Slashdot Mirror
Who's To Blame For Rules That Block Tesla Sales In Most US States?
cartechboy writes The common assumption among Tesla fans seems to be that state auto-dealer lobbyists are working with Republican legislators to enact laws banning direct sales of Tesla's electric cars to retail buyers. Is it true? The New York Times published an article with some data points that assesses the supposition. While the article mainly focuses on the conflict between Uber and the Republican party, some quotes could be easily applied to Tesla. For instance, Republican National Committee chairman Reince Preibus said, "It should be consumers, not government bureaucrats or legislators, that deicde what companies get our business." The author of the article, Josh Barro, wrote that 22 states permit direct sales of automobiles by Tesla to retail buyers, and of those the majority--14 of them-- voted for President Obama. He suggested that Democratic California, Illinois, and New York "have freer markets in auto retailing than Texas," which is presently Republican. When looking at a five-year-old article by Nate Silver that looked at political donations by car dealers, fully 88 percent of those donations went to Republican candidates, and just 12 percent to Democrats. That possibly suggests a propensity among Republican state legislators to support the interests for car dealers over those of electric-car buyers. Is the small bit of evidence enough to make a case?
Good background on the current system of dealership sinecure can be found in this short 2009 Competition Advocacy Paper from the U.S. Department of Justice, which delves into the history and effects of the dealers-only system which still prevails.
The creation of the FCC came under FDR's watch in 1934. Actually FDR formed a commission to study communication regulation. The study recommended that a Federal agency regulate all communications. FDR pushed for the creation of such a body and 2 DEMOCRATIC Senators introduced a bill to form the FCC. The bill passed both Houses and FDR signed it into law.
In the past the arguments that mandated the franchise structure had at least a little bit of logic in that by there being a local presence, the service that the vehicle needed could be performed by representatives with corporate connections. Back then, cars needed a LOT of service; rockers needed their lash adjusted, points needed changing and distributors needed to be curved, and lot of parts wore out faster. The majority of those maintenance tasks were internal combustion engine related though, with only a few, like brakes, applying to today's modern 100% electric cars. When cars needed that kind of maintenance it was easy to argue that without dealer support, the end consumer would be screwed-over with an unmaintainable vehicle.
As gas-powered cars improved they need less dealer-support for basic service, that already weakens the dealer-franchise argument. The new 100% electric cars require even less service to begin with though, and with the onboard computers' ability to report-back to Tesla when readings get out of normal the car can self-report small problems before they become large ones, assuming that Tesla has done a good job of determining what to monitor. Teslas simply don't need as much maintenance, and most of the simple maintenance (brakes, tires, even HVAC) can probably be performed by existing independent shops that can bill Tesla to do the warranty work.
This is a paradigm shift, and dealers are going to start to feel the pain if they're unwilling to actually add value, and honestly, there's not a lot of value to add when they're mostly unnecessary in this shift.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
The FCC was formed by the Communications Act of 1934 to replace the radio regulation functions of the Federal Radio Commission.
The Communications Act of 1934 is a United States federal law, signed into law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt on June 19, 1934. I believe FDR was a Democrat. The law was passed by the 73rd Congress. Both chambers had a Democratic majority. Dems in the Senate enjoyed a 60-35 majority, while over in the House thing were even rosier with Dems holding about 312 seats to Republicans 115 or so (counts varied slightly over time).
First, let's remember that lawmaking politicians of influence of either party are typically what, 60+ years old? 70+? These guys still have their staff print their emails for them and are surprised when a someone says 'let's watch a movie' and it doesn't involve (at best) a VCR. Not super-quick at adapting to change.
Second, until pretty recently the "target demographic" of electric car buyers was some sprout-eating weirdo from the Bay Area, ie, someone who wouldn't piss on a Republican if they were on fire, ie not someone that ever, in a million years, would VOTE Republican. OTOH, Car Dealerships are relatively typical small businessmen, whose concerns about running a business tend to coincide with GOP viewpoints and platforms. Whether they vote Dem/Rep is irrelevant, it's that they [i]could[/i] vote Republican, so which group would a Republican politician reasonably spend their time serving?
-Styopa
There was no Republican Southern Strategy. There was Nixon's Southern Strategy - which was his belief that Wallace would split the Democratic vote and that he could win states with less than 45% of the vote. Which he did.
You're proof of Goebbels big lie statement.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond