OBAMACAR!

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

OBAMACAR!

CONGRESS VOTES DOWN REPEAL OF "OBAMACAR"!

House votes down ban on military sponsorship of NASCAR teams

By Christina Wilkie - 02/18/11 02:49 PM ET

The House on Friday voted down a proposed budget amendment by Democratic Rep. Betty McCollum (Minn.) that would have ended the U.S. Army's sponsorship of an official NASCAR racecar.

The amendment sought to bar the use of Pentagon funds to sponsor NASCAR vehicles. In 2010, the U.S. Army spent some $7 million to sponsor the No. 39 Chevy Impala stockracing car.

The final vote was 148 in favor of the amendment, 281 opposed.

[Tx4obama]

1. Not fair calling it Obama car

It was funded before Obama was in office.
And it is the republican House that voted down the ban.

So, it's the RepubliCAR ;)

[itsrobert]

2. $7Mil for a Chevrolet Impala?

Talk about your $500 toilet seats. Government wasteful spending.

[GoCubsGo]

8. No.

$7 million to pay entrance fees for races, to truck it around from event to event, to replace multiple sets of tires each race, along with other parts on a very frequent basis, and to print out all the recruitment propaganda they hand out every time they display this vehicle. I'm sure there are other things the money gets spent on, but it's not all for the car.

[Twinguard]

15. My wife's family loves NASCAR,

so I end up watching (kind of "half-watching" really) quite a few races through the season. I ask them lots of questions about it so that I can at least be a better spectator. I figure if I understand it better than I might, at some point, actually care a little bit about it.

You are right about race fees and tires and stuff, I just want to add that the cars themselves cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to make, not even counting maintenance. Each team has several cars, all tuned differently for the different types of tracks (short tracks, road tacks, super speedways...). Factor in the garage crews, the pit crews, the driver him or herself, the spotter, the fuel, the specialized parts made only for these cars, and everything you said about trucking the car from city to city and it's not difficult to see how sponsoring a car could cost several million (in this case seven million) dollars.

Many sponsors look at these teams as an investment. NASCAR is hugely popular, and the fans are loyal to their driver. If a driver is sponsored by -- for example -- Ford, that driver's fans are more likely to buy Ford products over Chevrolet, Dodge, or Toyota. That said, I'd be curious to see how many people sign up for the Army or National Guard because their favorite driver is in an Army or National Guard car.

[boppers]

3. Cute.

I think I'll do some trolling with it.

[DebJ]

4. We are cutting needs for poor families and yet spending

7 million on a damn race car??????????????????????????

[BobbyBoring]

13. You have to remember

The Romans at the time of their decline were just like we are now. The "Mob" or us in modern times must be entertained so we don't see the few remaining things we have stripped from us to maintain the "Empire".

The Romans had Chariot races we have NASCAR.
The Romans had gladiators, we have football and American Gladiator.
The Romans threw Christians to the lions????????????????? How long will it be before we have actual blood games where dirty brown people are fed to animals.

There are many in America that would welcome that day.

7 Mil. is a drop in the bucket to maintain the MIC~

[Kucinich Feingold]

14. And we have soccer, rugby, boxing, MMA, ice hockey,baseball,basketball,cricket,

and you get the point. My sport hockey is violent. Does that make it similar to the days of the Romans?

[BobbyBoring]

17. Oh Yeah!

Hockey players fall in to the gladiator category!

[Kucinich Feingold]

18. And Rugby too.

[Chan790]

19. I oppose the race car, but...

it's Pentagon discretionary funds for promotion of military service. If they were not spending it on race cars, they'd be spending it in a more direct fashion on suckering 18 year old kids from bumblefuck to join the Army.

There is no path from not paying for the race car to paying for poor families to eat.

[DebJ]

5. Thanks for posting. Time for a letter to the editor regarding

Mr. Platts of Pa's vote. We deserve an explanation of this crap.

[tomg]

6. Maybe we should have congress

dress like NASCAR drivers and wear their corporate logos.

[Brewman_Jax]

7. They lost track of millions of dollars

and yet can afford to sponsor a race car while social programs are being cut? :o

I see where the defense budget can be cut by...$7 million.

[vroomvroom]

9. I really wonder if Obama hates these things -- I know i would nt

[Renew Deal]

11. Hates what things?

Cars? Races? Dealing with DC games?

[Renew Deal]

10. Can't DoD cut it on their own?

How many people does it recruit? If it's worth it, then they should do it. If not, cut it.

[FrenchieCat]

12. How many jobs did this vote generate, Mr. Boehner?

[SidDithers]

16. Don't you mean BOEHNERCAR!?...nt

Sid

[Avant Guardian]

20. Too drunk for driving

[jakefrep]

21. NASCAR is a waste of money...

for the government and the auto manufacturers. In its present form, NASCAR contributes absolutely nothing to the advancement of automotive technology. It's a technologically-bankrupt rolling soap opera.

[Travelman]

22. Worrying about this is silly

Seven million dollars. Sounds like a lot of money. But consider for a moment the total cost of recruitment: five and a half billion dollars in FY 2009.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/expectmore/detail/10000064.2002.html


Look at the numbers:

$5,420,000,000
$7,000,000


That's 0.12915% of the recruiting budget. About one eighth of a percent of the recruiting budget. Not the overall DOD budget; just the budget that they have for recruiting. Overall, the entire DOD probably spends more on paper clips than they do NASCAR advertising.

Getting wound up about this is silly. NASCAR reaches many, many hundreds of thousands of people directly. It is the country's most popular spectator sport. From an advertising standpoint, seven mil on this is a bargain.