Now, I don’t know Claire’s stance on the CFC, have to believe she supports the Combined Federal Campaign (a path for Federal workers to have donations directly deducted from their paychecks). And, it is unlikely that she is a big supporter of CFC destruction of the Ozone layer. However, when it comes to CFC, Cash For Clunkers, @clairecmc simply has it wrong. She has twittered away with her opposition to reinforcing this massively successful federal program.
We simply cannot afford any more taxpayr $ to extend cash for clunkers. Idea was to prime the pump, not subsidize auto purchases forever.
Claire must see a parallel between the auto industry and a literal reading of the Biblical explanation of creation, because anything that lasts more than seven days seems to, for her, border on “forever”.
We put a billion $$ in cash for clunker program.That’s 250,000 cars. We weren’t sure how long it would last,but a billion of your $ is alot.
Well, the original concept was for a 1 million vehicle program or sparking about a 10 percent increase in car sales. While, as discussed elsewhere, there are plenty of issues with the C.A.R.S. Program, a 2-3 percent “prime the pump” seems unlike to do anything serious, while a 10 percent boost actually could help some dealers stay alive, have workers back on assembly lines, and otherwise have a meaningful impact.
While I still have serious concerns about the legislation’s structure, Claire should recognize that the $1 billion dollars is having a real stimulative impact.
I will consider using EXISTING stimulus $ that has already been appropriated to finish up cash for clunker program. No new $.
The one-week old ‘forever’ program is having real impact on Main Street, unlike the $100s of billions sent to help out Wall Street. (The Federal subsidies to Wall Street bonuses are easily an order of magnitude larger than the Clunker program’s cost.) Thus, perhaps Claire can find that “already been appropriated” cash in some Wall Street executives’ pockets?
In any event, yet again Claire McCaskill seems to be taking pride in positioning herself as some form of false moderate, placing herself between those who criticize government (at least a Democratic Party led government) every chance they meet and those advocating/fighting for sensible government policy.
NOTE: A reminder, as per To Twit Claire, this post is a reproach (although some might call it a taunt) to some of Claire’s “twitting” habits.
twit (tw
t)
tr.v. twit·ted, twit·ting, twitsTo taunt, ridicule, or tease, especially for embarrassing mistakes or faults.
n.1. The act or an instance of twitting.2. A reproach, gibe, or taunt.3. Slang A foolishly annoying person.