Thanks to Obama regs, 7 million lower income consumers will be cut out of the car market

posted at 3:06 pm on April 13, 2012 by Tina Korbe

Last summer, the Obama administration announced new regulations to require car manufacturers to increase the fuel efficiency of passenger vehicles and light trucks. New research reveals that they’ll price 7 million consumers out of the car market. The Washington Examiner’s Conn Carroll reports:

The Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) regulations that President Obama announced last summer will make it impossible for 7 million lower income consumers to buy a new car according to a National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA) study released today.

Obama’s proposed CAFE standards, which will begin taking effect in 2017, raise minimum average vehicle fleet fuel efficiency to 54.5 mpg by 2025. The Environmental Protection Agency and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimate that this regulation will raise the average price of passenger cars and light trucks by $3,000.

“The unintended consequences of the proposed fuel economy increases are clear,” NADA Used Car Guide analyst David Wagner said. “If the price of a vehicle goes up by the government estimate of almost $3,000, millions of people will no longer be able to finance a new vehicle.”

Unlike Hilary Rosen’s comments or even the Paul Ryan budget, these regulations aren’t just up for discussion and debate: They’ll take effect in 2017 unless a future administration rolls them back. Electoral politics typically revolve around the “sexiest” of subjects, but it’s important to ground our discussions in actual developments. While “the big ideas” that determine elections are undeniably important, we can’t allow the election to provide cover for the president on “little” policies like this one.

The more the American people realize the actual results of the Obama presidency not just in terms of high unemployment, but also in terms of its day-to-day effects on the lives of even those Americans who haven’t felt the sting of job loss, the more they’ll be unable to be fooled by his rhetoric. Look at it this way: You might not be unemployed and you might not be one of the 7 million consumers who won’t be able to buy a car after 2017, but, if you decide to buy a new car in the future, you’ll still have to pay about $3,000 more for it than you would have if Obama had never been president. It’s one fact among many, but they all add up.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

But he’s giving people who make over $170,000, $10,000 more to buy a car!

lorien1973 on April 13, 2012 at 3:08 PM
Isn’t that reVOLTing?

Bitter Clinger on April 13, 2012 at 3:12 PM

…beat me B C!
Taking from the poor to give to the rich! …Hood Robin!

KOOLAID2 on April 13, 2012 at 4:37 PM

No, those are only good for buying junk food, steaks and lottery tickets.

Logus on April 13, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Apparently not. There was a report the other day about a criminal in Massachusetts who paid for his bail bond using his EBT card.

Our tax dollars at work. Doesn’t it make you feel good?

AZCoyote on April 13, 2012 at 4:38 PM

But the Obamas understand the average American better than the Romneys-that’s the important thing.

I’m sure we’ll all be happier walking and taking public transportation knowing that the President and his wife empathize as they take their individual private jets to their identical vacation destination a few hours apart. Oh, and don’t forget the private jet for the dog.

talkingpoints on April 13, 2012 at 4:26 PM

I only count two planes there.

slickwillie2001 on April 13, 2012 at 4:38 PM

Here’s an excerpt from my comment yesterday on Chu & sea level:

[{anti-}Energy Secretary] Chu said he’d like gas at a European $9 a gallon, but that’s an understatement for sure, as we know Chu would relish $15 or $20 a gallon. And Chu would also get ecstatic over electricity at a $2 a kilowatt hour (vs. apx 10 cents per KW hour now).

$2 per KWhour?? and $20 gas? Then, as the leftists dream, we are headed back to the stone age, because at these prices a lot of people just wouldn’t bother having electricity at all, or a car. Of course, the economy would tank, incomes shriveling, jobs vanishing by the scores of millions, industrial production cratering.

Civilization doomed, no exaggeration. No change in climate, though. A hungry dirty diseased violent world. These people like Chu are criminal.

anotherJoe on April 13, 2012 at 4:38 PM

Oh, and your RX-7/4000 went up against the likes of the 1986 Subaru GL (66 hp) and the 1980 Volkswagen Dasher diesel (44 hp, could barely hit 60 mph in 19 seconds, though it did gett nearly 45 mpg on the highway as long as it was summer and one wasn’t trying to climb hills).

Steve Eggleston on April 13, 2012 at 4:16 PM

When I was 16 I had a 1983 Renault Alliance with 64 hp. When I was 17, I had 1969 GTO with 475 hp and 525 lb ft of torque.

besser tot als rot on April 13, 2012 at 4:40 PM

When I was 16 I had a 1983 Renault Alliance with 64 hp. When I was 17, I had 1969 GTO with 475 hp and 525 lb ft of torque.

besser tot als rot on April 13, 2012 at 4:40 PM

At least you traded up before the Alliance fell apart on you (or did it fall apart on you in the year you had it?)

Steve Eggleston on April 13, 2012 at 4:43 PM

Got nearly 50 mpg in the Renault, and … much, much worse in the GTO. But I entered the free market and willingly paid the extra $ for gas in the GTO. If gas prices were too high, I might not have. But that’s the way it should be. Not some petty tyrant telling me what car I should drive.

besser tot als rot on April 13, 2012 at 4:44 PM

This is all part of the plan. Everyone should be using mass transit anyway – according to the lib/Dems us mere peons have no need for our own cars anyway.

dentarthurdent on April 13, 2012 at 4:44 PM

At least you traded up before the Alliance fell apart on you (or did it fall apart on you in the year you had it?)

Steve Eggleston on April 13, 2012 at 4:43 PM

It nearly fell apart. But I’m hard on cars. Blew up the GTO engine twice and then bought a 73 Chevy 3/4 ton with a 454 to tow the broken down GTO and blew the engine up on that while towing the GTO. Later drove that truck cross-county @ 7 mpg.

besser tot als rot on April 13, 2012 at 4:48 PM

Which markets are those, again? It’s certainly not the US market.

Steve Eggleston on April 13, 2012 at 4:37 PM

DING DING DING!!!

We have a winner.

Obama wants us us to be like Europe in EVERY way.

portlandon on April 13, 2012 at 4:48 PM

Well, since I’m priced out of the market for new cars, I’ve been buying some of those clunkers that haven’t wound-up in the scrapyard. I did however, come up with a plan. You see, the government retired the F-14 when the F-18′s completely replaced them. Assuming I could even find one (good luck, they were cut-up with hydraulic scissors… something about the AIM-54 missile being the longest reaching AAM in existance), I could possibly buy one for less that what the government originally paid for it. I would be riding on two Pratt and Whitney F401-400 turbofans generating 28,090 lbs of thrust each, and could fly faster than Air Force One (s&ck-it, Obama).

However there are a few other minor wrinkles in my evil plan… fuel just for starters.

Turtle317 on April 13, 2012 at 4:52 PM

besser tot als rot on April 13, 2012 at 4:48 PM

Check the oil level occasionally for flip sake.

NotCoach on April 13, 2012 at 4:52 PM

They’ll take effect in 2017 unless a future administration rolls them back.

And it will.

GarandFan on April 13, 2012 at 5:17 PM

I suppose it’s already been said but of course, this also makes used cars priced higher, as well as all used equipment in general that ‘drives’.
Farm vehicles are now going under the CAFE rules.
This will make my crappy tractors worth more, but if I need to buy a used crappy tractor it will now cost me more.
And of course rising metal prices have caused the price of everything made of metal to rise.
Thanks Obama, you Eff-weed.

Badger40 on April 13, 2012 at 5:17 PM

Turtle317 on April 13, 2012 at 4:52 PM

Not as screwy a plan as you might think. I once did Internet research for a ‘net friend who said he had enough pieces for a working F-16.

He had me look up every conceivable piece of data that was publicly accessible on the plane and even figure theoretical flight plans…that was an interesting couple months.

MelonCollie on April 13, 2012 at 5:19 PM

But…. but… CASH FOR CLUNKERS!!!!

UltimateBob on April 13, 2012 at 3:07 PM

A lot of perfectly good vehicles were scrapped as a result of that program. Used vehicle prices are still high because of it.

bw222 on April 13, 2012 at 3:33 PM

And I’m sure I’m not the only person who is still P.O.’d about good used vehicles with good used engines being deliberately destroyed by putting sand in them, all to satisfy the Cash for Clunkers requirement. Our cars, a 1998 manual-shift Toyota and a 2001 Subaru, are still holding up for the most part, but we’ll be looking for other cars probably within the next two years, and we’ll be going for late-model used. If we can find suitable replacements, that is. I’m sure that’s going to become more and more difficult, if it isn’t already.

As for trying to herd everyone onto mass transit, I can say that in my area of western PA, that’s going to be even more of a laugh than it is now. The bus system, such as it is, has been running in the red for decades. The Transit Authority has been crying poor for equally as long, and there are stories every six months or so about how they have to raise fares (again) and cut more routes (again), ad nauseam. Any illusions anyone has about it being more efficient than driving is lost the first time anyone has to endure an hour and 45-minute trip for what would normally be a 35-minute drive. But I know, that’s not actually the point. /

PatriotGal2257 on April 13, 2012 at 5:46 PM

At the risk of repeating someone else’s comment:
You can’t force people into public transportation if you let them buy a car.

n0doz on April 13, 2012 at 5:52 PM

Obama’s proposed CAFE standards, which will begin taking effect in 2017, raise minimum average vehicle fleet fuel efficiency to 54.5 mpg by 2025. The Environmental Protection Agency and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimate that this regulation will raise the average price of passenger cars and light trucks by $3,000.

Even if Obama does win re-election this year, he will be out of office by January 20, 2017, since the 22nd Amendment limits all Presidents to two terms. How can Obama order the EPA to impose anything after he will be out of office? Won’t whoever is President in 2017 have authority to appoint his own EPA Administrator, with the advice and consent of the Senate IN 2017?

Obama has a nasty habit of issuing orders and ramming things through Congress that don’t take effect until after he’s gone, such as the health care law voted in 2010 which takes effect in 2014, and now this CAFE standard orderd in 2011 which takes effect AFTER Obama is out of office. That way, nobody feels any effects under Obama, but the next President takes the blame for Obama’s policies.

Obama: Apres moi, le deluge!!!

Steve Z on April 13, 2012 at 5:55 PM

Even Homer Simpson gets it.

Gyro on April 13, 2012 at 7:04 PM

Feature, not bug.

WeekendAtBernankes on April 13, 2012 at 9:08 PM

This is all part of the plan. Everyone should be using mass transit anyway – according to the lib/Dems us mere peons have no need for our own cars anyway.

dentarthurdent on April 13, 2012 at 4:44 PM

This.

petefrt on April 14, 2012 at 8:00 AM

Um, right now it costs $6-$10k to squeeze another 10mpg out of cars. Why makes anyone think a Poli Sci retard in the form of Obama can just snap his fingers and engineer a doubling of gas mileage, for just $3k?

Ain’t gonna happen. Count on it.

MNHawk on April 14, 2012 at 8:17 AM

Obama has condemned millions of lower income Americans to a life of struggle…Yes, the price of cars will go up and up as the costs of re-engineering to meet ridiculous standards becomes part of the equation. If you remember, Obama raised mileage standards way back in 2009 as one of his first official acts. Even while Detroit was teetering on bankruptcy he moved the goal-posts for car manufactureres. More, his war on energy and profligate spending and borrowing mean that inflation is on the way. Gas, electricity, food, and virtually every consumer good will become more expensive because of Obama policies. I wonder how he thought poor Americans were going to pay for electricity when he decided that costs would necessarily skyrocket? The man is a fool. This country will certainly pay dearly for his tilting at windmills.

Nozzle on April 14, 2012 at 8:21 AM

The Obama’s are the like the Royalty of old Europe. They live a gold-plated lifestyle jetting to exotic, luxurious vacations on the backs of taxpayers, while his policies make life ridiculously expensive for the rest of us. What is the purpose of making electricity costs skyrocket? To fight global warming? So, we close coal plants in the United States while China and other developing nations open coal plants daily? We disavow nuclear energy because of Chernobyl and now Fukushima? We now have two nuclear accidents in fifty years of producing nuclear energy. And yet, tens of thousands die on American roadways every year and no-one seems deterred from driving? In point of fact the communist leaning fanatics killed nuclear power and now they have their sights on coal and oil…Our lives are poorer as a result while the world races to procure energy from all sources to make their lives better. It makes no sense. Obama and his followers have some serious problems with logic and common sense…

Nozzle on April 14, 2012 at 8:40 AM

The more the American people realize the actual results of the Obama presidency not just in terms of high unemployment, but also in terms of its day-to-day effects on the lives of even those Americans who haven’t felt the sting of job loss, the more they’ll be unable to be fooled by his rhetoric. Look at it this way: You might not be unemployed and you might not be one of the 7 million consumers who won’t be able to buy a car after 2017, but, if you decide to buy a new car in the future, you’ll still have to pay about $3,000 more for it than you would have if Obama had never been president. It’s one fact among many, but they all add up.

Yes, the more folks realize just what’s happened the more they’ll want change, and the facts do add up. Unfortunately, people will be all too easily swayed by “war on women” – remember, women are the largest part of the electorate and only rising – and other such nonsense. End result: four more years. Remember, ceteris paribus Obama gets another term. That might not sound too important but to me the implications are damning for the Republicans unless they can get their heads out of their ***es.

Aquarian on April 14, 2012 at 3:55 PM

The more the American people realize the actual results of the Obama presidency not just in terms of high unemployment, but also in terms of its day-to-day effects on the lives of even those Americans who haven’t felt the sting of job loss, the more they’ll be unable to be fooled by his rhetoric. … It’s one fact among many, but they all add up.

You don’t think the average American feels that EVERY DAMN DAY?!?!. Gas prices are up, utility bills are up, food prices are up, apartment rents have skyrocketed, home ownership is harder (much harder) to get, many companies are not giving raises and bonuses, and college tuition for the kids is astronomical on all fronts. WE FEEL THE PINCH AT EVERY PAYCHECK!

Phil-351 on April 15, 2012 at 9:14 AM

Comment pages: 1 2