The $3 billion cash for clunkers program has been one of the most
popular parts of the Obama administration’s assorted
(de)-stimulus efforts. Well, a new AP analysis shows
that, true to form, the program didn’t exactly accomplish its
mission with flying colors.
Remember the so-called environmental benefits cash for clunkers
would produce by taking gas-guzzlers off the road? Looks like
many Americans turned in their cars for models that have
comparable or even worse fuel economy — for example, an old Ford
F150 pickup truck for a new one.
Given the program’s goals, I would call that fraud.
The AP reports:
The single most common swap — which occurred more than 8,200
times — involved Ford F150 pickup owners who took advantage of
a government rebate to trade their old trucks for new Ford
F150s. They were 17 times more likely to buy a new F150 than,
say, a Toyota Prius.
The fuel economy for the new trucks ranged from 15 mpg to 17
mpg based on engine size and other factors, an improvement of
just 1 mpg to 3 mpg over the clunkers.
Owners of thousands more large, old Chevrolet and Dodge pickups
bought new Silverado and Ram trucks, also with only barely
improved mileage in the middle teens, according to AP’s
analysis of sales of $15.2 billion worth of vehicles at nearly
19,000 car dealerships in every state. Those deals helped the
Ford F150 and Chevy Silverado — along with Ford’s Escape
midsize SUV — climb into the Top 10 most-popular vehicles
purchased with the government rebates. The most common
truck-for-truck and truck-for-SUV deals totaled at least $911
million.
In scores of deals, the government reported spending a total of
$562,500 in rebates for new cars and trucks that got worse or
the same mileage as the trade-ins — in apparent violation of
the program’s requirements. The government said it is
investigating those reports and said in some cases they were
probably entered incorrectly by dealers or based on outdated
fuel economy figures.
Whew! I can sleep better at night knowing the feds are going to
devote more taxpayer dollars to covering up the trail — err, I
mean — investigating fraud and abuse.
Now, who’s up for the federal government controlling our
health-care system?
Pingback| 11.5.09 @ 2:07PM
Twitter Trackbacks for The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Uncle Sam Got Suckered links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Adam Smith| 11.5.09 @ 2:18PM
Is anyone surprised about this latest government FUBAR, or the attempt to cover it up?
Can't wait for the DMV Healthcare plan...
JACK| 11.5.09 @ 2:58PM
The program seemed to have two goals. One to improve fuel economy. With the low thresholds, it was not going to improve it significantly. Second to stimulate sales of new cars out of the existing inventory. It accomplished that goal. Ignoring the subject measurement of how many new sales were actually generated for the CARS program, the increased sale are irrefutable.
c. j. acworth| 11.5.09 @ 5:57PM
"the increased sales are irrefutable". Yeah, but how many of those sales were simply "stolen" from the future. Folks who otherwise would've held onto thier old vehicle for another year jumped onto the "free" money this year. The taxpayers shelled out billions to pay people to do today what they would've done on thier own tommorrow. Bad idea.
Pete| 11.5.09 @ 3:03PM
And the inevitable lull in sales will also be irrefutable.
This "program" amounted to the same thing as my dentist handing out lolipops to my kids after their appointments...get 'em used to the free stuff so they pay less attention to the fact that their skulls are getting drilled.
Stan Redmond| 11.5.09 @ 5:47PM
How did this stimulate anything? Obama took money from taxpayers and gave it to relatively wealthy people to buy new cars. There were no jobs created or "saved." The poor and jobless that Obama says he cares about weren't rushing out and buying new cars to provide a union job to an already employed union worker to a bailed out failed company (GM, Chrysler).
Just wait until it's all free.......