Like Causes?

Install the App
TRY NOW

senate Bill S. 565

Should Federal Agencies Use Remanufactured Auto Parts to Save Money?

Argument in favor

Remanufactured auto parts are basically the same level of quality as new parts — but less expensive. This bill should make maintaining the federal vehicle fleet less costly.

Eric's Opinion
···
04/18/2016
This will not only save federal money, but may cut down public spending. If there is no strong, dissenting reason why you should not I say go ahead.
Like (7)
Follow
Share
GrumpyMSgt's Opinion
···
08/28/2015
Yes, I would love to see Harry, Nancy, John, and Mitch riding around in used Pontiac Aztec's, Oldsmobiles, Saturn's, and other GM cars from a once great American company destroyed to help secure an election. Our Socialist Marxist Dictator bought a lot of votes with this scam.
Like (6)
Follow
Share
Crystal's Opinion
···
09/28/2015
If it's good enough for the citizens, it's good enough for the Feds. My insurance forces me to look into this as a first option.
Like (3)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

Giving agencies discretion about when to not use remanufactured auto parts is wise, but may also negate some of the cost savings this bill could provide.

Jacob's Opinion
···
06/02/2016
A new vehicle should be manufactured from new parts, especially when they cost so much nowadays.
Like (3)
Follow
Share
Daniel's Opinion
···
12/31/2016
Manufacturers should decide which materials to use. It's their company. Who are we to legislate the production process? This is not the role of government.
Like (1)
Follow
Share
Stan's Opinion
···
06/09/2016
No not at all and insurance should not be allowed to use them either.
Like (1)
Follow
Share

bill Progress


  • EnactedOctober 7th, 2015
    The President signed this bill into law
  • The house Passed September 28th, 2015
    Passed by Voice Vote
      house Committees
      Committee on Oversight and Reform
  • The senate Passed June 15th, 2015
    Passed by Voice Vote
      senate Committees
      Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
    IntroducedFebruary 25th, 2015

Log in or create an account to see how your Reps voted!

Bill Activity

  • action
    Introduced in Senate
  • referral
    Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
  • calendar
    Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
  • reported
    Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Reported by Senator Johnson without amendment. With written report No. 114-59.
  • calendar
    Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 101.
  • vote
    Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
  • action
    Message on Senate action sent to the House.
  • action
    Received in the House.
  • referral
    Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
  • action
    Mr. Walberg moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
  • action
    Considered under suspension of the rules.
  • action
    DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on S. 565.
  • vote
    On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.
  • action
    Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
  • topresident
    Presented to President.
  • signed
    Signed by President.
  • enacted
    Became Public Law No: 114-65.

bill Progress


  • EnactedOctober 7th, 2015
    The President signed this bill into law
  • The house Passed September 28th, 2015
    Passed by Voice Vote
      house Committees
      Committee on Oversight and Reform
  • The senate Passed June 15th, 2015
    Passed by Voice Vote
      senate Committees
      Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
    IntroducedFebruary 25th, 2015

Log in or create an account to see how your Reps voted!
    This will not only save federal money, but may cut down public spending. If there is no strong, dissenting reason why you should not I say go ahead.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    Yes, I would love to see Harry, Nancy, John, and Mitch riding around in used Pontiac Aztec's, Oldsmobiles, Saturn's, and other GM cars from a once great American company destroyed to help secure an election. Our Socialist Marxist Dictator bought a lot of votes with this scam.
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    If it's good enough for the citizens, it's good enough for the Feds. My insurance forces me to look into this as a first option.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    A new vehicle should be manufactured from new parts, especially when they cost so much nowadays.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    Save federal cash by buying less expensive parts. YES, as long as they are "made in the U.S.A." Why create more jobs in China. The biggest problem could be controlling sub-contractors. Lastly, all re-manufactured parts must meet or exceed original parts.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    Insurance companies do this all the time on our vehicles. So long as the remanufactured parts pose no danger or risk then yes. Goveenment waste and overspending needs to stop.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    As long as it doesn't look or work like a junk heap! Most refines are fine though, and helps keep up the reusability of materials
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Why not? Using oem is not only overly expensive but not helping us state side. Support those that reman state side.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Yeah why not remanufacture something. It's better than tossing it in a landfill.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Same standards as used for the general public
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    All the comments of those voting no seem to think this would apply to the cars they buy. The question indicates that remanufactured parts would only be used for government vehicles, not consumer vehicles.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    I like the idea reducing waste and repairing parts is a smart idea.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    Yes
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    As someone who deals with this scenario on a daily basis, I think it's a terrible idea! There is a reason why remanufactured parts are inexpensive, and that is quality. Would you cut corners on your parents, friends, relatives vehicles and jeopardize their safety for a couple of bucks?
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    No not at all and insurance should not be allowed to use them either.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    Remanufactured parts are not as safe for your car. Doubt very seriously that they would be up to spec. Depending on remanufactured part :safety features, more accidents, more insurance claims.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    Absolutely. The average American does. In fact, most insurance plans use them by default. Save the money
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    Manufacturers should decide which materials to use. It's their company. Who are we to legislate the production process? This is not the role of government.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    If we have they should too
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    I am all for cost savings to make my tax dollar go further. This is again, a no-brainer, to preclude government agencies from being "less than good stewards" of my tax dollars.
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    MORE