Ed Bobit's Publisher's Page

Here richly, with ridiculous display, The Politician's corpse was laid away While all of his acquaintance sneered and slanged, I wept; for I had longed to see him hanged.-Hilaire Belloc,Epitaph on the Politician Himself

Political campaigns are designedly made into emotional orgies which endeavor to distract attention from the real issues involved, and they actually paralyze what slight powers of cerebration man can normally muster.-James Harvey Robinson,The Human Comedy

This particular issue of Automotive Fleet is a unique one that may totally confuse some politicians. I am referring to two of our solid feature stories: one on H.R. 1415 and the divergent opinions on fleet allowances, the other on the new 1984 allowances just announced by the car makers. Both stories are "must" reading for every professional fleet person since they affect the very roots of this fall's purchasing (comparing and weighing the new allowance programs) and the long-term atmosphere in which we work (H.R. 1415).

General Motors elected to reinstate allowances last year to maintain a competitive posture. Now, their new allowance programs are undoubtedly being termed "mighty competitive" by other makers who have their own sales objectives (and programs) for the fleet market. It's ironic that these new allowance programs were announced during the heat of battle by NADA and the Dealers Alliance group, who are totally opposed to any allowances that the dealer does not share through his retail purchasing. Much less publicized, but also an element of interest, is that some lessors are prodding the factories for the corporate fleet purchases' "sweeter" daily rental allowances. There are similar pressures on the dealers to match daily rental buying rates for regular fleet purchases. It remains the responsibility of every fleet buyer to make his purchases as economically as possible, and the volume buys for this fall will be predictably crazy with Detroit's special fleet offerings.

Our strong concern and total commitment is to make certain that H.R. 1415 does not become a national law. To this end I personally spent two days in Washington in mid-July. In my conversation with Congressman Taylor, who introduced the bill, it was clear that he feels very strongly about its necessity "to save the auto franchise system." The congressman reports continued new support from many sectors toward its passage. Our feature story in this issue indicates that NADA is similarly committed to its support, as is the money-raising and ad-running Dealers Alliance. However, in my discussions with the key people responsible for the subcommittees where the bill now rests, there appears to be low priority to any movement on it in the near future. A member of the Energy & Commerce subcommittee informed me that on the first of July they wrote a letter to James C. Miller III, chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, asking about the prevalence of subsidy violations that have directly injured dealers and whether there has actually been any violation of laws administered by the FTC (so far, no reply). The staff director of the subcommittee advised me that no hearings have been scheduled. It is unlikely there will be any since the current session of Congress is due to recess early in August, leaving just three weeks for action in September when major issues will be confronting both houses.

There appears to be an almost ambivalent attitude on this bill, both within the industry and on the Hill, that it may not really come out of committee before Congress recesses. A better guess is that the next Congress will have a similar bill re-introduced with additional support since some states, such as Rhode Island, are determined to establish similar legislation on a state-by-state basis (not unlike the various "Lemon Laws"). Whatever happens, you can be assured that we will keep you up to date with the significant developments.