Cash for Caulkers

[one...two...tree 2,762]

By Steve Hargreaves, CNNMoney.com staff writer

President Obama proposed a new program Tuesday that would reimburse homeowners for energy-efficient appliances and insulation, part of a broader plan to stimulate the economy.

The administration didn't provide immediate details, but said it would work with Congress on crafting legislation. Steve Nadel, director at the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, who's helping write the bill, said a homeowner could receive up to $12,000 in rebates.

The proposal is part of the President's larger spending plan, which also includes money for small businesses, renewable energy manufacturing, and infrastructure.

We know energy efficiency "creates jobs, saves money for families, and reduces the pollution that threatens our environment," Obama said. "With additional resources, in areas like advanced manufacturing of wind turbines and solar panels, for instance, we can help turn good ideas into good private-sector jobs."

The program contains two parts: money for homeowners for efficiency projects, and money for companies in the renewable energy and efficiency space.

The plan will likely create a new program where private contractors conduct home energy audits, buy the necessary gear and install it, according to a staffer on the Senate Energy Committee and Nadel at the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy.

Big-ticket items like air conditioners, heating systems, washing machines, refrigerators, windows and insulation would likely be covered, Nadel said.

Consumers might be eligible for a 50% rebate on both the price of the equipment and the installation, up to $12,000, said Nadel. So far, there is no income restriction on who is eligible. That would mean a household could spend as much as $24,000 on upgrades and get half back.

Homes that take full advantage of the program could see their energy bills drop as much as 20%, he said. The program is expected to cost in the $10 billion range.

It's not clear how the home efficiency plan would be administered - the government may issue rebates to consumers directly, homeowners might get a tax credit, or the program could be run via state agencies.

If consumers have to spend a lot of money up front to get the credit, it could throw a wrench in the works, David Kreutzer, an energy analyst at the Heritage Foundation, told CNN.

"This will not be something that's attractive to people who are having trouble already making their budget payments month to month or week to week," he said.

To keep consumers from having to spend thousands of dollars before getting reimbursed, Nadel said, one idea is to have contractors or big box retailers pay part of the cost up front.

Fraud issues could also come up, Kreutzer said.

"Any program that is going to run through a third party and is going to distribute billions of dollars needs to have lots of checks and balances to make sure there's not abuse," he said.

Nadel noted that as a way to guard against fraud, contractors would have to be certified to participate.

Energy company boost

Obama's new spending plan also calls for renewable energy companies to get additional support. That could come in the form of loan guarantees - basically, money the government uses to secure loans for startups.

In the original stimulus bill passed earlier this year, $6 billion was earmarked for such loan guarantees. But then lawmakers took away $2 billion to fund Cash for Clunkers - the popular program that paid people to turn in their old cars.

The $4 billion from the original bill has funded about $40 billion in loans, said the staffer on the Senate Energy Committee. Meanwhile, firms are hoping for another $4 billion in loan guarantees, since they have another $40 billion worth of projects that need funding.

A bill on energy efficiency reimbursements already has supporters in the Senate.

"Not only will [such legislation] increase our energy security and transform our energy infrastructure to a modern, clean and efficient one," Senate Energy Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., wrote in a recent op-ed column in the Hill, a Capitol Hill newspaper. "But it also will position the United States to lead in the development of clean energy technologies."

link

[peejay 327]

The hole Obama & the Dems keep throwing money into gets deeper and deeper daily. Apparently it is a bottomless pit.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

The hole Obama & the Dems keep throwing money into gets deeper and deeper daily. Apparently it is a bottomless pit.

We have plenty of paper.

[Danno 1,228]

Years ago I took advantage of a similar program out in California were so many houses were built w/out insulation.

By simply being a conduit between work work crews and the home owner, easy money was to be had.

I expected these programs to be operational a year ago after the campaign promises.

[Dr. Obvious 49]

Good to well insulate the house before it is foreclosed on. Banks don't like drafty properties on their hopium-laced balance sheets.

[peejay 327]

Years ago I took advantage of a similar program out in California were so many houses were built w/out insulation.

By simply being a conduit between work work crews and the home owner, easy money was to be had.

I expected these programs to be operational a year ago after the campaign promises.

I personally think these programs are boondoggle pork that guys like Obama believe will garner them votes using public money. It's nothing more than spread the wealth handouts to pad the ballot box. The same people that b!tch about corporate welfare have no problem with ####### like this even as we run up astronomical deficits. Who is paying for this and where is the money coming from?

I don't need Obama in order to insulate and caulk my house nor do I believe it is the duty of government to do it. If Obama and crew thinks they have my vote locked in because they dangle this "gimme" in my face...they are sadly mistaken as well.

I'm one of the 60% of Americans that actually pays US income tax every year (and have done so my entire adult working life). And I'm a middle class blue collar worker! Not some evil Wall Street robber baron! I also believe there is no such thing as "somethin' for nothin'". Somebody is paying for this pork. Namely all of the 60% of Americans that actually pay US income taxes. Rich to working class.

If ####### like this is at the core of the plan to promote job creation in America...we are in for more hard times ahead. Government needs to create favorable conditions to promote broad sustainable business models...not do one hit wonders that fade as soon as the money dries up. Not to mention that government should not be promoting one industry at the expense of the others unless there is overriding national interest to do so. Not someone's fashionable notion to promote their pet project of being green for green's sake. It either makes economic sense or it doesn't. It's either in the broad national interest or it isn't. I'm not really convinced that running up the federal deficit even further for this purpose is prudent right now.

That said...would I deduct new windows from my income tax if I need new windows? You betcha! I'd also cash any checks or pocket any money any idiot wants to send my way too. My MaMa didn't raise no fool. I'm paying for this boondogle whether I use it or not. I'm just saying that this isn't prudent and wise use of tax $$$ while we run up astronomical federal deficits. Maybe if everyone had to pay even a minimal tax on their income there wouldn't be a class of citizenry that buys into the notion that anybody owes them a damned thing in this world or that everyone else should pay for it.

Remember this...politicians derive their power and influence over you by making you dependent on them. That is the core mentality of government entitlement. They want you to have to go through them to get anything you need in this world. Womb to tomb security comes at a cost of your freedom. No such thing as a free lunch in this world.

Edited December 10, 2009 by peejay