Thats just great!!! This is just another smoke and smog screen that creates the NEW car market and drains our used! The used car market is gone as far as the government is concearned!!!!!!! Mr. Barack Obama will not care about this statement as he is agaisnt eveything American! It does not matter the spelling as it does'nt matter the unificiation on these words!!!! My words may be Oversized and MY other words may be SMALL get overt them and VENT!!!!!!!!! Say what you are thinking on this!

Copperguy, If you read the articles on the gazette and other newspapers, etc., you can see my FACTS (really very accurate predictions) as I stated earlier are all coming true unfortunately. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out what this program in only 2 weeks running now is going to do now and into the future. Read again my so-called FACTS (really predictions if you will) and keep waiting and see them all be true.

Wesgonsin, a patriot does not think that way to buy just the big 3 in Detroit. This is America and is a democracy for freedom of choice, not capitalism or dictatorship you are referring to. I honor your opinion, but do not agree at all with it. My toyota tundra is more American made and more American parts assembled and manufactured in the USA compared to any other big 3 1/2 ton trucks. Look around at GM, all their 1/2 ton trucks are made in Mexico or Canada, not the USA. This kind of thinking might have applied 20 years ago, but GM is even planning on making some of their cars in CHINA and shipping them to the USA to be sold. How American is that? I use to think your way 10 years ago, but look around and be real please. Unfortunately, the Big 3 have just as much if not more foreign parts and plants building their vehicles as Toyota and Honda. It is sad, but true.

Anything we can do to diminish our dependence on foreign oil seems like a grand idea to me. I still think it should be required that an American made vehicle be purchased in order to qualify, though. I don't care if they do assemble some small portion of foreign cars here, that money goes right back overseas anyway. Mabey some people working in Toyota plants in the U.S.A. would lose their jobs. Well, put them to work with Ford or General Motors when those companies can compete better with Honda, Toyota, etc.etc.etc....... Call me a Patriot

Why, yes it does Geminic. You'll find out why if you ever are in a serious or for that matter any accident and they find out it is your fault and the other party sues you for every dime you have and takes your driver's license priviledges away for the next 20 years until you pay in full. What is your reasoning on why you do not have at least liability insurance on your vehicle? I wonder if you are going to drive illegally also next year when the state of WI finally mandates car insurance for all? I'm not asking the non-insured to carry full coverage because I could care less what happens to your vehicle, but if you care about human beings and other people's property that is your fault in an accident, common sense tells you to carry at least liability insurance so other insured people do not have to pay for the non-insured stupidity.

Hi Janesville, Yesterday we went to Delavan, Elkhorn, Lake Geneva, East Troy, Burlington & Whitewater looking for a car. Walworth County has no cars left on the lots to sell, does Janesville?

Someone explain to me how some of these people trading in their clunker can afford a new car payment. I was in the dealership this weekend and someone with a clunker bought the car I was looking at. I calculated the numbers and their payment was going to be at least $500 a month(16k/3 yrs/5.9APR). I think we will see a lot of these car on the repo lot... And you need car insurance to finance...

Cookiedough: So you think those who dont have insurance are deadbeats? So why dont you elaborate on exactly what you think a deadbeat is? I'm a mom, a manager, a student, a homeowner and a car owner. I DONT have auto insurance. Does that put me one level below you? But hey, with a name like cookiedough you must be nutty. (see, i can make stupid assumptions too)

Hypocrite - what is that? I assume you are a police officer and without mandatory liability insurance, I cannot believe you would even consider licensed drivers' to NOT have mandatory liability insurance. Very rarely will you see anyone without liability insurance or any insurance on their vehicles pay you in full within a reasonable amount of time if it was their fault for the accident. 3 for 3 in my family batting 100% deadbeats. Get all of the non-insured off the road immediately. Call me what you want - I could care less. I'm not saying insured drivers' are any better than non-insured, just stating that WI should have many, many years ago mandated liability insurance for all licensed drivers or immediately lose their drivers privileges. Feingold and the other legislators are hypocrites stating next year they will mandate insurance for all licensed drivers, yet now give the non-insured the right to purchase a new car under the cash for clunkers without current insurance on their clunker. That is a hypocrite, not me.

As someone said the other day...How, exactly, did they arrive at $3500 or $4500???.....Maybe they could have "incentivized" twice as many buyers with only a $2000 welfare payment...Idiots pulling numbers out of the sky, no rhyme or reason..The nice thing for them is that no one can be held accountable.

Here's the thing, cookidedough: I have personally had my vehicle damaged by an uninsured motorist who paid me in full for the damages. By the same token, I have personally handled hit-and-run crashes involving insured motorists who did not want a claim on their insurance, didn't want to be arrested for OWI, etc..

I agree that driving without insurance is risky. I agree with mandating insurance coverage for automobiles and drivers. I know a number of fellow cops who have the attitude, "POS car = POS driver." I don't subscribe to that theory. That - like your rants labeling all uninsured motorists as thoughtless, careless, reckless POS's - is no different than any other type of profiling. Treat the offenders as offenders. Don't lump everyone in the same category.

Isn't it curious, too, that you will on the one hand talk about the CARS program with such utter disdain while at the same time working diligently to help yourself take advantage of it? Do you know the meaning of the word hypocrite?

I hope all of those who are supportive of the need to have health insurance are also supportive of the need to have a voter ID.

I agree totally truth1 on the fact (here we go again) that the program is not retroactive for purchases before July 24th. I bought a new 2009 corolla in April 2009 and I do not qualify retroactively.

This is a real nice scenario for someone that bought a new or near-new car a couple months ago and got rid of an old one, real nice...I'm sure the "cash payment" isn't retroactive.......Real, real nice...

No income tax to be reported on either the 3500 or 4500 voucher. It's free money from the fed. govt. which in turns meaning all the US taxpayers. So, don't thank the fed. govt. for the free money, but to all who live in the USA and are going to have to pay for it down the road in increased fees or some other lame excuse to raise taxes in some form or another.

One question:Is this "clunker" money subject to income tax?
There is no reason it shouldn't be.

I must be prejudice if I call the non-insured motorist who might now be eligible to purchase a new car deadbeats. I call them the way I see them. Deal with it. Hopefully, no one, including yourself, will see what I mean if ever you are in an accident and either get your car totaled or someone you know or love gets killed by a non-insured motorist. They do not belong on the road and certainly should not have the priviledge to buy a new car if they currently do not have at least liability insurance on their current clunker. Why do you think at the present time ONLY 2 states, WI and I think New Hampshire are the only 2 states left that do NOT require insurance on vehicles registered to legally drive on the roads?

cookiedough: None of the statements following your "Fact:" identifier are factual in basis. They are opinion and conjecture. In order for them to be fact, you must be able to point to some data proving them to be true. One or more of them MAY become factual at some point in the future. Today, they are simply predictions. They are, most certainly, NOT fact.

You label your predictions as "fact" in order to denigrate one or more classes of people based solely on your prejudiced view of that "class." By using the "fact" label, you attempt to give some credible support to your prejudice.

Congrats overthehill guy on your recent purchase. This program is for folks like you who do have insurance and are looking into your future on the bright side. As far as copperguy is concerned, prove me wrong in one of my so-called fact statements and no, republicans are not any better or worse than democrats. They both can be corrupt or good. Don't base your opinion as a general rule of thumb, but look at the individual, not the party as a whole. If you want my opinion (or so-called fact), neither are worth a hill of beans. Another person commented on the 1 year of insurance needed to qualify but not the 1 year of ownership, but both must hold true.

We, also, are taking advantage of the CASH FOR CLUNKERS program and are trading in 1998 large pick up for a Focus. The difference of MPG between the two is nearly 20 MPG. We are keeping the Escape that we have which gets more than 25 MPG, so that nets out pretty well. That is what this program wanted to accomplish and I am very happy with the deal I got. With the $2000 rebate from Ford plus the rebate from the government we are saving a total of $6500 right off the top line plus we are getting 0% interest for three years through Ford. It is a deal that can't be compared to any other. I feel as long as the government is doing this program, why not take advantage. We are positioning ourselves for retirement and now will have two top of the line Fords (A Limited Escape with only 55K miles on it and brand new SEL Focus). I know Janesville has been a Chevrolet town, but we have had very good luck with Fords. According to the news the CASH FOR CLUNKERS program is accomplishing what it set out to do. People are trading in very low MPG vehicles on very high MPG vehicles. I hope they continue the program,however we got in on the first Billion.

RAF...show me where the RepubliCONS have bee anything but partisan. They are still bitter they lost the election because of the last eight years of rule by Torture King Cheney and his puppet Dumbya. Now I know why the Torture King's name is Dick, reflects his personality.

cookiedough: The sun is hot. That is a fact. It will rain in Janesville tomorrow. That is NOT a fact. Rather, it is speculation, a prediction.

You present many "theories" or "predictions" as "fact."

As to those who state that one can cancel insurance on a vehicle with a lien after "one month," this is true. You CAN cancel the insurance. In so doing, you are violating a term of the contract with the finance company. That finance company can then file for replevin on your vehicle and repossess it. (By the way, cookiedough: This paragraph contains two facts. See if you can find them.)

One final note about insurance becoming mandatory in Wisconsin: Thank GOD we have Republicans in control of both houses of the legislature and the Governor's office. Without that, mandatory insurance would NEVER have become law!

Here we go with more strange apples to oranges arguments. Most common sense people understand the difference between car insurance and health insurance.

Janesvillean -- Yup I have health insurance as well.. through it isn't as good as it was and costs me out of pocket considerably more.

I also lost my job when the company I worked for all my life left Janesville and went out and got another even though it pays far less than what I made before. I only got 26 weeks of unemployment even through I was taking classes to change careers.

I've never been standing in line for free food or anything else and have never applied for any.

It's about time that I do quality for some type of benefit.

I hope all of you who are sudden converts to the moral and social necessity of having car insurance are equally supportive of the necessity of having health insurance.
.
But maybe I'm being too cynical when I assume otherwise.

Since I did participate in this program need to set a few things straight. I had to have the title for the "clunker" along with proof of having the "clucker" registered for one full year which meant having the registration slip for last year as well as the current one AND I had to have proof of insurance on it for one full year which also meant the slips for last year as well as the current year. I bought the "clunker" new 18 years ago with 10 miles on it and have driven it fully insured ever since. It may have been showing it's age but was in far better operating condition than most much newer ones are and was very well maintained with just over 86,000 actual miles on it.

I elected to replace it now due to the incentive... and have been a responsible working tax payer for 40 years now. In addition to continously having insurance on every vehicle that I've owned.. My insurance had to pay for an accident with an at fault uninsured motorist and for an uninsured neighbor who wiped out my garage. Garage had never before or has the new one since moved itself to get destroyed by any other vehicle. What my insurance didn't pay for, came out of my pocket both times. I will be paying for this vehicle just as I have for all other vehicles owned and my house.

People who were qualified for this incentive had paperwork stopped right near completion of the deal when the money ran out.

cookiedough, I think you are missing the larger point.

1. The bill as passed used 1 year of insurance instead of 1 year of ownership clause to keep you from buying a crap car today and trading it in tomorrow under the clunker program.

2. The supporting Representatives and Senators from this state voted on the bill with this provision in place. Again, proving most of these clowns don’t read these measures before they vote on them…if they had read it and paid attention to the laws in the state they represent this “clause” would have been fixed before and not after implementation.

wesgonsin - the majority of Toyota's sold in the US are made here. The Camry is made of 73% American parts and assembled in Kentucky. >50% of "foreign" vehicles are assembled in and have a majority of parts coming from right here in America.

cookiedough - you can just "cancel" insurance the day after its required to get a loan. There is a lien notice put on the insurance policy and the insurance company won't cancel the policy until the lien release is presented to them showing the loan has been paid off - at least my insurance company (a major national insurer) does.

I can understand the theory behind the "Cash for Clunkers" program. But shouldn't it be Federally mandated that a person buys an American made vehicle in order to qualify? I mean, what's the point if they're just going to buy a Toyota?

Sarah: Get in the real world please. Most non-insured drivers on WI roads can simply cancel car insurance the day after if it is required to get a loan and get most of their money back the next week. These same uninsured people driving and causing accidents on our roadways DO NOT CARE if they get stopped or pulled over and get fined without insurance. Whether it be 500 or 100,000 dollars in fines, it does not matter to most (although not all) of these type of uninsured people. I do agree with you however that most uninsured drivers on WI roads probably cannot afford a new car anyways, but in the end, if they do buy a new car, it will hurt them later on down the road when they default on their car loans and get the vehicle repossessed. This flawed program does help a few at the expense of the majority and here in the USA, I thought the majority rules. Just wait and see the side effects later on.

Fact: The clunker program does not have adequate support staff to handle the incoming e-mails and phone calls and all you get is a busy signal when a consumer has a legitimate question not covered on their website like my family does. My mom and I got title ownership to a true clunker that would be eligible except my mom and I have not been on the title for 1 year due to the death of my father 7 months ago (only one on title) even though the car has been fully titled and insured in our immediate family since my dad and mom purchased it in 1989. So, Feingold will support uninsured deadbeats who cannot afford a new car anyways and probably will still not have insurance on their new cars but the legislators and fed. govt. cannot give me an answer to my question of being able to get rid of our eligible clunker who is not being used since my mom does not have a drivers license and sits in the garage just paying insurance on it. Yet another fine example of the fed. govt. not developing a plan properly and fully supporting and staffing it. Probably by the time my mom and I get an answer from cars.gov thru email or phone, the 3 billion will be used up in 4-5 weeks from now.

Some of these comments are way off base. Fact: Most people who do not have car insurance, at least liability insurance, on their current clunkers WILL NOT and CANNOT afford car insurance on a new car. These people do NOT care if they injure or kill someone or causes damage to other people's vehicles. These same uninsured deadbeats can go buy a new car of which they cannot afford since they do NOT have to have insurance on their new car UNTIL NEXT YEAR in 2010 when it is required. This Feingold character and all who voted in favor of uninsured deadbeats with not at least liability insurance on their clunkers do not deserve to be treated as equals in this is very flawed program.
Fact: All this program is going to do is put the general public into more debt unable to pay off the loans on their new cars with the banks, and be in the same boat as the homeowners defaulting on their bank loans.
Fact: Also what this program is doing is creating dealer and mfgs. profits substantially all over the U.S. where the dealers are not going to let the consumer purchase at or near invoice price anymore by overinflating the dealers' profit margins because they can now increase the actual selling price much closer to full msrp because they do not have to settle anymore for negotiating up from invoice but rather down from full msrp so the consumers are not going to actually be getting the full voucher price.
Fact: After this stupid program is over with in 3-5 weeks from now if the govt. passes the extra 2 billion of which they will of course, then there will be a shortage of certain vehicles sitting on dealers' lots thus the dealers will increase the selling price of these short in supply cars much closer to full msrp instead of at or near invoice until their supply of these short supply cars are back up to normal.
Fact: The fed. govt. does NOT have 3 billion dollars to blow and in turn, it is going to cost each and every tax payer later on down the line because this 3 billion dollars is the taxpayers money it is coming from, just wait and see!

The reason the program has been successful; it drives the economy in the same way real tax cuts do. Allowing investors and consumers to keep and spend their own money has ALWAYS been the best way to move the economy forward.

To be honest the program has been run in typical government fashion and been a debacle for consumers to navigate and dealers to function. I know of one dealership that had people in offices at three in the morning trying to get paperwork pushed through a government website so their customers would not loose their new cars.

Aruba before you start touting partisan comments over the program perhaps you should look at the facts.

So who did and did not vote on it? The tally shows 298-119 so where do you say it is opposed by republicans when in fact democrats voted against it also?

"Keeping informed is not something that is necessary when you just argue"
-
Yet this is something you have neglected to do; being informed before arguing.

Tool...

This has become one of the best incentive programs in recent history. And the best cars in the world - Toyota - is the primary beneficiary of the resulting sales.

Now they are talking some of these car dealers will have to sell theses cars in order to re-coop there money as the program has dried up. As far as having insurance to buy these new cars yes they have when purchasing but they can cancel policy after 1 month

The program is a success, but the Republicans are just bitter because they would rather have the money go to the crooks on Wall St. Anything that benefits the working man is just plain wrong to them.

I see where the governments heart was at in this program, and as it was intended it was a success. I am not going to pull a party card, but I don't feel the government on any level has the right to reward/punish citizens who fall into certain micro programs. I question what the true cost of all the recent spending will cost ALL taxpayers in the future. I don't think we have this money in a drawer somewhere, and I would like to see an amortization of it to see how much $4500 today costs us when/if the money is taken out of the red. If this program works so well, why not give people 25$ for every $100 in groceries. You could also have credit where when you buy new tires for your car, you buy three, the government buys one. I am not going to say the word, but what the government is doing is not capitalism.

Every one should have to have INS. on there automobile or any thing that use's our road's

This is just another welfare program from the GOVERNMENT. Does anyone find it odd that these CLUNKERS ARE BEING DESTROYED WITHIN 2 DAYS? Wait until the more gas guzzling vehicles need parts for repairs!! Oh I guess you will eventually have to buy what the GOVERNMENT wants you to buy. SMART CARS ANYONE!!!

People like rexkramer just like poisoning the well of rational discussion, SarahB1. Note how he tries to bait with arguments he would LIKE people to make so they will fall into his predetermined political labels. It's quite typical that he would make political hay over something that has already been changed. Keeping informed is not something that is necessary when you just argue at people based on labels.

rexkramer said: "I'd be awful proud if I voted democrat, awful proud."

After removing your foot from your mouth, better check out who else supports the change.

How can someone afford to buy a new car if they currently can't afford car insurance?

To be fair, Feingold isn't the only one to sign on to this request. Basically, they are rewarding people for being irresponsible.

Members joining Feingold’s bipartisan effort include Senators Kohl (D-WI), Gregg (R-NH), Shaheen (D-NH), Stabenow (D-MI) and Representatives Baldwin (D-WI), Dingell (D-MI), Hodes (D-NH), Kagen (D-WI), Kind (D-WI), Moore (D-WI), Obey (D-WI), Petri (R-WI), and Shea-Porter (D-NH). Members from the New Hampshire delegation joined Feingold’s effort because like Wisconsin, New Hampshire has a state law that does not require drivers to have car insurance.
http://feingold.senate.gov/record.cfm?id...

Very true Rex, the next response from that page 1 that you mentioned will also have to somehow include an accusation of racism. That seems to be something that the simpletons yap out quite readily. Very comical.

Way to go Russ. Reward those who have not bothered to get any auto insurance, those who have cost everyone else higher premiums over the years.

Yes, give away more money that does not exist. It comes from that magic place, doesn't it?

befair, how many trillions have been spent in Iraq? This program is the equivalent of a few hours of occupation.

The bigger picture is we'll be reducing emissions for a cleaner environment. Lowering our oil imports for gasoline refinement. Increasing the number of new car sales for our manufacturing employeers.

I don't see this as wasted money.

And, let me beat you to your next likely response from page 1 of the liberal repy list. "Bush did (insert topic here) too, so if he did it, the democrats can do it twice as much."

rexkramer: I would think that the driver would be more likely now to insure a new vehicle. Also, I think it would be unfair to the dealerships and buyers in Wisconsin to exclude them. The insurance law in Wisconsin is being changed, so why cry over spilled milk?

Unfair? If you think it's unfair then perhaps you should speak with your legislators that have allowed Wisconsin to be one of 2 states that doesn't mandate auto insurance for drivers. Every time the liberals have some mandate they want to cram down our throat, like, oh, I don't know, let's say smoking bans for starters, we're always told how this state or that state is doing it so therefore we should to. Yet when it comes to a measure that actually requires responsibility, all you hear is crickets coming from the legislature. Why am I "crying over spilled milk", well because I'm one of the guys paying for that overpriced milk so that some slug who didn't bother to pony up for car insurance, thus raising my rates, is now cashing in on my tax dollars. Whether liberals like yourself realize it or not, this money actually comes from somewhere, that "magical" place is known as the taxpayer, despite what your president and current governor would have you believe. If you've been driving around without car insurance then take all the money you saved not paying for premiums, unlike most of the rest of us, and put that towards a new car. Heaven forbid though that I suggest any personal responsibility in the age of "hope and change".

Is there no end to the ways this current government can find to give away our very hard-earned money?

So apparently Russ was too busy when the bill was being drafted to object to this clause that excluded irresponsible drivers who endangered everyone else on the roadway by driving uninsured from being able to feed themselves at the taxpayer funded trough. Nice to see he's there to step up and defend the irresponsible after the fact. I'd be awful proud if I voted democrat, awful proud.