McCain and CAFE

January 13th, 2008 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

Hmm…

“[McCain] has a curious hostility toward America’s most important manufacturing industry, one that accounts directly and indirectly for roughly one in seven jobs nationwide. … As for CAFE, McCain is correct in stating that the industry has fought hard against higher fuel standards. As a senator whose job it is to protect American interests, McCain should join them. CAFE has cost the jobs of American autoworkers.” (Editorial, “Automakers Don’t Deserve McCain’s Disdain,” The Detroit News, 2/27/03)

In 2002, Sen. McCain Teamed With Democrat Sen. John Kerry To Propose Higher CAFE Standards. “For the latest time since losing his bid for the GOP presidential nomination two years ago, Senate Commerce ranking member John McCain, R-Ariz., has teamed up with a prominent Democrat on legislation bitterly opposed by the Bush administration. This time, the issue is higher mileage standards for automobiles–and his partner is Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass. McCain and Kerry Thursday agreed to introduce legislation that would increase fuel efficiency standards to 36 miles per gallon by 2015.” (”McCain Again Teams Up With Dems,” National Journal’s CongressDaily, 3/8/02)

Sen. McCain Voted Against Requiring That CAFE “Not Have An Adverse Impact On The Economy, Consumer Choice, And Auto Safety.” (S. 14, CQ Vote #310: Adopted 66-30: R 45-6; D 21-23; I 0-1, 7/29/03, McCain Voted Nay)

Sen. McCain Knows That His Push For Higher CAFE Standards Is The Same As Higher Taxes. “Sen. John McCain didn’t expect an enthusiastic response this morning when he touted the need for higher fuel standards to the Detroit Economic Club. No surprise, the crowd didn’t exactly embrace the idea. Asked how raising Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards was ‘different than raising taxes,’ McCain acknowledged he didn’t think his proposal would be very popular. ‘I know, I said it’s a tough issue. CAFE standards have to be improved. There’s too much pollution in the environment, there’s too much dependency on foreign oil and we’re going to have to take a number of steps,’ McCain told the crowd. He finished his answer to dead silence.” (Amy Schatz, “McCain Urges Higher CAFE Standards – In Motor City,” The Wall Street Journal’s Washington Wire, http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire, Posted 10/9/07)

General Motors Predicted The McCain-Kerry CAFE Plan Could Cost As Many As 100,000 Jobs. “Major automakers characterize the Kerry-McCain plan as a reckless attempt to legislate technology that could curtail sales of their most profitable SUVs and pickups. General Motors Corp. says that as many as 100,000 jobs would be lost.” (Jeff Plungis, “Automakers Support Alternate CAFE Proposal,” The Detroit News, 3/11/02)

McCain’s Support Of Higher CAFE Standards Will Cost The Auto Industry Billions And Will Impact Jobs. “McCain, together with Democrat John Kerry, were initial co-sponsors of the 35 mpg (so-called CAFE) mandate that just passed Congress — legislation that economists predict will cost the domestic auto industry $85 billion over a decade and impact thousands of jobs.” (Henry Payne, Op-Ed, “Taxing Michigan,” National Review, 1/11/08)

“AUTOMAKERS DON’T DESERVE MCCAIN’S DISDAIN”
Sen. McCain’s Push For Higher CAFE Standards
Reveals A “Curious Hostility” Toward Detroit

“[McCain] has a curious hostility toward America’s most important manufacturing industry, one that accounts directly and indirectly for roughly one in seven jobs nationwide. … As for CAFE, McCain is correct in stating that the industry has fought hard against higher fuel standards. As a senator whose job it is to protect American interests, McCain should join them. CAFE has cost the jobs of American autoworkers.” (Editorial, “Automakers Don’t Deserve McCain’s Disdain,” The Detroit News, 2/27/03)

Sen. McCain Voted Against Requiring That CAFE Standards Be Economically Feasible. (H.R. 6, CQ Vote #156: Adopted 64-31: R 46-7; D 18-23; I 0-1, 6/23/05, McCain Voted Nay)

Sen. McCain Voted Against Requiring That CAFE “Not Have An Adverse Impact On The Economy, Consumer Choice, And Auto Safety.” (S. 14, CQ Vote #310: Adopted 66-30: R 45-6; D 21-23; I 0-1, 7/29/03, McCain Voted Nay)

Sen. McCain Voted In Favor Of Higher CAFE Standards For Pickup Trucks. (S. 517, CQ Vote #48: Adopted 56-44: R 40-9; D 16-34: I 0-1, 3/13/02, McCain Voted Nay)

Sen. McCain Knows That His Push For Higher CAFE Standards Is The Same As Higher Taxes. “Sen. John McCain didn’t expect an enthusiastic response this morning when he touted the need for higher fuel standards to the Detroit Economic Club. No surprise, the crowd didn’t exactly embrace the idea. Asked how raising Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards was ‘different than raising taxes,’ McCain acknowledged he didn’t think his proposal would be very popular. ‘I know, I said it’s a tough issue. CAFE standards have to be improved. There’s too much pollution in the environment, there’s too much dependency on foreign oil and we’re going to have to take a number of steps,’ McCain told the crowd. He finished his answer to dead silence.” (Amy Schatz, “McCain Urges Higher CAFE Standards – In Motor City,” The Wall Street Journal’s Washington Wire, http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire, Posted 10/9/07)

The Detroit News: “CAFE Has Cost The Jobs Of American Autoworkers.” (Editorial, “Automakers Don’t Deserve McCain’s Disdain,” The Detroit News, 2/27/03)

General Motors Predicted The McCain-Kerry CAFE Plan Could Cost As Many As 100,000 Jobs. “Major automakers characterize the Kerry-McCain plan as a reckless attempt to legislate technology that could curtail sales of their most profitable SUVs and pickups. General Motors Corp. says that as many as 100,000 jobs would be lost.” (Jeff Plungis, “Automakers Support Alternate CAFE Proposal,” The Detroit News, 3/11/02)

McCain’s Support Of Higher CAFE Standards Will Cost The Auto Industry Billions And Will Impact Jobs. “McCain, together with Democrat John Kerry, were initial co-sponsors of the 35 mpg (so-called CAFE) mandate that just passed Congress — legislation that economists predict will cost the domestic auto industry $85 billion over a decade and impact thousands of jobs.” (Henry Payne, Op-Ed, “Taxing Michigan,” National Review, 1/11/08)

McCain “Blasted” The Automotive Industry For Resisting Changes. “McCain blasted the automakers for resisting the changes. ‘The auto industry has resisted every single change in safety and efficiency for over 40 years,’ he said. ‘At one time they were against seat belts. At one time they were against air bags.’” (Deirdre Shesgreen, “Senate Applies Brakes To Plan Calling For Higher Fuel Efficiency Standards,” St. Louis Post Dispatch, 3/14/02)

The Detroit News: McCain Treated Automakers Like “They Were A Bunch Of Tobacco Executives.” “John McCain opened Senate hearings on the safety of sports-utility vehicles (SUVs) by treating the nation’s automakers as if they were a bunch of tobacco executives.” (Editorial, “Automakers Don’t Deserve McCain’s Disdain,” The Detroit News, 2/27/03)

Team Romney did the research - was e-mailed to me, and I’m sure many others received the same research briefing - so you have to realize that, but one wonders what Michigan Republicans think about his record on CAFE standards, doesn’t one?

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  1. Rudi666
    January 13th, 2008 at 06:24
    Reply | Quote | #1

    Campaigning in Michigan Romney panders and says he will bring back auto jobs. Tell that to Pittsburg steelworkers who heard pandering in the same vain.

    McCain promises retraining and education. Automation Alley and new Google jobs in Ann Arbor are the future, not non-existant jobs that Mittter tell Michigan he will return to the state.

    This comment has been edited by MvdG: Rudi if you’re not willing to actually read a post don’t bother to comment. If you do this again you’ll be banned.

  2. ChrisWWW
    January 13th, 2008 at 08:34
    Reply | Quote | #2

    Funny thing, if American cars had better fuel efficiency, perhaps they wouldn’t be in such bad shape vs. their Japanese counterparts in this new $3+ gallon of gas world. I feel bad for the autoworkers, but the actual people who own and run these companies are idiots of the first degree. Without government intervention, they would not be concerned about the environment or safety.

  3. Rudi666
    January 13th, 2008 at 17:08
    Reply | Quote | #3

    ChrisWWW Don’t just blame the auto executives, how many soccer moms drive SUV’s to the mall.  The consumer is also guilty of buying these huge trucks and demanding DVD players for the kids in the back seats.Truck were exempt from CAFE because they were once considered for use on farms and such(Work trucks).

    DETROIT — The full-size pickup Toyota Tundra is Motor Trend’s 2008 truck of the year, the magazine announced Tuesday.

    http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/article.aspx?articleID=071219_5_E3_spanc40612

    Motor Trend’s editors said the Tundra is a match for Detroit rivals the Ford F-150, Chevrolet Silverado and Dodge Ram in dimensions and performance. The Silverado won the award a year ago.

    I wonder how many Japanese and German comsumers drive Suburbans or Tundras? While in Europe in 2001 I saw the Smart car and MiniCooper, both the US executives and consumer won’t buy these products.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.


Warning: is_writable() [function.is-writable]: open_basedir restriction in effect. File(error_log) is not within the allowed path(s): (/home/p6525pol:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php:/tmp) in /home/p6525pol/public_html/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 500