<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>

      <rss version="2.0">		
        <channel>
          <title>WashingtonWatch.com - S. 357, The Ten-in-Ten Fuel Economy Act</title>
          <link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills</link>
          <description></description>
          <managingEditor>info@washingtonwatch.com</managingEditor>
          <generator>http://www.pjdoland.com/chai/?v=0.1</generator>
          
<item>
<title>Comment by Bruce (December 13, 2007, 01:00:00)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_357.html#24586</link>
<description>I agree with Liberty, I question the calculation that says this legislation would save money.  I would save money if I bought a cheap economy car, true.  I will save less if the government forces it on me and the automotive industry.

Frank - do you know what subsidize means?  That is when the government pays part of the bill.  They do not do that for petroleum, as you yourself point out the current fuel taxes.  Several alternative fuels, hybrids, etc. however ARE subsidized....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">24586@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 13 Dec 2007 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Forno (December 13, 2007, 01:00:00)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_357.html#24588</link>
<description>I looked at the Congressional Budget analysis that's linked above.  I think it's what they use to make these estimates.  And it says that gas taxes would go down by a lot because less gas would be sold - that's where the savings come from.  But it doesn't say what the costs are that would be imposed on auto manufacturers, which obviously go right to auto buyers.  So there are savings, but they come at an unknown cost....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">24588@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 13 Dec 2007 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Frank (November 22, 2007, 01:00:00)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_357.html#23583</link>
<description>All the gov't has to do to improve fuel economy is stop subsidizing the petroleum industry. Per-dollar fuel taxes should be at least twice as high as they are now. That would drive consumers to seek relief through improved-mpg vehicles and deter wasteful usage....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">23583@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 22 Nov 2007 00:00:00 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by liberty (July 14, 2007, 01:00:00)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_357.html#17096</link>
<description>How does mandating businesses do something that government has decided is correct save me money??...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">17096@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 14 Jul 2007 00:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Status as of May 8, 2007</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_357.html</link>
<description>5/8/2007: Senate committee/subcommittee actions. Status: Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">20566@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 08 May 2007 00:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
        </channel>
      </rss>
  		