While One Fuel-Economy Proposal in Congress May Go
Too Far, Another May Be a Lot More Reasonable

Fully produced report in MP3 format:
48 kbps |
96 kbps
(47 seconds)
--
How
Will You Use This Story? --
(OPEN):
THE U-S SENATE WILL VOTE ON FUEL-ECONOMY LEGISLATION WITHIN THE NEXT
FEW DAYS. EVERYONE AGREES THAT BETTER GAS MILEAGE HELPS THE
ENVIRONMENT, AND OUR POCKETBOOKS. BUT, ONE SENATE BILL MAY GO TO
THE EXTREME. FORMER U-S SENATOR JIM TALENT, FROM MISSOURI,
EXPLAINS WHY AN AGGRESSIVE, COMPROMISE BILL IS MORE REASONABLE...
(TALENT):
"H-R SIX CALLS FOR AN AVERAGE 52 MILES PER GALLON--A
STANDARD SO EXTREME [THAT] NOT A SINGLE AUTOMAKER CAN MEET IT. THE
BILL NOT ONLY HURTS DETROIT; IT WILL HURT AUTO JOBS IN MISSOURI,
TENNESSEE, AND WISCONSIN--AS WELL AS DEALERS AND SUPPLIERS, NATIONWIDE."
(BRIDGE):
TALENT ADVOCATES A COMPROMISE BILL...
(TALENT):
"THE LEVIN-BOND AMENDMENT IS AGGRESSIVE--BUT
REASONABLE: IT RAISES STANDARDS FOR CARS TO 36 MILES PER GALLON.
IT PROTECTS AMERICAN AUTO JOBS--AND REQUIRES ENERGY-EFFICIENT
TECHNOLOGIES, LIKE HYBRIDS. THIS AMENDMENT IS TOUGH--BUT IT
DOESN'T RUN THE CAR COMPANIES OUT OF BUSINESS."
|