Cheat-Seeking Missles

Friday, June 22, 2007

Two Modest Ideas

Here's a big idea from the Senate:
The Senate [energy] bill requires automakers to increase fuel economy to 35 miles per gallon, about a 40 percent increase over what cars, SUVs and small trucks are required to achieve now [by 2020]. (source)
And here's a modest idea from C-SM. Let's pass a bill that requires the federal government to become 40 percent more efficient. We'll give them a scant 13 years, until 2020, to accomplish that feat.

Not a chance, eh? That's because while it's very easy for them to force their will on car makers, and hence, on us, it's impossible for us to impose our will on them.

Now here's a quiz.

Question: If we're going to be driving cars that are 40 percent more efficient, do you think they'll be every bit as comfortable and safe as today's cars? Choose answer A or B.

"I would expect them to look a lot like they do today, the same size, the same acceleration and the same or even better safety," says David Friedman, director of the clean vehicles program at the Union of Concerned Scientists.
"There's no way you can get those numbers without a dramatic shift in consumer choice," insisted Mark LaNeve, General Motors' vice president of North America sales, service and marketing. "We don't know how it's attainable."
Given that the Union for Concerned Scientists is concerned only about forcing its members' decidedly unscientific views down our throats, I'm going with B. Except for that bit about "consumer choice."

This isn't about choice; it's about government telling us what to buy, what to "like," and not to worry about the fact that they fully intend to stick us in tiny deathtraps.

The Senate bill includes nothing ... NOTHING! ... about opening new oil reserves in the U.S. This is not a sensible energy policy; it's a radical Warmie greenhouse gas doom nightmare forced on the American people.

So one more modest idea: Let's pass a global warming bill that says we will benchmark our national greenhouse gas reduction objectives to the reductions gained by the 100 members of the U.S. Senate.

Labels: , , ,