McCaskill: Crazier than Corker on Cash for Clunkers

/in /by

Let’s get one thing straight: Tennessee is a car state. And so is Missouri. In fact, unlike Missouri, Tennessee does not have a car on the top 10 new vehicle purchased under Cash for Clunkers. Nevertheless, Tennessee’s two Republican Senators voted for the program. But Claire McCaskill did not.

Here are the votes that deviated from party line (final vote was 60-37):

Republicans Voting Yes:

Brownback (KS)

Collins (ME)

Snowe (ME)

Bond (MO)

Voinovich (OH)

Alexander (TN)

Corker (TN)

Democrats Voting No:

McCaskill (MO)

Nelson (NE)

Leahy (VT)

Warner (VA)

Democrats Not Present:

Mikulski (MD)

Kennedy (MA)

Byrd (WV)

I look forward to McCaskill’s Tweeted explanation for why she was almost alone of car-state Senators voting against an effective stimulus program. Unfortunately for McCaskill, even the normally press-friendly but regressive Bob Corker won’t be able to give her reasons, since he voted in favor.

image_print
  1. SmileySam says:

    What was Leahys excuse ? Seems out of character for him, but not that much. He’s getting soft.

  2. bmaz says:

    Crap, I thought Clare the Hot Air had come around. Didn’t she make some statement to that effect just a couple of days ago?

    • emptywheel says:

      My guess is that there was a carefully crafted deal to make sure it had 60 and only 60 votes.

      I do hope the Ford factory workers cream her for this… This is putting the Ford Escape on the map, bc all of a sudden people realize you can drive a “SUV” (yeah, it’s totally underpowered) and still be efficient.

      But Claire wants to piss on that.

      • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

        Here’s the problem: she’s from Missouri.
        Remember how close her election was?!

        Am I happy to read about this vote?
        No.

        Do I recall how close her election was?
        Yup.

        Nevertheless, it does sound like Ford needs to have some good, heart-to-heart conversations with McCaskill.

      • Jesterfox says:

        Meanwhile, those of us with small cars (’95 Escort) don’t qualify for the program. Darn it! I could use some help buy a new car. It would be my first new car.

  3. evietoo says:

    Because why not give $4,500 for refrigerators? That is seriously her explanation.

    She better not bail on health care.

    • emptywheel says:

      Was it? Do you have a link? Bc I’m channeling a “Citizens can’t drive a fucking refrigerator to work” post, and I probably should base it on something.m

  4. freepatriot says:

    crazier than corker ???

    that’s a accomplishment

    do you get a plaque for something like that ???

    it’s, like, employee of the month, or sumtin

    maybe rarer than that even

    (wink)

    • fatster says:

      “Employee of the month” often qualifies said honoree for a month-long special parking space. Wonder what Claire will park there?

  5. joejoejoe says:

    McCaskill has some weird voting habits. I was looking at some recent votes and she voted for a lot of GOP amendments to strike parts of legislation, GOP amendments that had more GOP defectors than Democratic support. On one Coburn amendment she and Evan Bayh were the only Dems to vote with the GOP even as 10 Republicans voted against Coburn’s amendment.

    I’d like to see somebody interview McCaskill in a non-confrontational manner and just get her to explain what it is she is trying to accomplish with some of these votes. Is she being a fiscal scold? Is she a stickler for some kind of process? I like Claire McCaskill but I don’t see the logic behind her voting patterns and snarky twitter answers don’t really fill in the blanks. I just like to know how Claire McCaskill decides to vote on any given issue.

      • joejoejoe says:

        I agree that she’s been inconsistent. It worries me when I don’t know what somebody is for, only what they are against and McCaskill is making lots of noise complaining about things without offering much in the way of alternatives. What does she want to accomplish in Congress?

        • emptywheel says:

          Add in the fact that she appears to like to appeal to high principle. But in her application of high principle she’s less consistent than those motivated by greed.

        • bmaz says:

          Ever seen the movie The Candidate? At the end, when Robert Redford finally gets elected to the US Senate, he corners Peter Boyle and says “What the fuck do I do now”? Maybe Clare doesn’t know either……

        • TomWells says:

          You need to look at her record. She primaried a sitting Democratic governor becuase he stood p to the radical right.

          She is better than a Republican, but not by a lot.

          People think she is better than she is because of her support for Obama.

    • bobschacht says:

      McCaskill has some weird voting habits. I was looking at some recent votes and she voted for a lot of GOP amendments to strike parts of legislation, GOP amendments that had more GOP defectors than Democratic support. On one Coburn amendment she and Evan Bayh were the only Dems to vote with the GOP even as 10 Republicans voted against Coburn’s amendment.

      McCaskill is a certified Senatorial Blue Dog who votes more often with Republicans than Democrats on critical issues. Of course Nelson (NE) is even worse; he’s a certified DINO. But it is a bit odd to see Leahy and Warner with McCaskill & Nelson in this foursome. Bayh is also a certified Blue Dog like McCaskill. I’m gonna post a Seminal blog on this as soon as I can figure out how to transfer the html along with the text.

      Bob in HI

    • drfatman says:

      She couldn’t explain it either. I would be there isn’t an ounce of logic to her decision … I assume she looks down at her blackberry and whatever the last tweet is she goes with that (snark).

  6. DanielDoyle says:

    I guess one could say there wasn’t enough climate-protecting teeth in the bill. But that’s not really consistent with Claire-Bear’s platform.

  7. TheWerle says:

    The problem is, Clunkers kind of sucks. Yes, its stimulative, but only just. The increase in sales is only 16% greater than what was already projected, and even with a discount this large the only people who can afford a new car are the middle and upper middle class, who weren’t likely to stick with a clunker for long anyway. When factoring in the energy use of creating new cars for the cars removed from the fleet and the energy to destroy and recycle the clunkers, the reduction in CO2 is all but a wash.

    Is it too much to think that maybe McCaskill just genuinely thought that this wasn’t good enough of a use of the stimulus money? That three billion could have gone into more grants to research and production for green industries.

    My pal is a policy guy at a energy efficiency nonprofit, formerly DoE, who has just started a new energy blog, and they break things down.
    http://thepowergeneration.blogspot.com

  8. freepatriot says:

    and I’d like to take this opportunity to address all those people talking bout grandma being a clunker an growing a slong

    first off, Granny is like 90 years old (and a bit of a hypochondriac*), so yeah, she’s a bit of a clunker

    and if she suddenly sprouts a slong, I’m blaming Thers, for giving her the idea in the first place

    you can’t talk about medical shit like that in front of a hypochondriac, dude

    (*Grandma is crazy, but not “bob corker” crazy, so don’t order the plaque yet)

  9. joejoejoe says:

    Why is there a Department of Transportation and Department of Energy instead of a Department of Refrigerators? Maybe Claire should get on that right away.

  11. dopeyo says:

    claire is from missouri. harry truman aside, we have a long tradition of stupid senators. claire can’t drink as much as bond – who is retiring – so she has to do something to court the yahoo vote.

    she was formerly the state auditor. she likes to pretend she’s keeping an eye on the cookie jar.

  12. Leen says:

    McCaskill generally seems reasonable. Wondering what is up?

    What were Leahy’s objections?

    ————————————————————–

    been thinking that Senator Voinovich (R-Oh) should be focused on. Voted for the Clunker funding, for Sotomayor.

    Remember watching Voinovich during the John Bolton hearings. Voinovich seemed genuinely concerned about the direction of our country and the nomination of John Bolton to the U.N.

    Wondering if we can get to Voinovich’s compassionate side having to do with Health Care for All.

    I will be calling his local offices today to find out where he will be for the month of August.

    Voinovich’s local Ohio offices
    http://voinovich.senate.gov/pu…..eLocations

      • Leen says:

        Thanks for the insights. Have not followed her voting record..just heard what she has had to say

    • BoxTurtle says:

      Voinovitch is okay. If you speak to him, frame your concerns in terms of “good government”. Voinovitch is a operations wonk, he worries about things like the aging federal workforce and people not having the resources to do their jobs.

      If I were going to talk to him about clunkers, I’d put a lot of effort into the reducing oil consumption and getting people off the jobless rolls and back into being taxpayers.

      Boxturtle (Stop by Starbucks for a Grande on the way, Voinovitch could bore a cat to death)

      • Leen says:

        He all ready voted for the clunker program and voted to give more money. I have been to Voinovich’s office quite a few times over the years. He is receptive. Just trying to encourage others to meet with him over August. I think there is a crack…and think we should all try to widen that crack

  13. 4jkb4ia says:

    “McCaskill said she had one more worry that is keeping her undecided on how she’ll vote: the long-term competitive impact of the program on General Motors and Chrysler, two companies in which taxpayers have invested heavily.

    “I don’t like the idea that we’re robbing demand for new cars six months from now” after the program ends, she said.”

    Via stltoday.com. This makes more sense as there are prominent GM and Chrysler plants in the St. Louis area alone, some of which were scheduled to close.

    • bmaz says:

      Actually that makes no sense whatsoever. Clearing out inventory backed up both at dealerships, holding yards and factories is the smartest thing for manufacturers leading into the model year. It will give them a desperately needed monetary infusion, allow them to pay suppliers, fund the production runs necessary for the new model year and open up the space in the chain for those new products. It will also allow dealers to stay alive and employ the workers and salesmen necessary to still be alive when the new models come.

      McCaskill is a fucking idiot if this was her logic. Tom Wells @34, she ought to be primaried.

      • Petrocelli says:

        Clearing up the oversupply also means the new model year can begin without big price reductions, so earnings can be higher.

        I don’t understand why Claire is against this, except for the whole “The perfect being the enemy of the good” thingy.

        Up in Canuckistan, there are various programs being rolled out. One is a “2 years of free Public Transit” or discount coupon for purchasing a Bike, when you give in your clunker. Another program coming next July will be for grants up to $10,000 for purchasing an EV. This will help the Volt but will also get the message to Nissan and others that there is a market for EVs up here.

        Along with these programs, the Cash for Clunkers is an essential program for the stimulus it provides and also the decrease in fuel consumption and emissions. I am now of the belief that if the economy continues to struggle, extending this program and widening it, is a no brainer.

  14. 4jkb4ia says:

    The GM plant in Wentzville was saved but shut down during the pre-bankruptcy process. The Chrysler plant in Fenton is gone. We now return to the typical elitist bubble.

  15. SmileySam says:

    Now this is funny !

    The CEO of Cash4Gold, the mail your gold to us for money company, as send a letter to Congress offering his help and congratulating Congress on the branding of Cash4Clunkers. It could of been written by the Onion. Do you laugh or cry reading this ? http://www.cash4gold.com/newsp…..s-program/

  16. Petrocelli says:

    Jeebus, I sent Obama a looong e-mail last night (courtesy Mary & me) and now I have to send a looong e-mail to Claire, explaining how immediate sales will translate into future sales.

    All this while entertainin’ a troupe of Michiganders, who thankfully have not asked for Beamish Draught … yet !

    Can you puleeze edumacate your Congresscritters before putting them in Office …

    • freepatriot says:

      Can you puleeze edumacate your Congresscritters before putting them in Office …

      what educated person would want the job ???

      there is a reason that we have a congress full of idiots and nutjobs …

      jes sayin, is all

  18. Leen says:

    ot phone calls this morning (later need to go mow mow mow)

    Just called the district office of Senator Voinovich in Nelsonville Ohio (740-441-6410) Ohio for his schedule in August. Katie at the office did not have much information and let me know that South East Ohio does not have a district Rep at this time. She could not tell me anything about Voinovich’s schedule for August and recommended that I call the Washington office (202-224-3353)

    Called the D.C. office and Joe was not very friendly (let me know they have been getting these calls). I let him know that I was a member of group of folks here in Athens who are all respectful single payer advocates and had no plans to interrupt any town hall events or any other events that Senator Voinvovich would be holding. That what we were interested in were thoughtful, respectful dialogue. Joe said that there are no town hall meetings on Voinovich’s schedule. I asked what Voinovich’s stance was on Health Care Reform? These are Joe’s exact words “he opposes both single payer and the public option” I then asked what does he support. Joe answered “the Senator supports increasing competition and lowering cost”
    I asked “how does he suggest that happen” Joe “the public should be able to go over state lines to access health care plans”

    I then called the Cleveland office (216-522-7095. Spoke with Lucy (she also said that they have been receiving lots of calls) She suggested I talk with our district Rep I let her know that there was no Voinovich district rep in s.e. ohio. She put me through to John who was the most helpful person I spoke with. Let him know we wanted to get with Voinovich directly
    Set up a meeting with Voinovich during the recess. Here is Voinovich’s direct scheduler.

    Beth Martins
    Fax 216-522-7097
    email [email protected]

    Now here is the best part of these calls. When I asked John (who was the most helpful and well informed)what Senator Voinovich’s stance was on health care reform. He said that Voinovich had “concerns” about single payer and the public option. When I let John know that Joe in the D.C. office had said that the Senator “opposed” both single payer and the public option. John repeated that the Senator had “concerns”

    John and I had a short conversation about the distance between “oppose” and “concerns” He agreed.

    I hope folks in Ohio contact Voinovich and slip through the crack between “oppose” and ‘concerns”. Sounds like we can work on Voinovich. Touch his what I believe to be truly compassionate bone in his body.

    If folks are interested in any events that he may attend in Ohio during the month of August you need to either contact the district office regularly and they sometimes post his calender under press releases

    • BoxTurtle says:

      Just blasted off a polite fax to that number asking for a meeting. Be patient, I got busied out a couple times.

      Voinovitch is not running for re-election, he can vote his brain not his party should he so choose. This is a vote we can earn, I think.

      Boxturtle (Not sure about a “compassionate” appeal. Will stick to operations wonk, I think)

  19. joanneleon says:

    Found a statement by McCaskill:

    But McCaskill said she worried that the program would help more foreign car companies than U.S. manufacturers. The list of the top 10 new cars sold in the program so far includes two Fords, a Dodge, a Chevrolet, three Toyotas, two Hondas and a Hyundai.

    “The American auto manufacturers that we just saved with billions of taxpayer money have insufficient inventory of cars to participate in this extension. That makes no sense. We are chasing their customers into the arms of their foreign competitors,” McCaskill said after the vote.
    Link

  20. joanneleon says:

    More from crazy Claire (and I really do wonder about her) but some of her points seem pretty cogent if you are focused on US auto companies rather than jobs and stimulus in general:

    In Thursday’s edition of the Post-Dispatch, McCaskill said she had concerns over the long-term competitive impact of the program on General Motors and Chrysler, two companies in which taxpayers have invested heavily.
    St. Louis Post-Dispatch

    Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) wrote on her Twitter page that she would oppose the bill outright because: “We simply cannot afford any more taxpayr $ to extend cash for clunkers.”
    The Hill

    […]Washington has invested billions in both Chrysler and General Motors to help them bounce back, yet those companies are only getting “crumbs” from “klunkers” because their inventories of fuel-efficient cars were low.

    “They are at a huge disadvantage,” McCaskill said.

    She said Congress should wait to extend it until both auto companies can operate on a “level playing field.”
    Kansas City Star

    Kit Bond took advantage of the situation, showing that McCaskill’s vote was probably not very politically astute:

    The Republican said he found irony in watching some who have supported stimulus programs “hand-wringing over money for a federal program that is helping sell cars, and may help the more than 200,000 Missourians who depend on the auto industry for their livelihoods.”
    St. Louis Post-Dispatch

  21. emptywheel says:

    Here’s Leahy’s thinking which is, honestly, worse than CMC’s (h/t Nan):

    Mr. President, I would like to make some observations about the Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save Program, more commonly known as Cash For Clunkers.

    When Congress first passed this program in June, I evaluated the merits and the arguments and chose to support it, because I believed it would provide a prompt shot in the arm to our ailing economy. I continue to believe that the program’s goals of reducing the environmental impact of automobiles on the road and producing economic stimulus are good ones.

    However as we debate whether to infuse this program with another $2 billion I would urge that we be patient and wait until all the facts are in, before rushing forward with a tripling of the program’s overall cost. Significant claims have been made about the average increased fuel economy and resulting financial savings that will result from car purchases made through the program. The Administration has used these claims to push for the program’s expansion, yet federal agencies have not yet made available – to the American people and to the Congress — the appropriate data to support these claims.

    If you have picked up a newspaper in the past few weeks, the sudden popularity of the program is clear. Newspaper headlines have consistently noted the program is rapidly running out of money and that car purchases are well above where they were at this time last year. In my own state of Vermont, car dealers have reported having difficulty keeping up with demand for new cars that meet the program’s requirements. But while we know that cars are moving off sales lots and onto the road, we have yet to receive enough details about the current sales data to know the true story of whether this program is working as intended.

    Recent reports on the program have indicated that funding was about to run out, yet the number of actual car sales through the program was far lower than the program allowed for. Further, many dealers have noted that hundreds of thousands of dollars in program vouchers from the government have yet to be paid. If this is in fact the case, we should demand that the management of this program be ironed out before pumping billions more into it.

    Positive indications about the direction of the economy are emerging. Today we learned that the number of Americans filing for unemployment dropped to its lowest level since January. The Cash for Clunkers program may prove to be a factor in helping our country emerge from this recession, and I certainly hope that is the case.

    But the public release of information about this car rebate program is necessary to ensure that both the Congress and the American people can make well-informed judgments about the merits of continuing this program in these economically challenging times. If the Administration is unwilling or unable to provide this information before the Senate votes on additional funding, I will be unable to support the program’s expansion.

    • Leen says:

      this makes sense
      “However as we debate whether to infuse this program with another $2 billion I would urge that we be patient and wait until all the facts are in, before rushing forward with a tripling of the program’s overall cost. Significant claims have been made about the average increased fuel economy and resulting financial savings that will result from car purchases made through the program. The Administration has used these claims to push for the program’s expansion, yet federal agencies have not yet made available – to the American people and to the Congress — the appropriate data to support these claims.”

      • emptywheel says:

        Fair enough. Though the anecdotal info (Focus being the top new car) absolutely support them, as does Leahy’s criticism that it has netted fewer cars than anticipated (which means people are trading in for the full 4500 and therefore getting significant new mileage increases.

        • bmaz says:

          Toyota Corrolla may have overtaken the Focus. Still, stimulating the auto sector, in a broadbrush fashion, is still a good idea right now. I would be thrilled if the government did another program, targeted to American manufacturers, soon as the new model inventory is stocked up late this fall. There may be issues with trade restrictions or something, but I would have no problem with it.

      • Leen says:

        Holy crap trickle down and out to Iraq…Gitmo
        You have probably all ready seen the clips that I am watching at Info clearing house but if not. Brutal but we need to know

        • Leen says:

          Last line in program

          “Once you know how America runs its prisons at home, then the obscen abuses at Abu Gharib are not less shocking just less surprising”

  23. oldtree says:

    Follow the money. She votes against her own people, she owes them her job. I would suspect they are ready to take it back. If they aren’t, they got what they paid for.
    The program stinks, but it is the best thing they have put forward so far. Not much for a resume yet. The Peons are still waiting for their handout, or “leg up” or “CCC” or whatever they call the new jobs the government will need to create as we continue our downward slide. The voices of reason see no end to our journey.
    I will continue being a peon until there are none left. We need to fight for education, as ignorance is the reason we have talking teabags.

      • ferrarimanf355 says:

        The V6 Camaro is a good cruiser, but it’s too porky. I’m waiting for the Mustang’s new engines…

        • ferrarimanf355 says:

          Oh, well, why do you hate the idea of the basic concept of automotive freedom, then? Can’t stand the fact that not everyone’s interested in a hybrid, or is buying the snake oil from those electric car promise factories?

          Leave the muscle cars alone.

  25. fatster says:

    What a nice little present to GM–at the taxpayers’ expense, of course.

    GM gets to dump its polluted sites

    BY TIM HIGGINS • FREE PRESS BUSINESS WRITER • AUGUST 7, 2009

    “When General Motors Co. emerged from bankruptcy, it was freed of obligations for polluted properties at discarded plant sites that will require millions of dollars to clean up.

    “GM’s unusual, government-engineered bankruptcy allowed the Detroit automaker to emerge as a new company — and to shed billions in liabilities, including claims that governments had against GM for polluting.”

    More.