And wait a bigger minute--who would be hardest hit by the scrappage proposal? We, the auto enthusiasts. Not only would crushing vehicles eliminate a huge source of parts for rebuilding our pet projects, meaning less vehicles to restore, but the program would be supported by government funds (read: our tax dollars). Our money would go to a "fix" that would not only crush classic trucks and cars but may not even clean up the air as significantly as if the plants were repaired. And many independent businesses that manufacture, rebuild, install, and retail the parts and accessories needed for our hobby would be directly affected both in product and economically. Not only that, but the price of older cars has jumped--why sell a car for $400 when you can get $700 to have it crushed?
Well, you're probably thinking, a vehicle retirement program has so many wrongs it could never be right, right? Actually, several states have tried "pilot programs," including California (which is said to have the filthiest air in the nation), where, in 1995, legislature passed a bill that allows taxpayer funds to be used for a clunker program.
Virginia had a publicly funded vehicle scrappage program on the books for several years, but in 1996 legislators repealed the program and replaced it with a privately funded program. In 1996 the Specialty Equipment Market Association (SEMA), enthusiasts, and other organizations succeeded in eliminating the entire program from the books. New Jersey has had a scrappage program on the books for several years, but because there is no funding to run it, it's dormant. SEMA's working with enthusiasts to repeal the program altogether. Texas recently rejected a bill that was pending, and in 1997, Arizona legislature, for the second time in two years, simply did not pass the bill, rather than add provisions that would limit the range of vehicles that could be scrapped, or add repair or retrofit alternatives. So some states have realized the clunker laws are ineffective and futile, while others continue to plod ahead.
Thankfully (and you really should thank them), SEMA is fighting for you hand, foot, tooth, and nail. The trade organization is made up of more than 3,000 companies that offer performance, functional, restoration, and styling products for trucks, special-interest vehicles, and passenger cars. Which is why the organization and such enthusiasts as Paul Maddams, vice president of SoCal Galaxies, have been lobbying so hard to prevent a blanket policy of retiring old vehicles, and they've even been successful in suggesting more effective vehicle emissions reduction alternatives, as well as rewording legislation to give targeted vehicles more of a chance to help other vehicles live.
But don't wait for SEMA or other hobbyists to do all the work. Really, really, your voice does count. You just need to let someone hear it. Write to your governor to say that you agree the air needs to be cleaned up but to utilize the already-available, cost-effective alternatives to vehicle retirement and not discriminate based on a vehicle's age but rather on how much it pollutes. But do it soon, before removing all old vehicles from the road is the law.