NEW CALIF SMOG LAW PROPOSED

[pressonregardless]

I have to chime in. First of all to individuals who make a living ~sic~ writing laws in the Peoples Republic of California have to drink the California kool-aid, that is Global Warming is a religion. It is the end all and source of their existence. Writing legislation that supports the concept is the goal that drives the engine for taxpayer. It is like a parasite that destroys the host. While it feeds, it survives and requires the host to receive medical attention at tax payer expense. So Mblouse I respect you for your analysis, (BTW, I need to order a short shifter too.) I too lived in "Great Lakes State" 2 years in Oscoda and 5 years in Marquette (Air Force) and raced with the Lake Superior Region SCCA. We didn't watch our farms dry up (as in California) due to law suits from Environmentalists who shut off water supplies so the "Bay area Smelt" can live. Those of you in the 49 states have no Idea. Don't even get me started on the laws we have to deal with to exercise our second amendment rights that you all take for granted. Hopefully California will stand as a sad mirror into the future of the country I served for so many years. PS. I stood at the Iron Curtain once upon a time, and now someone is looking back at me.

[baltobernie]

As a non-Californian, I thank those of you living there for your foresight and leadership in auto emissions legislation and technology. I'm serious. If you guys hadn't led the way with PCV valves, etc. in the 1960's, L.A. basin-style smog would be in every major metropolitan area today. The auto industry is too powerful for any state save California to take on, and you've done it again recently, forcing the industry to tighten up when even the federal government could not get them to act.

Now, a debate on "how much is too much" will be a lively one, and needs to be aired. I would think that Del Norte county might not require the same emission levels as Los Angeles, for example. But it seems to this "outsider" that an imposition of tailpipe testing on 1976 thru OBD-1 cars, while exempting earlier cars and relying on OBD-2 data is a reasonable compromise. Of course, the allowable levels need to reasonable, too, and fears of "ratcheting" are well-founded.

This Reply may sound suspiciously similar to "Not In My Back Yard" syndrome, particularly from someone with a pre-76 car. But many trips home from SoCal with burning eyes and throat have convinced me that, until alternative fuels reach the marketplace, you guys still have a ways to go.

[spidernut]

I would absolutely hate to have an emissions test every year...especially because I've only driven my Spider about 1,000 miles per year, if that much. I've not seen a 1970s junker in years. Every mid to late era 1970s car I've seen has been restored and meticulously kept. With the low miles driven by classic car owners, this law makes no sense.

If they really want to have an impact, require the emissions test every 15,000 miles driven! It isn't the age of the car that necessarily makes the difference, it is the miles and condition of the car.

I'm old enough to recall "Stage 3 Smog Alerts" in the Los Angeles basin. You could only see about 1/4 mile, the air was orange...really orange, and your throat would get sore after about 10 minutes outside. People with respiratory problems were told to stay indoors. Driving was to be kept at a minimum. Sacramento wasn't far behind. Driving through Auburn, CA, you'd look over the valley and it was socked in with an orange smog so deep only the buildings in Downtown Sacramento stuck through the haze.

Today, the air quality in California is still considered poor by Federal standards. That being said, it is a massive improvement over the 1960s and 1970s. Still, Federal highway funds are contingent upon meeting air quality standards. California lawmakers will do anything to keep the Federal funds flowing.

California's population is declining. It is an unfriendly place for business, awful for rental property owners and crime keeps rising, politics in the State are unbearable, property values have crashed, unemployment is over 10% and it is a terrible place to own a car made after 1976.

Politicians in California are idiots...they've always been idiots and will always remain idiots. The state has been in downward spiral since Gray Davis was elected. If it wasn't such a beautiful state, I'd never return.

[SpiderHead]

wow, I'm speechless.

normally on a topics like this I would rant on for hours.

but you folks have said it all!

The clean air folks have done wonders for the air quality in the LA basin. I'm proud of them, and appreciate the uphill battle they fought to get the air as clean as it is.

That said, I'm getting real close to giving up on this state.

Lets buy a town in the high country of Arizona, call it Fiatville... and invite Fiat to build a factory there We could have our own locally printed and backed Fiat currency... No career politicians, and get rid of Mondays. (Just have 2 Sundays!)

When someone starts acting too political, we will just run them out of town tarred and feathered on a rail.

hehehe

-Ryan

[pope]

Lets buy a town in the high country of Arizona, call it Fiatville... and invite Fiat to build a factory there -Ryan

Ryan, I already beat you to the idea. I Invited Fiat to build a factory and they said YES, the town is called Detroit. Our air and water is crystal, probably like Northern Californias. LOL

[So Cal Mark]

don't you mean crystal meth?

[pope]

That I wouldnt know! I would imagine the actual city has it, but then I rarely go there so...

[htchevyii]

One cargo ship pollutes as much as 50 MILLION cars!

http://www.greencarreports.com/blog/102 ... llion-cars

[htchevyii]

Terrific, it looks like the bill was passed, is a Governator Veto what we need now?
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/bilinfo.html
If you put in the bill & click on votes it looks to have passed 8-6.

[pope]

Trey, I think that is just the commitee vote. That would send it on to the house and senate for their votes.

[Gunsmith]

Everyone should pay close attention to what is going on here even if you do not live in California. This bill is a slap in the face of common sense. Like you guys have stated many times, it would only affect a small percentage of cars that are by far better maintained and rarely driven compared to newer vehicles. So why propose such legislation you ask? It can only be one of two things stupidity or money. Most politicians view us as naive subjects instead of sovereign citizens. So they either think we will be pacified by worthless legislation that has no real affect on the problem or they will make money off of it. We had emissions testing in Florida for years. It was farmed out to a "Private" company which sent you to certain repair shops that could get your cars to pass or they would put the testing wand in the car next to yours for a few extra bucks to get it to pass. So finally someone exposed it all and instead of fixing the crooked system they just killed it because it was determined that it had not positive net impact on the environment anyways. I would not be surprised to learn that someone connected some how to these politicians would be making big money selling parts, service or was sitting on a boat load of cars that needed to be scrapped at the States expense. The extreme environmentalists have learned that by being very loud they can effect legislation. Those grounded here on Earth need to be louder and let the politicians know you will either vote them out or help them on their next campaign to get re-elected. That is the only thing they can understand.

It is all about sound bites on the news, a well named bill can be promoted by the media even if it is bad. Remember genocide was renamed "ethnic cleansing" man that doesn't sound bad at all does it? You guys in California should appoint a gifted spokesperson for your cause and come up with a catchy name for your group and write a speech that makes each sentence a sound bite explaining the fraud of the bill. Make a brief bullet point hand out with facts and statistics and have it look just the way you would want to see on TV. Most news agencies just love to copy what you have and rarely check it just so they can be the first with it. This will do far more than the Emails.

It is always difficult to overcome the stupid factor because there is no debating or rational arguments to overcome stupid.

The second amendment was mentioned in an earlier post which I happened to know a little about. Not to go down that road on this forum but for only an analogy. The news and the government spent millions of dollars and way too much time trying to ban guns that are used in less than 3% of all crimes and the media helped by labeling them something they weren't and most Americans believed these outright lies to be true because their government and media would not lie to them would they? Additionally more than 90% of the 3% were obtained illegally so what would legislation do? The money would have been better spent keeping criminals in jail not preventing law abiding citizens from enjoying their sport or protecting themselves and their families. So why do it then, stupidity or money right, it always boils down to that. Every time new gun control measures are proposed gun and ammunition sales skyrocket. More guns have been sold by Clinton, Obama and Fienstein than any other marketing campaign ever imagined.

As far as I know most citizens do not poses the equipment required to monitor air quality or what the particulates in the air are so we take are illustrious governments word for what it is and where it all comes from. If the politicians can put up a stupid bill like this it gives the outward impression that they are doing something only to find out their brother in-law or major campaign donor owns the factory or equipment polluting the most.

Man that was long sorry guys, I just hate to see politicians do that to people and it always flows to other states from there. So even if you do not live in California contact everyone you know who does and fire them up.

If that doesn't work Mark hang out a shingle that "Classic Car Compliance performed here" and start raking it in. Then go buy every piece of junk old car you can get running and sell it to the state.

[Tappy]

do these politicians drive in big strech limosines to get their transport , mostly one man only ?


Here taxes are paid on the engine volume , who polutes most payes most ....If you have an oldtimer they calculated you pay less , producing shipping and assembling a new car would pollute a lot more then the few km you do with your oldtimer ...

make sense to me , your californian lawmakers dont

[Gunsmith]

That is a point that usually gets lost Tappy, how much in resources does it take to make a new "Cleaner" car or cleaner whatever as apposed to getting the most useful life out of an existing product. But then again it doesn't force us to buy new "cleaner" cars from Detroit does it?

[So Cal Mark]

an update from SEMA says under this new bill, pre 76 cars would still be exempt from smog inspections. 1976-1994 cars would have to be inspected every year. The extra fees generated would be used to buy up old cars and scrap them. SEMA succeeding in defeating this measure in the previous two legislative sessions

[wengr]

That is a point that usually gets lost Tappy, how much in resources does it take to make a new "Cleaner" car or cleaner whatever as apposed to getting the most useful life out of an existing product. But then again it doesn't force us to buy new "cleaner" cars from Detroit does it?

agreed, for years the mpg ratings for hybrids were innacurate until the government finially changed the wa it's calculated. Never seemed very "green" to me to abandon the current car for a new one, especially a car half full of batteries. I doubt battery production is very good for the environment. In a way, some buy hybrids for the same reason some buy Escalades or Hummers - it makes them feel good about themselves.