The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“NATIONAL SALVAGE MOTOR VEHICLE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT OF 1998” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Transportation was published in the Extensions of Remarks section on pages E2097-E2098 on Oct. 12, 1998.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
NATIONAL SALVAGE MOTOR VEHICLE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT OF 1998
______
speech of
HON. JOHN D. DINGELL
of michigan
in the house of representatives
Friday, October 9, 1998
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, at some point, I hope that my Republican friends will explain to me their views on federalism. With this bill, the Majority is embracing the notion that the Federal Government possesses wisdom superior to the states on the subject of issuing motor vehicle titles.
The legislation stops short of a federal takeover of the state function of titling motor vehicles or creating a new Federal Department of Motor Vehicles. However, it tells every state in the country that it must comply with new federal regulations governing how states title motor vehicles. These new regulations will establish, and I quote,
``uniform standards, procedures, and methods for the issuance and control of titles for motor vehicles and for information to be contained on such titles.''
In Committee, Democratic Members raised a number of concerns about this legislation. Those problems still remain in the bill we have before us today.
First, this legislation gives no money to the states to perform inspections, if required, nor does it provide funds to carry out other new, federally imposed duties. I must admit I'm a bit perplexed. I thought my Republican colleagues had committed not to impose costly new burdens on state and local governments without compensating them for their expense.
Second, the bill could still preempt state laws that give the consumer greater protection. Although, under certain circumstances, the amendment before us lets the states set the percentage of value loss that will define what a salvage vehicle is, this bill could still preempt state laws that provide greater consumer protections in other areas of salvage vehicle title branding.
Third, the bill gives the Department of Transportation authority to issue regulations covering all aspects of vehicle titling by the states. That may be more than needed to accomplish the bill's stated purpose, which is to require title branding for salvage vehicles nationwide.
Mr. Speaker, for these reasons, the National Association of Attorneys General has opposed this legislation, as has a broad-based coalition of consumer groups. Among the consumer groups opposing the bill are: the Consumer Federation of America, Public Citizen, Consumers Union, and the U.S. Public Interest Research Group.
Clearly, there are legitimate theft prevention and consumer protection issues involved in the way the states title motor vehicles. I am not opposed to addressing these in a prudent and careful manner which respects the rights of the states.
I, therefore, suggest strongly that this bill simply needs more work and that it should not be enacted into law in its present form. This legislation seeks to address important public policy goals. However, we should be careful that our solution to these public policy concerns does not create new problems that we are not prepared to deal with.
____________________
