If the progressives were to lose this vote on the House floor then the House conferees (Dingell et al.) would demand dropping the Seante language in conference and we'd get nothing. At least in a compromise we get something. But the idiots in the auto industry opposing this, as they have for decades, are the real culprits. Besides all the other benefits to national security, Middle East oil independence, and green house gas reductions, mandatory fuel economuy standards would SAVE the American auto industry, if anyhting can. If Detroit doesn't make fuel efficient cars, you'll see dwindling market share, now below 50%, and eventually Ford, Chrysler and GM will be looking to the government to bail them out! (a la Chrysler in the 80's). Ultimate irony--no regulation now, but when we lose everything we expect the government to save us. Just incredible. It will be a miracle if our auto industry survives at all. Cars are going the way of electronics, computers,and just about everything else you buy (except Catapillars, medical equipment, and airplanes) and will be imported. Does anyone think this is good for America?

is now routine. No more tanks rolling off assembly lines in the future when we really have to fight a major land war against another nation state, as we did in World War II... But the profits of the global corporations are not suffering from this event, only the American economy. Pelosi has a tough job, it's hard to explain the byzantine requirements of getting anything done in Congress, and Democrats have little Party discipline.

Or perhaps this is how the political world really works:

The barons of Big Autos and Big Oil, not being too stupid to perceive their own best short-term interest, can readily see that their Republican enablers are in freefall and by 2009 may well be unable to preserve their corporate tax breaks and underwrite their continued baronial looting of corporations and shareholders.

So what is a contemporary robber baron to do? Hmm, how about offering a deal to the devil Democrats? Cash for Democratic election campaigns, cash withheld from Republican campaigns, various favors granted or implied--all offered in return for the appropriate votes, or--just as importantly--for failure to force key issues to votes. It really isn't that expensive to suborn a key Congressman or Senator in the right committee at the right time.

If the golden age of outright corporatist enabling is over for these barons, political gridlock will be an acceptable alternative and will allow the looting to continue.

And remember, many are the ways to avoid the reporting requirements for political contributions or to offer bribes relatively immune from presecutorial scrutiny. It just takes a little imagination, the use of offshore accounts, and the occasional barter of services, favors, and goods outside of the traceable cash/credit/banking economy. It is a most intricate web that the corporatist and political elites weave one with another.

Some political analysts eagerly scrutinize lists of campaign contributors for evidence of corporate contributions to candidates (and yes, there is plenty of such evidence). But, with an increasingly politically corrupted judicial system, what if the public data simply reflect the legal tip of a massively illegal underlying iceberg?

Can one put a price on the slanted news and editorial coverage promoted by corporatist megaphone Rupert Murdoch, for example? When Fox News and the Wall Street Journal begin to speak approvingly of certain Democratic candidates and programs, we will know that the outcome of the political game has been fixed.

The blogosphere will need to hold the system to account, for the MSM by and large have become part of the corporatist problem.

These cafe standards are pointless.  They might have saved the US auto industry if we'd imposed them a decade or two ago.  They do nothing now.  Companies that don't sell cars that get substantially higher than 35mpg, will go out of business.  Consumers are going to be paying $4/gallon at chrismas, and probably $5-$6 /gallon in the next couple of years; more if the dollar continues to collapse.

I think you are right.  The big 3 are toast.

I expect that the real innovations (such as battery-electric cars) will come from outside of an auto company.  Even Toyota is moving too slowly..

As we know - or should know - from Econ 101, the best signal by far and away to reduce consumption of a given good is PRICE.  What I would do is to slap a large carbon tax on the entire economy - make it revenue neutral if you want by cutting other taxes, I don't really care.  The question is, can we get this through our sclerotic, unimaginative, special-interest-owned political system?  If not, would a "cap and trade" system combined with an "Apollo Project" be the best option?

I'm getting to the point where I want to bang my head against a wall everytime I hear about an apollo project that focuses on cars--the theory that more-efficient petroleum-driven engines will reduce our dependence on fossil fuels is like advancing the theory that we'll all drink less if we switch from watery beer to high-proof vodka.  We absolutely need some of the brightest minds in America looking at solving America's energy needs as we continue into the 21st century, but dedicating those resources to building a better car is ultimately more wasteful than an SUV that gets 15 mpg in city conditions.

Getting 100 or 200 miles per gallon's a bad idea?

The only hard thing is how to rationilize the contributions made by the US auto industry to both parties, especially this coming election cycle and then think that this thing has anything to do with economics. Another aspect we all might be missing but I thought we were going to be getting some cutting edge proposals from Clinton and other potential nominees on this very issue as part of the campaign platform for 2008...would basically do no good politically for the candidates if Pelosi and the House beat them to the punch now would it. Just a thought.

Based on her interview on McNeil-Lehrer this evening, it sounds like Pelosi's planning to try to get the CAFE increase in the final House-Senate conference bill based on it being in the Senate bill.  If that works, and it passes, she should be hailed not as dumb but as brilliant.

But I've lost patience with Dingell.  I think he should be stripped of his chairmanship and assigned to the Dogcatcher Committee.