By the way, here is the letter I just sent to Grassley in its entirety. I had written a longer and better one, but I forgot to select a 'prefix' button in the name field when I submitted the form, so I got an error message and lost the whole letter when I hit 'back.' Arghh! Why is it that when your computer loses something, whatever you write to replace it never seems quite as good as the stuff you can't quite remember?

------------------------------
Dear Senator Grassley,

I'm writing to support your plan to pass legislation addressing the tax credit inconsistency that allows small businesses to get much larger tax benefits for buying SUVs than for hybrid cars, which is an irresponsible, unbalanced incentive that needs to be reversed. A policy that gives incentives for investing in SUVs in this unbalanced way is very unfortunate in terms of its far-reaching effects on the environment, American dependence on foreign oil, and overall energy consumption, so I am very glad to see that someone in Congress has recognized the problem and is going to take steps to correct it.

I hope that you are able to get the support you need to pass a law that will help protect our environment and take a step in the right direction on energy policy. Evening out this set of tax incentives will be a good tax policy change. Thank you for your leadership on this issue, and for any efforts to make our tax policy more consistent and environmentally friendly in terms of our long term energy goals.

 

I'm with Delta, excellent advice, Leah.

 

Agreed, and I did just that.

 

Awww, thanks, you guys!

 

Well Im not a tree hugger, but do care about the enviroment. I am a conservative Republican, and I agree with Gumby's and partialy with some of leah's Statement..
The offering tax benefits for buying SUVs than for hybrid cars is well stupid..

When have we had a coherent energy policy? We've only had lessons (not learned) since the Oil Embargo days in the early 1970's to figure this out. I don't think either political party, nor any past or present President can be blameless here.

Our country has been in a downward spiral since the 70's and would take a lot to recover.. We are losing our civil rights all the time one here, one there, this has been happening when both parties are in control of the office.. I wont go into the religion statment as there are plenty of relgious people on this board who others may view as nuts.. Briefly speaking of rights example, prayer in school is concidered a violation of church & state, but as long as theres an Fcat test they will continue to pray silently...
There are several issues that I do not agree with that the past president has inacted and several issues the present president has also inacted.

I do not agree with the non religious NUTS that want to remove In God we trust[I] either....

Politics can be such a nasty can of worms !!

 

I just watched Futurerama's episode on about global warming. Where the original creator of the robots sacraface fuel efficency for more power. They claim it won't pass emissions test but by slapping a "sport utlity robot" label on them they believed it was ok. Now the robots are the blame for the Earth's doom.

I thought I bought it up because it was funny and meaningful

 

My prediction is that the tax credits for hybrids will disappear once the option-surcharge drops below $2,000. I'm sure that the factors of Economies of Scale and more efficient battery chemistry will allow that to happen. At that point, the auto industry basically won't need the government's help to sell these cars.

Or to put it another way: At this point, everybody *I* know wants to buy a hybrid; they just can't afford one.

The government should have *never* gotten into the business of subsidizing land yachts that get single-digit FE. These vehicles should have an environmental impact surcharge instead.

 

The light truck CAFE and safety standards set in the 1970's need to be set closer to passenger car standards. The cutoff should go past 8,500 pounds. If this had been done in the early 1990's, 6000-pound vehicles used as commuters would be rare.

 

Many people I know want to buy hybrids, too, but whether or not they can actually afford one, there's a public perception that they can't. Particularly my friends in public interest jobs, or people who are teachers, students, etc- they don't make much money right now and they're the ones who are most interested in the technology. (no one else at my law firm has a hybrid, although there's no question they could afford them).

Maybe it's partly just my perspective, being young, but I think that it's a little bit of an age thing. Lots of young people want to be cutting edge, and hybrids do have that image, but it's the young people who aren't as financially well-off and can't afford the extra up-front costs even knowing that it will save money in the long run. That's why the tax incentives are so important- it's not just about actually being affordable, it's about a public perception of affordability and a faster (same year, at least) recouping of the extra investment.

As hybrid advocates, we want people to be able to afford hybrids, yes, but we also want the mainstream consumer to include hybrids in their initial consideration when they start to think about buying a vehicle, because that part comes first. Well-publicized government initiatives that say, 'we think that buying hybrids is so important that we're going to subsidize them and make them cheaper for you' have to go hand-in-hand with ads that say, 'you can save money on gas down the road.' That's why I think I disagree with Ashengray when he says that he thinks the tax incentives will disappear when the surcharge drops. I think that it would be better to have it decrease in amount but remain as a statement of public policy, that Congress and state governments will realize this, and that it will be popular enough to stick around longer. Although governments aren't logical, they can be swayed by popular opinion, and popular opinion is going our way.

 

Leah, I applauding your posts. I've seen the following stated a couple of times on this site, but I think it bears repeating:

Hybrid should be thought of as an option on a car, just like any other option. I know that's a bit of a stretch with a Prius, but did you ever take a good look at a Matrix in a side-by-sde with a Prius? Not all that much difference. Anyway, if hybrid were viewed as an option, I don't think people would be so ignorant of it (I can't believe some of the questions I get when people see me driving a hybrid - I would have though the "do you have to plug it in" days would be long over with, but apparently not). Maybe people would even clamor for it more if it were the latest chic option. And, we wouldn't have Consumer Reports spreading falsehood about what a bad idea it is to choose the hybrid option. When was the last time you saw them tell us what a lousy deal leather heated seats or navigation was?

Okay, off my soapbox, but wanted you to know, Leah, that I am from Iowa and I did write Grassley. Thanks for the tip and the link. It's good to know my letter got multiplied by 100. Where can you get a deal like that?