Jump to content
Create New...
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    New U.S. Highway Bill Brings Much Needed Money To NHTSA

      Larger Budget on defect investigations and a increased maximum fine are some of the changes in store.

    The U.S. Congress is voting on a new highway bill that if passed, would bring some much needed money and changes for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).

     

    Automotive News reports the new bill, called Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act would be the first long-term highway plan in a decade. If passed, the bill would provide roughly $300 billion for roads, bridges, and mass-transit projects. The bill would also increase NHTSA's budget for defect investigations from $10 million a year to $30 million. But for NHTSA to get the increase in the budget, they would need to implement a number of reforms outlined by Transportation Department’s inspector general.

     

    Along with the increase in the defect investigation budget, FAST would some much-needed changes in how recalls and defects are dealt with.

    • The maximum fine for safety violations will increase from $35 million to $105 million
    • Employees who report on potentially dangerous safety violations will be rewarded
    • If there is a financial penalty put on an automaker or supplier, a whistleblower could get up to 30 percent of the penalty
    • Automakers will need to keep safety data for 10 years (up from the current 5) and provide part numbers for defective parts to NHTSA
    • Dealers will be required to notify customers of an open recall
    • Rental car companies will not be allowed to rent out vehicles that have an open recall
    • States would be given funds to notify owners who renew their vehicle registration that a recall is due


    Currently, the bill has bipartisan support and the White House announced that President Obama would sign the bill if passed.

     

    Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    I am excited by this, but sadly it is also still just a half ass measure as the current highway infrastructure work needed is estimated at $400 Billion. So while this will help, it will not really address replacing the old worn out bridges and roads nor will it really address the need for better mass transit and freeway expansion to deal with congestion.

     

    Cut a third of the 1800 military bases around the world and use that money on rebuilding America.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I am excited by this, but sadly it is also still just a half ass measure as the current highway infrastructure work needed is estimated at $400 Billion. So while this will help, it will not really address replacing the old worn out bridges and roads nor will it really address the need for better mass transit and freeway expansion to deal with congestion.

     

    Cut a third of the 1800 military bases around the world and use that money on rebuilding America.

    Bill Clinton did that in the 90's and we still did not get better roads.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    I am excited by this, but sadly it is also still just a half ass measure as the current highway infrastructure work needed is estimated at $400 Billion. So while this will help, it will not really address replacing the old worn out bridges and roads nor will it really address the need for better mass transit and freeway expansion to deal with congestion.

     

    Cut a third of the 1800 military bases around the world and use that money on rebuilding America.

    Bill Clinton did that in the 90's and we still did not get better roads.

     

    Then Shrub spent Trillions on his personal war and we still did not win.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     

    I am excited by this, but sadly it is also still just a half ass measure as the current highway infrastructure work needed is estimated at $400 Billion. So while this will help, it will not really address replacing the old worn out bridges and roads nor will it really address the need for better mass transit and freeway expansion to deal with congestion.

     

    Cut a third of the 1800 military bases around the world and use that money on rebuilding America.

    Bill Clinton did that in the 90's and we still did not get better roads.

     

    Then Shrub spent Trillions on his personal war and we still did not win.

     

    Wasn't my point dfelt but in my only defense of Bush Jr. he also had to use a military that was cut in half by the Clinton administration during the 90's. There is a direct cause and effect link there but I don't want to talk politics here. It never gets anyone anywhere here.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     

     

    I am excited by this, but sadly it is also still just a half ass measure as the current highway infrastructure work needed is estimated at $400 Billion. So while this will help, it will not really address replacing the old worn out bridges and roads nor will it really address the need for better mass transit and freeway expansion to deal with congestion.

     

    Cut a third of the 1800 military bases around the world and use that money on rebuilding America.

    Bill Clinton did that in the 90's and we still did not get better roads.

     

    Then Shrub spent Trillions on his personal war and we still did not win.

     

    Wasn't my point dfelt but in my only defense of Bush Jr. he also had to use a military that was cut in half by the Clinton administration during the 90's. There is a direct cause and effect link there but I don't want to talk politics here. It never gets anyone anywhere here.

     

    True and I will also respect and stay away since this is not the political thread. My point is no matter who is in office, they waste money out of the country rather than taking care of the country first.

     

    Our infrastructure is pathetic and we need to build a modern electrical grid, natural gas, roads, etc. 

     

    I believe we can all agree we need to invest in America first before elsewhere.

    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    when gas is 2.00 a gal like it is now, i really would have no prob spending another 50-75 cents a gal in tax to fund new roads (not trains, bike lanes,  or inefficient transit)

     

    but if you add a tax it never goes away.  And in states like here, it goes into the general fund and gets raped and never makes it to new roads.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    when gas is 2.00 a gal like it is now, i really would have no prob spending another 50-75 cents a gal in tax to fund new roads (not trains, bike lanes,  or inefficient transit)

     

    but if you add a tax it never goes away.  And in states like here, it goes into the general fund and gets raped and never makes it to new roads.

     

    If only the rest of America was so willing to embrace pragmatic taxes and strict, transparent uses for the proceeds!!

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • GM stated a few years back that they were all in on EVs and would prove that by bringing to market a number of EVs that would meet the needs of the retail market. Chevrolet started with the Silverado EV RST edition, delivering an estimated 440 miles of range on a full charge with 754 horsepower and 785 lb-ft of torque with a 0-60 mph time of less than 4.5 seconds, DC fast charging up to 350kW and a 10,000 pounds of trailering with 1,500 pounds of payload. The Silverado RST was a fully loaded truck that has many features and yet Chevrolet also stated that two other modules would also be available by the end of 2024, 4WT with a 450-mile range, 3WT with 393-mile range, and a Trail Boss edition. Full details could be viewed here: The First-Ever Silverado EV | Electric Truck | Chevrolet WT EV Truck Trail Boss EV truck GMC was soon to follow with their Sierra EV Denali pickup 1st Edition that delivered 460 miles of range with 760 horsepower and 785 lb-ft of torque with the same 0-60 mph time, charging, hauling and trailering specifications. GMC also stated that by the end of 2024 or early 2025 you could buy a Sierra EV AT4 edition or Sierra EV Elevation edition. Full details can be seen here: The All-New 2024 Sierra EV Denali Edition 1 | Electric Truck | GMC GM has added a Max Range battery option to their truck lineup in the following: Chevrolet WT Max Range 492 Miles EPA-estimate Chevrolet RST Max Range 390 Miles EPA-estimate GMC Sierra EV Denali Extended Range 390 Miles EPA-estimate GMC Sierra EV Denali Max Range 460 Miles EPA-estimate Both Chevrolet will offer additional range packages for the LT series of EV pickup in 2025 as will GMC expand extended range and Max Range to the rest of their family of EV pickups in 2025.   View full article
    • The U.S. military asked for a new tactical vehicle that could run silent for what the military calls silent drive and watch, technologies to make it very hard to detect. Enter GM Defense LLC that took the Chevrolet Silverado 2500HD ZR2 truck with GM's 2.8L Duramax turbo-diesel engine, add a 12 module battery pack, electric motors front and rear for awd and a total armored exterior allowing GM Defense to meet the requirements of a Silent drive and watch tactical vehicle prototype for the 21st century. GM Defense ensured the vehicle would have a stealthy ingress and egress for success in high threat zones, delivering onboard power to support high-energy-demand sensors, shooters and a Soldier kit. A "Next Gen" tactical vehicle that delivers: active and passive safety features Including roll-over protection anti-lock braking electronic stability control four and five point seat belt harnesses 360-degree camera capabilities in HD This "Next Gen" tactical vehicle was designed to support using existing sustainment benefits: Fuel Demand Reduction Existing JP8 fuel infrastructure Lower maintenance from reduced parts, subsystems in the propulsion system This vehicle can be ordered in two, four, and six seat configurations allowing it to support multi-mission capabilities including command and control, launch efforts, network extensions, counter unmanned aerial systems, casualty evacuation and other critical mission needs. This vehicle will be on display and available for test driving at the Oct 14-16th AUSA 2024 tradeshow in Washington D.C. booth #7809. View full article
    • Seems the GMC EV Pickup much like the Chevy version now has a max range offering too, 460 miles of range for the AWD EV Pickup. 2025 GMC Sierra EV Denali offers more range and more choice
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search