japanese Automakers will be there with high mileage vehicles. Then the Big 3 will just play catch up, just like they did in the 70’s …..anyone remember the Pinto? Sometimes I think they have Homer Simpson running their engineering Depts and we all know the car he built!
Ford’s Model T had a better MPG than the average of all Big 3’s vehicles today.
I am all for better MPG but lets face it this law overall is way too little, too late.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:21 amThe saddest thing is that GM had this in the bag with their electric car. They could have been a world leader yet they killed the program and smashed up all these little cars.
Just think of the jobs that could have afforded the auto industry, not to mention all the peripheral industries.
Alas, greed won out. Anyone wanna bet that the CEO of GM has oil stock up the wazoo?
One more wasted chance to be a world leader.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:22 amThe technology is expected to be widespread to allow a plug-in hybrid to donate energy back to the the grid (V2G) long before 2020. I hope by 2020 to be getting 100 miles per gallon.
Or even better, check out “www.teslamotors.com”. All electric technology is getting better and better. Of course, then we need to work to make our electricity production cleaner…
June 20th, 2007 at 11:24 amLevin should explain to the Big 3 why they are getting their asses handed to them. They still don’t get it.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:33 amNot to Editors: Mikulski is from MD, not MA.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:34 am#9 Kevin
People that know how the free market works would vote against it. The car manufactures know they have to adjust the way they make cars. They don’t need the government telling them too. The market has let them know what to do.
Yeah, the market has told them that people will buy foreign cars to get better gas mileage. Unlike the car manufacturers, people see poor mileage as an expensive and unnecessary feature. But, the executives don’t have much of an incentive to try to give car buyers what they want, because the executives aren’t hurt when they run the company into the ground. They float away on their golden parachutes, reaping huge bonuses, while the workers lose their jobs and the surrounding communities become impoverished.
Yup, the market tells car manufacturers what to do. They just don’t really give a rat’s ass. There are times when just letting industries and markets do their own thing really f*cks up the country. This is one of those times. The government forced car makers to build safer cars, to put seat belts and air bags in them, to make them pollute less, and lo and behold the car makers were able to do it. If they haven’t got the smarts or the decency or the independence from oil companies to improve gas mileage, they need to be forced to do it. It’s a matter of national security now.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:35 amKevin, the auto industry did not voluntarily manufacture cars with seatbelts nor install catalytic converters. The consumer wasn’t demanding them either. Research and then government action forced detroit to comply. As a result, possibly hundreds of thousands if not millions of lives have been spared, and there is far less pollution in our skies as well.
The free market doesn’t help meet people’s needs. It caters to their wants. And the need and wants of humanity often contradict one another.
Unlike the concept of the free market, the global climate change crisis isn’t some principle of economics theory. It is a scietific fact that if not dealt with agressively and immediately, will likely have catastrophic consequences for thousands of earth’s species, including us. At best, even if we survice as a species, untold milions of people may lose their lives. Untold millions more will be forced from their home lands and become refugees. Diseases will undergo explosive growth, and wars and other conflicts will become even more rampant.
The stakes are so high that to expect detroit, or even the consumer for that matter, to solve the global climate crisis, would be to invite disaster.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:39 amThe Levin amendment would hardly weaken fuel economy standards. My organization, the Alliance of Auto Manufacturers, supports increases but they should be realistic and achievable. The Pryor-Bond-Levin-Voinovich amendment would still increase standards dramatically and require automakers to ensure that 50 percent of vehicles implement advanced technologies such as hybrids, clean disel, flex fuel and hydrogen power by 2015.
The energy bill can and should pass but let’s support a practical solution that won’t affect the price and availability of vehicles.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:42 amThe nanny state in action. Gag.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:45 amI am not a paid advertiser, but CA40g can boost your fuel efficiency overnight by 10-17%.
It frees up that pesky Calcium molecule, enhancing the lubricity of the engine, as well.
Just 1 oz/ tank. It cuts harmful emissions, too.
google it at ca40g.com
You’re welcome!
June 20th, 2007 at 11:46 amThis is so ridiculous! Cars were getting 30, 40 and sometimes 50 mpg 20 years ago! We should be getting 100 mpg by now easily.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:47 amFoolish
June 20th, 2007 at 11:51 amHopefully, Webb won’t sell us out twice in one session as when he voted with the republicans to give Bush a non-timetable blank check. So much for Webb’s promises.
Let’s see if he reverts back to his republican roots again….
June 20th, 2007 at 11:54 amNothing like seeing the so c ial ists demand we stop the average American from making their own choice. I enjoy seeing you folks attempt to destroy the free market and democracy. Why can’t we the people demand the product we want without the government forcing it on us? Do you honestly think it is cool beans to force American citizens to buy what you feel they need and not allow them to have a say? Seems very un-American.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:18 pmI rented a Ford product while in Sweden in 2004. I kept track of the miles driven and the number of liters of gasoline consumed during my week in the country. When I returned the car I calculated the mileage rate and it was 62 miles per gallon (not kilometers or liters – miles and gallons). This was a FORD product produced by a company in Carl Levin’s home state.
On returning to the United States I wrote to the president of the Ford Motor Company (I have owned Ford’s since my first car in 1967) and asked how is it that his company can produce a car that gets 62 mpg in the European market but they steadfastly refuse to put that sort of car on the market here. Of course the car companies claim it would cost them too much to do so. How can that be if they are already doing it for the energy and earth-conscious people of Europe? I sent copies of my letter to the President of Ford to my Senators (John Warner and Macaca Allen) and my Congressman (Jim Moran). Not surprisingly I have never yet heard back from any of them, including Ford, on my issue.
What I dont understand and never quite will is why are American companies so afraid to produce on their own, cars that get great gas mileage. The Big 3 whines about losing market share but doesn’t do a damned thing to win back people who purchase their vehicles from companies that produce fuel efficient cars. As far as I’m concerned the Big Three can all go bankrupt. Maybe then Carl Levin will get the hint. Then again, maybe not.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:30 pmI live in Detroit and the Big 3 cry babies have never ever considered what consumers really want. Their attitude is that marketing is more important than substance. They send jobs overseas and close facilities here.
American cars are shit. I see no reason to support the Big 3 as are divesting themselves of their American production base and employees. Now they want to reneg on the promises they made to retirees.
Mr. Levin took lots of auto money and is blind to the real problem.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:33 pm“Seems very un-American.
Comment by Roger_Roger — June 20, 2007″
yes, you’ve uncovered the secret plot. once this law passes, the u.s. government will commandeer all ‘big 3′ factories and manufacturing, start mass-producing trabants, and force every american at gunpoint to trade in their car of choice for a trabant. we’ll fight them though!wolverines!!
June 20th, 2007 at 12:35 pmNothing like seeing the so c ial ists demand we stop the average American from making their own choice. I enjoy seeing you folks attempt to destroy the free market and democracy. Why can’t we the people demand the product we want without the government forcing it on us? Do you honestly think it is cool beans to force American citizens to buy what you feel they need and not allow them to have a say? Seems very un-American.
Comment by Roger_Roger — June 20, 2007 @ 12:18 pm
I have been demanding quality hash at low cost for years now. Why Roger is the government standing in the way of my wishes. Oh and my terminal friends want to kill themselves with dignity but again the damn gov is in the way. UnAmerican indeed
June 20th, 2007 at 12:48 pmFANTASTIC COMMENT!! I’m saving that whole comment for future “free” market debates. Right on the money.
June 20th, 2007 at 1:30 pmI’m a MD resident, and I went ahead and called Mikulski’s office this morning telling her that my family supports an opposition vote to the Levin ammendment.
I just don’t understand why the legislation is so forgiving…35mpg by 2020? my Honda Civic gets 36 mpg and its 2 years old.
June 20th, 2007 at 3:16 pmI spent hundreds of hours volunteering for the Webb campaign. If he votes for the Levin amendment I swear to God, I will spend the next 5 years, thousands of hours, and thousands of dollars having him removed from office. Half of his campaign was spent touting global warming. How DARE he even be on the fence.
June 20th, 2007 at 3:28 pmComment by Roger_Roger — June 20, 2007 @ 12:18 pm
——————
Yes, what an evil plot it is for the government to force the American consumer to buy a vehicle that gets higher gas mileage than the vehicles today. Damn Chevrolet to hell for selling a 400 horsepower 2007 Corvette that gets (oh the horror!) close to 30 MPG on the highway. How dare they force me to buy this beast of a car; after all, the 1984 Corvette had about half the power AND half the gas mileage figures.
Roger, dear, we’ve had CAFE standards for decades now. The government has been forcing us to buy fuel efficient cars for a long time and America is still intact.
And Kevin, dear, the market will not take care of the problem regarding gas mileage. Since the first crises of the 1970s had us lining up for gasoline, had gas stations rationing the amount of gas each day, and selling gas only to people whose license plate number ended in an odd number on one day, and an even number on the next day, the market hasn’t done squat. The newly designed full-size GM sport-utes (Tahoe, Suburban, etc.) that went on sale last year were quick to boast about getting an average MPG a bit over 20 MPG. The SUVs they replaced were selling quite well; I don’t think that the management at GM were sweating and pacing over the MPG figures of the new vehicles. The mileage figures of the new SUVs show about a 2 mpg increase over their predecessors.
As for high mileage vehicles, let’s look at what the market is buying vs. what the Japanese and American manufacturers are producing.
Honda introduced the Insight in 1999, a hybrid vehicle that was rated at 61 MPG city, 70 highway. What was America producing that competed with it? Nothing. What did America produce during the next 7 years that competed with it? Nothing.
We did get a hybrid Escape from Ford. Chrysler still has not produced a hybrid vehicle.
As for GM, we got a Chevy Silverado (and its GMC counterpart) classified as a “mild hybrid” that did nothing to increase gas mileage. It did a wonderful job, however, as a mobile electrical generator thanks to the plug-in outlets in the cargo bed.
And then we have the Saturn hybrids, the VUE and the Aura. Technologically speaking, they don’t even come close to that offered by Toyota and Honda. The Saturns use a belt-driven alternator/motor that helps boost power to the engine during acceleration. These “hybrids” cannot run on pure electricity.
Where is the hybrid Chevy Cobalt? Where is the hybrid Malibu (oh, it’s coming…next year)?
In 1998 I purchased a new Dodge Neon R/T with 150 HP and and EPA highway rating of 40 MPG. This was without exotic engineering…no hybrid engine, no direct-injection, no variable valve timing. 10 years later, Dodge has not improved one damn bit on the mileage of the Neon’s replacement, the Calibur.
Oh, and I’ve personally seen a best of 39 MPG in my Neon.
If Chevy can produce 300 and 400 HP V8 full size cars and sports cars that can get 29 MPG on the highway (see Impala and Corvette), then they should be able to produce mid-size cars with V6s that easily get 40 MPG, and small cars with 4 cylinders that get at least 45. Instead, until recently GM was still putting a V6, the 3800, that dated back to the 1960s. With the introduction of the Saturn Aura, GM was still putting a 4 speed auto transmission in the 4 cylinder model. At the very least, they should have put a 5 or 6 speed.
June 20th, 2007 at 5:26 pmUnfortunately for us, there seems to be a whole lot of backstabbing going on with the Dems we put in office. Very disappointing.
June 20th, 2007 at 6:03 pm