Asked in the comments of No Banker Left Behind Passes - Oh, the OINK of it! if there was anything redeeming about the bailout, I went looking for some "silver lining." What with an additional 150 billion dollars of pork, there had to be something that will be of benefit to the little people, yes?
It turned out there were two things of a green nature added to the bailout by the Senate that will possibly help revolutionize our energy consumption and help our entire nation. Pork I can embrace!
The first is an issue near and dear to my heart - alternative energy. From the Wired blog network:
Included in the legislation Friday was a one-year extension of a tax break for wind energy production companies, and an eight year extension of a 30 percent tax break for residential and commercial solar installations.
"The bill is a major step in our long journey toward energy independence and ensures that solar energy will be a significant part of America's energy future," said the Solar Energy Industries Association president Rhone Resch in a statement. "This long-term extension of solar tax credits will create a domestic solar industry with hundreds of thousands of jobs while providing clean, affordable, carbon-free energy to millions of American families, businesses and communities."
The renewable energy industry had been fretting all year that members of Congress would adjourn without renewing the tax breaks, which company representatives said would have put a crimp in the industry's growth because they would have had a harder time obtaining financing.
I found the second green positive at Treehugger which reported credits for hybrid vehicles were tucked into the bailout. Interesting how they iced Toyota out:
The original "bailout plan" by Treasury Secretary Paulson was 3 pages long. The Senate version that was passed last night (H.R. 1424) is now 451 pages long and it has "sweeteners" for everybody and their dogs.
PHEV Credit
One of those is a plug-in hybrid vehicle tax credit that was probably first seen in some GM wet dream: "The credit is a base $2,500 plus $417 for each kWh of battery pack capacity in excess of 4 kWh, to a maximum of $7,500 for light-duty vehicles," up to $15,000 for vehicles weighting more than 26,000 pounds. Because the Chevy Volt has a 16-kWh battery pack, it would get the maximum credit. Read on for more details.
Bailing Out... GM?
But that's not all! Part of the big smile on GM's face is the provision that restricts the credit to vehicles with a battery pack with at least 4 kWh of capacity. This means that the first generation of Toyota plug-in hybrids, and probably many others, will be excluded.
It's a good thing they're setting a high standard for plug-in hybrids, but if they had wanted to encourage PHEVs in general, they could have had smaller credits for plug-ins with smaller battery packs.
When Will it End?
"Phaseout of the credit is to begin after the total number of qualified PHEVs in the US sold after 31 December 2008 is at least 250,000."
I am almost panting to buy a Chevy Bolt, so this maximum credit status is very good news.
Green Pork aside, I cannot forgive my Senators and Congressional Representatives for voting as they did. These two green initiatives should have been passed on their own, not as sweeteners for a rancid bill.
I updated No Banker Left Behind Passes - Oh, the OINK of it! with this information this morning, but it is the nature of OS that posts over 24 hours old are lost to the ether. So I repackaged it here in the hopes more folks would see it.
I believe we must agressively explore alternatives to oil and use our innovation and design skills to regain our place as world's unmatched technological leader in the areas that will save our future and the planet.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Salon.com
Comments
Please forgive how poorly that sentence is constructed.
Yab, you are 100 percent correct. I have not had enough time to parse the exact language, but I did see this:
Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM) inserted new legislation that would require insurance companies to cover mental illnesses the same way they cover physical infirmities. Domenici's bill-within-the-bill would ban higher copays and deductibles for the mentally afflicted, as well as remove limitations on doctor visits:
[Domenici] said perceptions about the ability to treat mental health problems have changed greatly over the years, but coverage has also become an expensive proposition. So, he and others, such as the late Sen. Paul Wellstone, D-Minn., began pushing for health insurance parity. Pushback came from those who would have to bear most of the expense.
"Those who stood to lose fought hard and that was principally insurance companies and businesses," Domenici said.
Employers and insurers were concerned that legislation would have required plans to cover a "telephone book" of conditions, raising costs beyond what companies and their workers could afford and potentially negating companies' ability to offer any health coverage at all.
Actually, employers and insurers are not that concerned about increased costs, because they can simply pass those on to the consumer/employee (and the consumer/employee will probably blame greedy corporations rather than government mandates for their inability to afford health insurance). Domenici's mental health parity bill may very well be a compassionate, necessary piece of legislation, but it has absolutely nothing to do with toxic mortgage assets or tightening credit markets.
Adoption of the measure, hailed by a leading mental health advocacy group as a "great civil rights victory," marks the end of a decade-long struggle led by Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts and his son, Representative Patrick Kennedy of Rhode Island, to ensure parity for mental illnesses in the eyes of the American healthcare system.
"The miracles of modern medicine make mental illness just as treatable today as physical illnesses," Kennedy, who is being treated for brain cancer, said in a statement. "After 10 years of debate, Congress has finally agreed to end discrimination in health insurance coverage that plagues persons living with mental illness for so long."
Kennedy added: "It will now be the law of the land that people with such illnesses deserve the same access to affordable coverage as those with physical illnesses."
The lead Republican sponsor in the Senate, Pete V. Domenici of New Mexico, singled out the Massachusetts Democrat for credit, calling his efforts remarkable. "This has been a labor of love for us," Domenici said in a statement.
The mental parity law, one of many amendments included in the legislation to broaden legislative support for the bailout package, requires health insurance companies to charge the same deductibles, copayments, and out-of-pocket expenses for mental health treatments as for all other illnesses.
Among other requirements, the law also requires the US Department of Labor to report to Congress every two years on how group health plans are complying with the law.
The first quote on mental health parity
More positive take on mental health parity
Lt: " The mental parity law, one of many amendments included in the legislation to broaden legislative support for the bailout package, requires health insurance companies to charge the same deductibles, copayments, and out-of-pocket expenses for mental health treatments as for all other illnesses."
It's about time! Thank you, Lt , for another most imformative post!
Not all earmark projects are undeserving. Like you, I wish they would just outright fund things. Maybe that's just too "socialist" for them. I suppose we may need to hear from children's wooden, arrow makers though.
rated and informed
I'm with o'stephanie. Why couldn't these good things have been their own bills?
Thanks for saving my eyes for yet another project. :)
Right on the nose, man.
I'm hip to green pork, too...they served it to us on the boat.
I did not mean to in any way imply that mental health parity wasn't a very good thing. I think it is long past due. It is very telling that they were so desperate to pass this bill that they essentially gave away the store in the sense that they passed many extras that had been languishing for years.
Joe -- only another sailor would recognize the haute cuisine reference.
"Hardly Haute", when you get your "steak" and see the marks on it where the jockey kept hitting it... See ya around, Pal.
Probably the funniest food reference to the bailout I've run across was the title of the post over at Open Congress: How to Pass a Wall Street Bailout - Wrap it in Loads of Pork. I'm sure political cartoonists are having a ball with the imagery.
This was presented as an urgent national crisis that needed immediate attention and bipartisan support. Not as a political opportunity for members of Congress who desired earmarks to help them with their re-election bids.
I've previously addressed this, but it's time bills were written in easy-to-understand English and addressed singular subjects without these attachments that force votes for main issues members agree with while also supporting attachments they don't.
Koakuma, I have blogged about earmarks (if you care to look at that).
http://open.salon.com/content.php?cid=17924
Obama actually had an early handle on a solution of how to fund infrastructure.
o'stephanie, you really are lucky with your representative. Quick thinking on his part to get his nibble of bacon, but yet not get saddled with blame for voting yea. The bailout was probably a once in a term or perhaps even once in a career opportunity for the representatives to load up their pet projects and have no fear it would not pass due to earmarks. Oh to have been a fly on the wall in the Senate when they negotiated to lard this baby up...
Makes me think of Kressskin's current post about Bush's Giant Package. Huge and needing the grease to pass through the body.
OC also lets you track legislation you are interested in when you create an account. It is a very nifty website and the people who write their blog have great snark.
This is a link to the bailout bill on OC.