Some of us become genuinely excited about political races at election time; most of us vote our convictions in November for the candidate we feel will represent us best in Washington. Unfortunately, nearly all of us leave the scene at that juncture. Except for the active lobbyists, these elected officials rarely know our reactions to the assorted legislation that passes by them.

As constituents and as part of the automotive market each of us has a conscientious duty today to alert our congressmen to several bills that affect us directly. There are several crises now imminent on the bank of the Poto­mac. Foremost is the proposed amendment to the Clean Air Act; the House and Senate have passed different ver­sions providing for (at Detroit's urging) a gradual phasing in of stricter standards. Both versions would suspend the tougher standards set for the 1978 model year and would continue current standards. The two bills differ on the timetable for implementing stiffer standards in 1979. In anticipation of approved legislation, the auto industry has designed its 1978 cars around current standards. But until the House and Senate approve a compromise, the industry is bound by the stiffer standards it contends it cannot meet.

After a two week vacation for the July 4th holiday, Con­gress will recess for a month on August 5th; and again retire October 8th for the rest of the year. Under the law, Detroit may build cars but may not ship them to dealers without the needed government certification for anti-pollution standards. Even with announcements delayed about a week this year, storage space at the factories would limit new production to a few days. Ford started making "1978" Pintos, Bobcats and Mustang Ils early in July but must sell these as '77s until the "Washington Runaround" is resolved.

Now Joan Claybrook, the new female head of the Na­tional Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), is holding another hearing on car bumpers. She is consider­ing a plan which would require the auto makers to disclose how well their bumpers withstand collisions and how much they cost to repair. The auto insurance companies would have to reveal the discount rate they offer for vehicles whose bumpers afford the best protection against damage. Then NHTSA would compile the data and publish it in a booklet for the makers to distribute to their dealers, and ultimately to the buyers. At stake is the 1980 model stand­ard requiring front and rear bumpers to protect lighting, cooling, exhaust, latching and other auto safety systems in 5-mph collisions.

Congress also has another month to respond to Brock Adams and his support of passive-restraint (air bags) Stand­ard 208 that he wants to become mandatory starting with 1982 models.

While GM and Ford will participate in a two-year air bag test program at the start of the 1980 model year to produce as many as 440,000 air-bag-equipped compact and inter­mediate-size cars, the cost is estimated to be a minimum of $130 per car.

All makers are solidly behind mandatory seat belt and harness usage where the potential for life-saving with only 70-percent usage nearly equals the estimate for life-saving with 20-percent air bag and seat belt usage.

Finally, legislation passed two years ago set mileage standards for 1978 through 1980 models and also for 1985, but it left it up to the Transportation Secretary (Brock Adams) to issue standards for the intervening years. The statutory standards are 18 miles per gallon for 1978, 19 for 1979, 20 for 1980 and 27.5 for 1985. Now Mr. Adams has ruled they must produce 22 mpg for 1981 and 27 for 1984. And he has hinted that the 1984-85 standards may be "tightened."

The fact is Congress is dumping on the automotive industry and Detroit alone cannot represent us all to Congress. If we permit this legislation to take effect, we will barely recognize the market as we have known it in the past. Our only hope for reasonable decisions is to express ourselves to our elected officials; and now is the time to take action.