According to the Wall Street Journal, the government's "Car Allowance Rebate System" ("cash for clunkers") program, which reimburses new car buyers up to $4500 toward the cost of a new fuel-efficient vehicle if the buyer trades in their old vehicle as part of the purchase arrangement, is in trouble:
A White House official said, "We are working tonight to assess the situation facing what is obviously an incredibly popular program. Auto dealers and consumers should have confidence that all valid [cash-for-clunker] transactions that have taken place to-date will be honored."Lawmakers are discussing with White House officials where to find funding -- including possibly tapping the government's Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, a congressional aide said.
The clunkers program, which offers rebates of up to $4,500 to consumers who trade in old vehicles and buy new, more fuel-efficient models, began July 24 and sparked a surge in car sales.
"It was an absolute success," said Michael J. Jackson, chief executive of AutoNation Inc., the U.S.'s largest chain of auto dealerships. "There's a very compelling case the government should put more money into it. It's a great stimulus to the economy."
Congress had expected the $1 billion set aside for the rebates to last several months and set up the program to expire Nov. 1.
Obviously this was stunning to Washington DC -- a "stimulus" program that actually worked, and that actually required money to be paid out to the private sector, all before 2010!
But the program turned out to be as confusing as it was popular. Rebates were made retroactive to July 1, and many car dealers began offering the $4500 credit earlier than last Friday. But the government has been slow to process dealer reimbursements, leaving them strapped for cash. Also, new EPA fuel economy ratings made 78 models that qualified for the rebates last Friday suddenly ineligible for the program this week. (At the same time, 86 more models became eligible for the program.)
Let's see ... confusion, slow reimbursements from the government, last-minute eligibility rules changes ... nah, that would never happpen with government health care programs.



Comments (33)
And why wouldn't it be popu... (Below threshold)1. Posted by J.R. | July 31, 2009 10:10 AM | Score: 11 (11 votes cast)
And why wouldn't it be popular. It's like someone off the street giving you a check for $4500 to go buy a new car! It's ridiculous given the dismal fiscal condition of our government. This is a program that never should have come to fruition.
1. Posted by J.R. | July 31, 2009 10:10 AM |
Score: 11 (11 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 10:10
2. Posted by P. Bunyan | July 31, 2009 10:14 AM | Score: 12 (14 votes cast)
A preview of Obamacare.
2. Posted by P. Bunyan | July 31, 2009 10:14 AM |
Score: 12 (14 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 10:14
3. Posted by Flu-Bird | July 31, 2009 10:39 AM | Score: 8 (12 votes cast)
How about instead trading in this entire bunch of no good tax and spend liberals on real bunch of those who pot the citizens first instead of their own personal wacky ideas
3. Posted by Flu-Bird | July 31, 2009 10:39 AM |
Score: 8 (12 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 10:39
4. Posted by The Obvious One | July 31, 2009 10:46 AM | Score: -13 (15 votes cast)
The program was wildly successful...
damn! Don't you hate it when that happens?
Obviously, in light of today's news that the recession is over the need to continue this program is in question.
4. Posted by The Obvious One | July 31, 2009 10:46 AM |
Score: -13 (15 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 10:46
5. Posted by J.R. | July 31, 2009 10:50 AM | Score: 11 (11 votes cast)
The program was wildly successful...
damn! Don't you hate it when that happens?
Successful at doing what? I think you meant to say it was wildly popular, which does not make it a success. I don't see how the means justify the ends with this program so I question you categorizing it as successfull.
5. Posted by J.R. | July 31, 2009 10:50 AM |
Score: 11 (11 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 10:50
6. Posted by Adrian Browne | July 31, 2009 10:57 AM | Score: -15 (17 votes cast)
Healthcare reform info:
http://www.healthreform.gov/
http://www.familiesusa.org/
http://healthreform.kff.org/
6. Posted by Adrian Browne | July 31, 2009 10:57 AM |
Score: -15 (17 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 10:57
7. Posted by The Obvious One | July 31, 2009 11:05 AM | Score: -16 (18 votes cast)
""It was an absolute success," said Michael J. Jackson, chief executive of AutoNation Inc., the U.S.'s largest chain of auto dealerships."
It sold cars.
That's what it was designed to do.
Are you telling me that Republicans, after 8 years of WH failures, can't recognize a successful government program when they see it?
7. Posted by The Obvious One | July 31, 2009 11:05 AM |
Score: -16 (18 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 11:05
8. Posted by HughS | July 31, 2009 11:19 AM | Score: 10 (10 votes cast)
Mike
Obviously the troll didn't pick up on your point as to why it was popular or the efficacy of returning money directly to the private sector.
8. Posted by HughS | July 31, 2009 11:19 AM |
Score: 10 (10 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 11:19
9. Posted by epador | July 31, 2009 11:34 AM | Score: 13 (13 votes cast)
TOO and Adrian:
The point is that this relatively modest program RAN OUT OF MONEY just a few months into operation. They are essentially OUT OF BUSINESS. But go ahead and look at the shiny objects, divert attention to the NEXT big program that is destined to run out of money (maybe before it begins) and pat yourselves on your backs for how smart and right (I mean left) you are.
9. Posted by epador | July 31, 2009 11:34 AM |
Score: 13 (13 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 11:34
10. Posted by Adrian Browne | July 31, 2009 11:46 AM | Score: -14 (16 votes cast)
Good thing our Revolutionary forefathers kept fighting the modest battles even though they RAN OUT OF MONEY.
10. Posted by Adrian Browne | July 31, 2009 11:46 AM |
Score: -14 (16 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 11:46
11. Posted by Les Nessman | July 31, 2009 11:52 AM | Score: 13 (13 votes cast)
" It sold cars.
That's what it was designed to do. "
Yep, and damn the costs, full speed ahead.
The country's in the very best of hands.
Tens of thousands of perfectly good, solid cars sent to the scrapyard along with the clunkers. I know a lot of people around here who are struggling to get by and a good $4500 car would help them. But they don't have a chance to buy these used cars because they are now scrapped.
'reduce, reuse, recycle' the 'green' slogan says. So what happened to 'reuse'?
11. Posted by Les Nessman | July 31, 2009 11:52 AM |
Score: 13 (13 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 11:52
12. Posted by GarandFan | July 31, 2009 12:07 PM | Score: 9 (11 votes cast)
The program did sell cars. For a brief period. Now what? More money so the 'car sales' can continue? If so, for how long? (Gotta keep that gravy train coming). Any followup being done? Not to rain on the liberal parade, but the thrust had also been to get rid of inefficient (by today's standards) cars. What kind of cars are being turned in? Makes, models and years please. DEFAULTS! Remember Barney Frank wanting all those new homeowners....the one's who later could not afford the homes they purchased? How many "new" car owners will default several months down the road on that neat $24K new car. Default because they were driving an old clunker because they could not afford a new car to begin with. Even with a $4.5k handout from the government.
What's happening to the clunkers? Dealers are supposed to destroy the engine and crush the cars. Well dealers don't do that. Recyclers do. Are they getting cars for 'free' from the dealers? They have initial costs before they sell the car as scrap metal. They have to pull all the fluids, and all the 'fluff' (upholstery, dashboards, plastic, etc some of which requires special hazmat handling). Any recycle facility will tell you that their main income derives from the selling of usable parts, scrap metal prices (which are currently down) are secondary. If they are required TO CRUSH everything, will they make their costs. Because if they don't, THEY WON'T CRUSH 'EM. Or will Barry just decide this is another business the government needs to get into?
Yeah, libs, "sounds like a success", but I prefer a followup to INSURE the program met stated goals. REALITY. So don't pat your god Barry on the back quite yet.
12. Posted by GarandFan | July 31, 2009 12:07 PM |
Score: 9 (11 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 12:07
13. Posted by Oh No You Don't | July 31, 2009 12:08 PM | Score: -12 (16 votes cast)
"Obviously the troll didn't pick up on your point as to why it was popular or the efficacy of returning money directly to the private sector."
Wow, you guys are losing it - big time.
Reducing the cost of the car to the consumer by $4500 IS putting money directly in the hands of the private sector. It's handing the car buyer a $4500 check to use as a down payment on the car.
13. Posted by Oh No You Don't | July 31, 2009 12:08 PM |
Score: -12 (16 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 12:08
14. Posted by Oh No You Don't | July 31, 2009 12:10 PM | Score: -12 (16 votes cast)
"The program did sell cars. For a brief period. Now what?"
MORE. There's talk of adding another $2 billion.
It's working - which will make Republicans hate it even more.
14. Posted by Oh No You Don't | July 31, 2009 12:10 PM |
Score: -12 (16 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 12:10
15. Posted by Les Nessman | July 31, 2009 12:20 PM | Score: 10 (12 votes cast)
" Reducing the cost of the car to the consumer by $4500 IS putting money directly in the hands of the private sector. It's handing the car buyer a $4500 check to use as a down payment on the car. "
.
" MORE. There's talk of adding another $2 billion. "
Wow. Now we've moved on to just blatant crowing about 'gimme gimme gimme', said out loud and proud.
More welfare. Take from the taxpayer and give to someone else. More corporations and now more citizens on the public tit.
Keep talking. Tell us more.
15. Posted by Les Nessman | July 31, 2009 12:20 PM |
Score: 10 (12 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 12:20
16. Posted by Texan99 | July 31, 2009 12:27 PM | Score: 11 (11 votes cast)
"Let's see ... confusion, slow reimbursements from the government, last-minute eligibility rules changes ... nah, that would never happpen with government health care programs."
As Glenn Reynolds remarked, "Not to worry. I'm sure they'll do a better job with your prostate."
16. Posted by Texan99 | July 31, 2009 12:27 PM |
Score: 11 (11 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 12:27
17. Posted by TOhio | July 31, 2009 12:35 PM | Score: 11 (11 votes cast)
Bottom line - The government can't even administer a program that simply requires turning in an old car for money to buy a new one.
Their projections were wrong. They didn't know basic business forecasting and contingency planning. The government can't run anything properly.
This is an omen folks. Cash for Clunkers collapsing is a precursor to what will happen to health care if we let Obama-Emmanuel-Pelosi-Reid and their minions take control of it.
17. Posted by TOhio | July 31, 2009 12:35 PM |
Score: 11 (11 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 12:35
18. Posted by Oyster | July 31, 2009 12:40 PM | Score: 7 (9 votes cast)
"Lawmakers are discussing with White House officials where to find funding -- including possibly tapping the government's Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, a congressional aide said."
I wondered who the government was going to bail out next with TARP money. I didn't know it would be the government.
I'd like to know who is buying these cars and what cars they're buying.
18. Posted by Oyster | July 31, 2009 12:40 PM |
Score: 7 (9 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 12:40
19. Posted by WildWillie | July 31, 2009 1:13 PM | Score: 7 (11 votes cast)
I love how the lefties think this money is "free".
How can the recession be over? 4 months ago, Obama said it will take a long time to get out of it. He wouldn't have lied to take advantage of the taxpayers would he? ww
19. Posted by WildWillie | July 31, 2009 1:13 PM |
Score: 7 (11 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 13:13
20. Posted by The Obvious One | July 31, 2009 1:46 PM | Score: -10 (14 votes cast)
Interesting seeing you conservatives with your fingers in their ears "LA LA LA-LA LA - It's not working, It's not working - La La La"
Do you guys sit in a circle while you comment or is this group "freeform"?
It's so successful they are thinking of expanding it. How many Republicans will vote against the expansion?
20. Posted by The Obvious One | July 31, 2009 1:46 PM |
Score: -10 (14 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 13:46
21. Posted by Stan25 | July 31, 2009 1:49 PM | Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
A $4500 tax cut would be a helluva lot better. No regulations on how to spend it and what on. That would do more for the economy than a stupid "Charlie Foxtrot" that Government Motors and Chrysler are doing at the behest of "Walks On Water" and his minions.
21. Posted by Stan25 | July 31, 2009 1:49 PM |
Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 13:49
22. Posted by Wayne | July 31, 2009 1:51 PM | Score: 9 (9 votes cast)
Next program will be giving home buyers $20,000 "free" money to buy houses. I bet that fund will quickly be "successful" \exhausted quickly as well. How about the government with its "free money" pay for 10% of a gas purchase? Again I bet that fund will quickly be "successful" \exhausted quickly as well. Excuse me for being derogatory but how can anyone be that stupid.
The end result is the government is forcing taxpayers to give their money away.
22. Posted by Wayne | July 31, 2009 1:51 PM |
Score: 9 (9 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 13:51
23. Posted by J.R. | July 31, 2009 2:14 PM | Score: 10 (10 votes cast)
What's another 2 billion when our deficit is already in the trillions. Who cares, we'll just print more money right?
I love how people are calling this a success. As if no one would want $4500 with no strings attached to buy a new car. And for those calling this a success, what was achieved? What is the desired goal here and is it worth it and why?
23. Posted by J.R. | July 31, 2009 2:14 PM |
Score: 10 (10 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 14:14
24. Posted by 914_ The Obvious Question! | July 31, 2009 2:21 PM | Score: 6 (8 votes cast)
Where My 4500?
24. Posted by 914_ The Obvious Question! | July 31, 2009 2:21 PM |
Score: 6 (8 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 14:21
25. Posted by JLawson | July 31, 2009 2:46 PM | Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
TOo - Where do you think that $4500 per car is coming from?
Here's a hint - how much did YOU pay in income tax last year? I figure between the spouse and I, we paid for 4 cars.
Think I'll get a 'thank you' note from the buyers?
25. Posted by JLawson | July 31, 2009 2:46 PM |
Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 14:46
26. Posted by ODA315 | July 31, 2009 2:56 PM | Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
Thanks Lawson
26. Posted by ODA315 | July 31, 2009 2:56 PM |
Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 14:56
27. Posted by 914_62 not quite as obvious | July 31, 2009 3:11 PM | Score: 6 (8 votes cast)
"Cash for clunkers stalls"
A metaphor for the Obama administration thus far.
27. Posted by 914_62 not quite as obvious | July 31, 2009 3:11 PM |
Score: 6 (8 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 15:11
28. Posted by Upset Old Guy | July 31, 2009 3:38 PM | Score: 5 (7 votes cast)
Oblivious One,
The recession is not over, and I am sorry to have to say that. I'm not sorry, however, to get to inform you. The U.S. economy is still contracting, -1% in the just released report.
In case you can't understand a simple number try this here is a simple question for you in the form of a grade school question. You're hemorrhaging, bleeding out. Your blood loss is at the rate of 10% of your total blood volume (at the start of the hemorrhage event) per minute. Suddenly your blood loss slows to the rate of 5% per minute. Are you still bleeding to death?
If you want to take your time and think it over for a while that's fine with me.
28. Posted by Upset Old Guy | July 31, 2009 3:38 PM |
Score: 5 (7 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 15:38
29. Posted by JLawson | July 31, 2009 5:02 PM | Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
You're welcome, ODA315. Hope you don't mind me saying this, but I'd rather have had the $4500 myself than help pay for your new ride... ;)
29. Posted by JLawson | July 31, 2009 5:02 PM |
Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 17:02
30. Posted by epador | July 31, 2009 6:06 PM | Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
I have a better idea, pay me to NOT DRIVE my clunker. (Hey, we still pay farmers not to grow certain crops, right?) I'll keep it locked in the garage for emergencies. I promise.
30. Posted by epador | July 31, 2009 6:06 PM |
Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 18:06
31. Posted by JLawson | July 31, 2009 8:30 PM | Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
"Where My 4500?
914_ The Obvious Question - check with The Oblivious One. Tell him you're owed, I'm sure he'll cough it right up.
31. Posted by JLawson | July 31, 2009 8:30 PM |
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 20:30
32. Posted by GarandFan | July 31, 2009 8:45 PM | Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Interesting seeing you conservatives with your fingers in their ears "LA LA LA-LA LA - It's not working, It's not working - La La La"
It's so successful they are thinking of expanding it. How many Republicans will vote against the expansion?
Hey Obvious One, is your head so far up your anal cavity that you can't see the problem? How "old" are the "old" cars? Yeah, you see pictures of junkers in the MSM. What are dealers seeing? And in 6 months, we find out the GREEDY dealers were selling to people who could not afford a new car, what then?
Will you be willing to pull your head out of your ass then? Or will you still be calling this a 'success'?
If the government is going to throw out another 2 billion, I'D SUGGEST THE STUPID BASTARDS CRUNCH THE NUMBERS ON THE 1ST BILLION. Awful hard to wash dried egg off your face while you're eating crow.
32. Posted by GarandFan | July 31, 2009 8:45 PM |
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 20:45
33. Posted by 914_62 | July 31, 2009 10:16 PM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Wheres My 4500 Oblivious One?? I'll expect a cashiers check by no later then 3pm Tuesday!
33. Posted by 914_62 | July 31, 2009 10:16 PM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2009 22:16