WJ to XJ Engine Swap
05-10-2006, 07:00 PM
#61
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: WJ to XJ Engine Swap smog bill AB 2683
You can buy it though...
"Earle Horton" <NurseBustersNoSpam@msn.com> wrote in message
news:44626e4d$0$6063$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.co m...
> "You can't fight city hall."
>
> Earle
>
> "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:44625704.BD2193E2@***.net...
>> It was so.... close and with Arnies thirteen Hummers, I thought
>> with a little nudging they wouldn't change the law. So I wrote them:
>>
>> From: L.W.(ßill) ------ III <----------@***.net> 9/14/04 11:42 AM
>> Subject: Veto AB 2683
>> To: Governor Schwarzenegger <governor@govmail.ca.gov>
>>
>> Dear Governor Schwarzenegger:
>> I am a collector of Jeeps with historical significance. I am
>> writing to request your veto of Assembly Bill 2683 (Lieber), which would
>> repeal the state's current rolling Smog Check exemption for vehicles 30
>> years old and older.
>>
>> I have studied the issue, and also the "junk science" relied
>> upon by the bill's proponents. I am convinced that the repeal of the
>> 30-year rolling exemption would cause definite harm to large numbers of
>> California citizens and businesses for no verifiable emissions reduction
>> benefit. The facts are consistent with my objections to this bill:
>> â?¢ California law recognizes the minimal impact of vehicles
>> 30-years old and older on vehicle emissions and air quality;
>> â?¢ Vehicles 30-years old and older constitute a minuscule portion
>> of the overall vehicle population and are a poor source from which to
>> look for emissions reduction;
>> â?¢ Antique and classic vehicles are overwhelmingly well-maintained
>> and infrequently driven (a fraction of the miles each year as a new
>> vehicle); and
>> â?¢ Legislators and regulators are feeling the heat from a failed
>> effort to meet air quality goals and are looking for a convenient
>> scapegoat, using false data and inflated annual mileage assumptions to
>> further their case. It is unfair for classic car afficionados to carry
>> the burden of their mistakes. There is no principled distinction between
>> a 1975 vehicle with a lifetime smog check exemption and a 1976 vehicle
>> without. While I support the goal of improved air quality and believe
>> further emission reductions from
>> mobile sources are possible, I am convinced that A.B. 2683 will not help
>> to achieve these reductions. This legislation will only serve to impose
>> unnecessary social and economic burdens upon the citizens of
>> California. It should be vetoed.
>> Thank you for your consideration.
>>
>> And a plea written the way I talk:
>>
>> From: L.W.(ßill) ------ III <----------@***.net> 9/14/04 2:14 PM
>> Subject: Please veto AB 2683
>> To: Governor Schwarzenegger <governor@govmail.ca.gov>
>>
>> Hi Arnold,
>> Please veto AB 2683 as your friend Jay Leno and I would like:
>>
> http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...llinheadlights
>> This extra hundred bucks every couple of years may not sound like much
>> to you, but it will place a financial hardship on me, retired, and just
>> driving my '78 Bronco to the grocery store and back. I keep it
>> mechanically perfect, as you may see in it's certificate:
>> http://www.----------.com/smog.jpg
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> To no avail!
>> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
>> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>>
>> Herb Leong wrote:
>> >
>> > Unless the law gets changed, it's got a loooooong wait to be smog
> free... =)
>> > You can thank the Sierra Club et al.
>> >
>> >
> http://www.smogcheck.ca.gov/ftp/pdff...smog_check.pdf
>> >
>> > /herb
>
>
"Earle Horton" <NurseBustersNoSpam@msn.com> wrote in message
news:44626e4d$0$6063$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.co m...
> "You can't fight city hall."
>
> Earle
>
> "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:44625704.BD2193E2@***.net...
>> It was so.... close and with Arnies thirteen Hummers, I thought
>> with a little nudging they wouldn't change the law. So I wrote them:
>>
>> From: L.W.(ßill) ------ III <----------@***.net> 9/14/04 11:42 AM
>> Subject: Veto AB 2683
>> To: Governor Schwarzenegger <governor@govmail.ca.gov>
>>
>> Dear Governor Schwarzenegger:
>> I am a collector of Jeeps with historical significance. I am
>> writing to request your veto of Assembly Bill 2683 (Lieber), which would
>> repeal the state's current rolling Smog Check exemption for vehicles 30
>> years old and older.
>>
>> I have studied the issue, and also the "junk science" relied
>> upon by the bill's proponents. I am convinced that the repeal of the
>> 30-year rolling exemption would cause definite harm to large numbers of
>> California citizens and businesses for no verifiable emissions reduction
>> benefit. The facts are consistent with my objections to this bill:
>> â?¢ California law recognizes the minimal impact of vehicles
>> 30-years old and older on vehicle emissions and air quality;
>> â?¢ Vehicles 30-years old and older constitute a minuscule portion
>> of the overall vehicle population and are a poor source from which to
>> look for emissions reduction;
>> â?¢ Antique and classic vehicles are overwhelmingly well-maintained
>> and infrequently driven (a fraction of the miles each year as a new
>> vehicle); and
>> â?¢ Legislators and regulators are feeling the heat from a failed
>> effort to meet air quality goals and are looking for a convenient
>> scapegoat, using false data and inflated annual mileage assumptions to
>> further their case. It is unfair for classic car afficionados to carry
>> the burden of their mistakes. There is no principled distinction between
>> a 1975 vehicle with a lifetime smog check exemption and a 1976 vehicle
>> without. While I support the goal of improved air quality and believe
>> further emission reductions from
>> mobile sources are possible, I am convinced that A.B. 2683 will not help
>> to achieve these reductions. This legislation will only serve to impose
>> unnecessary social and economic burdens upon the citizens of
>> California. It should be vetoed.
>> Thank you for your consideration.
>>
>> And a plea written the way I talk:
>>
>> From: L.W.(ßill) ------ III <----------@***.net> 9/14/04 2:14 PM
>> Subject: Please veto AB 2683
>> To: Governor Schwarzenegger <governor@govmail.ca.gov>
>>
>> Hi Arnold,
>> Please veto AB 2683 as your friend Jay Leno and I would like:
>>
> http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...llinheadlights
>> This extra hundred bucks every couple of years may not sound like much
>> to you, but it will place a financial hardship on me, retired, and just
>> driving my '78 Bronco to the grocery store and back. I keep it
>> mechanically perfect, as you may see in it's certificate:
>> http://www.----------.com/smog.jpg
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> To no avail!
>> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
>> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>>
>> Herb Leong wrote:
>> >
>> > Unless the law gets changed, it's got a loooooong wait to be smog
> free... =)
>> > You can thank the Sierra Club et al.
>> >
>> >
> http://www.smogcheck.ca.gov/ftp/pdff...smog_check.pdf
>> >
>> > /herb
>
>
05-10-2006, 07:08 PM
#62
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: WJ to XJ Engine Swap smog bill AB 2683
http://malaems.tripod.com/PanelB.htm
Earle
"billy ray" <Kill.them.all@God.knows.his.own.com> wrote in message
news:41d84$446270ba$48311525$11726@FUSE.NET...
> You can buy it though...
>
> "Earle Horton" <NurseBustersNoSpam@msn.com> wrote in message
> news:44626e4d$0$6063$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.co m...
> > "You can't fight city hall."
> >
> > Earle
> >
> > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > news:44625704.BD2193E2@***.net...
> >> It was so.... close and with Arnies thirteen Hummers, I thought
> >> with a little nudging they wouldn't change the law. So I wrote them:
> >>
> >> From: L.W.(ßill) ------ III <----------@***.net> 9/14/04 11:42 AM
> >> Subject: Veto AB 2683
> >> To: Governor Schwarzenegger <governor@govmail.ca.gov>
> >>
> >> Dear Governor Schwarzenegger:
> >> I am a collector of Jeeps with historical significance. I am
> >> writing to request your veto of Assembly Bill 2683 (Lieber), which
would
> >> repeal the state's current rolling Smog Check exemption for vehicles 30
> >> years old and older.
> >>
> >> I have studied the issue, and also the "junk science" relied
> >> upon by the bill's proponents. I am convinced that the repeal of the
> >> 30-year rolling exemption would cause definite harm to large numbers of
> >> California citizens and businesses for no verifiable emissions
reduction
> >> benefit. The facts are consistent with my objections to this bill:
> >> â?¢ California law recognizes the minimal impact of vehicles
> >> 30-years old and older on vehicle emissions and air quality;
> >> â?¢ Vehicles 30-years old and older constitute a minuscule portion
> >> of the overall vehicle population and are a poor source from which to
> >> look for emissions reduction;
> >> â?¢ Antique and classic vehicles are overwhelmingly
well-maintained
> >> and infrequently driven (a fraction of the miles each year as a new
> >> vehicle); and
> >> â?¢ Legislators and regulators are feeling the heat from a failed
> >> effort to meet air quality goals and are looking for a convenient
> >> scapegoat, using false data and inflated annual mileage assumptions to
> >> further their case. It is unfair for classic car afficionados to carry
> >> the burden of their mistakes. There is no principled distinction
between
> >> a 1975 vehicle with a lifetime smog check exemption and a 1976 vehicle
> >> without. While I support the goal of improved air quality and believe
> >> further emission reductions from
> >> mobile sources are possible, I am convinced that A.B. 2683 will not
help
> >> to achieve these reductions. This legislation will only serve to impose
> >> unnecessary social and economic burdens upon the citizens of
> >> California. It should be vetoed.
> >> Thank you for your consideration.
> >>
> >> And a plea written the way I talk:
> >>
> >> From: L.W.(ßill) ------ III <----------@***.net> 9/14/04 2:14 PM
> >> Subject: Please veto AB 2683
> >> To: Governor Schwarzenegger <governor@govmail.ca.gov>
> >>
> >> Hi Arnold,
> >> Please veto AB 2683 as your friend Jay Leno and I would like:
> >>
> >
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...llinheadlights
> >> This extra hundred bucks every couple of years may not sound like much
> >> to you, but it will place a financial hardship on me, retired, and just
> >> driving my '78 Bronco to the grocery store and back. I keep it
> >> mechanically perfect, as you may see in it's certificate:
> >> http://www.----------.com/smog.jpg
> >> Sincerely,
> >>
> >> To no avail!
> >> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> >> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> >>
> >> Herb Leong wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Unless the law gets changed, it's got a loooooong wait to be smog
> > free... =)
> >> > You can thank the Sierra Club et al.
> >> >
> >> >
> >
http://www.smogcheck.ca.gov/ftp/pdff...smog_check.pdf
> >> >
> >> > /herb
> >
> >
>
>
Earle
"billy ray" <Kill.them.all@God.knows.his.own.com> wrote in message
news:41d84$446270ba$48311525$11726@FUSE.NET...
> You can buy it though...
>
> "Earle Horton" <NurseBustersNoSpam@msn.com> wrote in message
> news:44626e4d$0$6063$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.co m...
> > "You can't fight city hall."
> >
> > Earle
> >
> > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > news:44625704.BD2193E2@***.net...
> >> It was so.... close and with Arnies thirteen Hummers, I thought
> >> with a little nudging they wouldn't change the law. So I wrote them:
> >>
> >> From: L.W.(ßill) ------ III <----------@***.net> 9/14/04 11:42 AM
> >> Subject: Veto AB 2683
> >> To: Governor Schwarzenegger <governor@govmail.ca.gov>
> >>
> >> Dear Governor Schwarzenegger:
> >> I am a collector of Jeeps with historical significance. I am
> >> writing to request your veto of Assembly Bill 2683 (Lieber), which
would
> >> repeal the state's current rolling Smog Check exemption for vehicles 30
> >> years old and older.
> >>
> >> I have studied the issue, and also the "junk science" relied
> >> upon by the bill's proponents. I am convinced that the repeal of the
> >> 30-year rolling exemption would cause definite harm to large numbers of
> >> California citizens and businesses for no verifiable emissions
reduction
> >> benefit. The facts are consistent with my objections to this bill:
> >> â?¢ California law recognizes the minimal impact of vehicles
> >> 30-years old and older on vehicle emissions and air quality;
> >> â?¢ Vehicles 30-years old and older constitute a minuscule portion
> >> of the overall vehicle population and are a poor source from which to
> >> look for emissions reduction;
> >> â?¢ Antique and classic vehicles are overwhelmingly
well-maintained
> >> and infrequently driven (a fraction of the miles each year as a new
> >> vehicle); and
> >> â?¢ Legislators and regulators are feeling the heat from a failed
> >> effort to meet air quality goals and are looking for a convenient
> >> scapegoat, using false data and inflated annual mileage assumptions to
> >> further their case. It is unfair for classic car afficionados to carry
> >> the burden of their mistakes. There is no principled distinction
between
> >> a 1975 vehicle with a lifetime smog check exemption and a 1976 vehicle
> >> without. While I support the goal of improved air quality and believe
> >> further emission reductions from
> >> mobile sources are possible, I am convinced that A.B. 2683 will not
help
> >> to achieve these reductions. This legislation will only serve to impose
> >> unnecessary social and economic burdens upon the citizens of
> >> California. It should be vetoed.
> >> Thank you for your consideration.
> >>
> >> And a plea written the way I talk:
> >>
> >> From: L.W.(ßill) ------ III <----------@***.net> 9/14/04 2:14 PM
> >> Subject: Please veto AB 2683
> >> To: Governor Schwarzenegger <governor@govmail.ca.gov>
> >>
> >> Hi Arnold,
> >> Please veto AB 2683 as your friend Jay Leno and I would like:
> >>
> >
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...llinheadlights
> >> This extra hundred bucks every couple of years may not sound like much
> >> to you, but it will place a financial hardship on me, retired, and just
> >> driving my '78 Bronco to the grocery store and back. I keep it
> >> mechanically perfect, as you may see in it's certificate:
> >> http://www.----------.com/smog.jpg
> >> Sincerely,
> >>
> >> To no avail!
> >> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> >> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> >>
> >> Herb Leong wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Unless the law gets changed, it's got a loooooong wait to be smog
> > free... =)
> >> > You can thank the Sierra Club et al.
> >> >
> >> >
> >
http://www.smogcheck.ca.gov/ftp/pdff...smog_check.pdf
> >> >
> >> > /herb
> >
> >
>
>
05-10-2006, 07:08 PM
#63
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: WJ to XJ Engine Swap smog bill AB 2683
http://malaems.tripod.com/PanelB.htm
Earle
"billy ray" <Kill.them.all@God.knows.his.own.com> wrote in message
news:41d84$446270ba$48311525$11726@FUSE.NET...
> You can buy it though...
>
> "Earle Horton" <NurseBustersNoSpam@msn.com> wrote in message
> news:44626e4d$0$6063$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.co m...
> > "You can't fight city hall."
> >
> > Earle
> >
> > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > news:44625704.BD2193E2@***.net...
> >> It was so.... close and with Arnies thirteen Hummers, I thought
> >> with a little nudging they wouldn't change the law. So I wrote them:
> >>
> >> From: L.W.(ßill) ------ III <----------@***.net> 9/14/04 11:42 AM
> >> Subject: Veto AB 2683
> >> To: Governor Schwarzenegger <governor@govmail.ca.gov>
> >>
> >> Dear Governor Schwarzenegger:
> >> I am a collector of Jeeps with historical significance. I am
> >> writing to request your veto of Assembly Bill 2683 (Lieber), which
would
> >> repeal the state's current rolling Smog Check exemption for vehicles 30
> >> years old and older.
> >>
> >> I have studied the issue, and also the "junk science" relied
> >> upon by the bill's proponents. I am convinced that the repeal of the
> >> 30-year rolling exemption would cause definite harm to large numbers of
> >> California citizens and businesses for no verifiable emissions
reduction
> >> benefit. The facts are consistent with my objections to this bill:
> >> â?¢ California law recognizes the minimal impact of vehicles
> >> 30-years old and older on vehicle emissions and air quality;
> >> â?¢ Vehicles 30-years old and older constitute a minuscule portion
> >> of the overall vehicle population and are a poor source from which to
> >> look for emissions reduction;
> >> â?¢ Antique and classic vehicles are overwhelmingly
well-maintained
> >> and infrequently driven (a fraction of the miles each year as a new
> >> vehicle); and
> >> â?¢ Legislators and regulators are feeling the heat from a failed
> >> effort to meet air quality goals and are looking for a convenient
> >> scapegoat, using false data and inflated annual mileage assumptions to
> >> further their case. It is unfair for classic car afficionados to carry
> >> the burden of their mistakes. There is no principled distinction
between
> >> a 1975 vehicle with a lifetime smog check exemption and a 1976 vehicle
> >> without. While I support the goal of improved air quality and believe
> >> further emission reductions from
> >> mobile sources are possible, I am convinced that A.B. 2683 will not
help
> >> to achieve these reductions. This legislation will only serve to impose
> >> unnecessary social and economic burdens upon the citizens of
> >> California. It should be vetoed.
> >> Thank you for your consideration.
> >>
> >> And a plea written the way I talk:
> >>
> >> From: L.W.(ßill) ------ III <----------@***.net> 9/14/04 2:14 PM
> >> Subject: Please veto AB 2683
> >> To: Governor Schwarzenegger <governor@govmail.ca.gov>
> >>
> >> Hi Arnold,
> >> Please veto AB 2683 as your friend Jay Leno and I would like:
> >>
> >
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...llinheadlights
> >> This extra hundred bucks every couple of years may not sound like much
> >> to you, but it will place a financial hardship on me, retired, and just
> >> driving my '78 Bronco to the grocery store and back. I keep it
> >> mechanically perfect, as you may see in it's certificate:
> >> http://www.----------.com/smog.jpg
> >> Sincerely,
> >>
> >> To no avail!
> >> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> >> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> >>
> >> Herb Leong wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Unless the law gets changed, it's got a loooooong wait to be smog
> > free... =)
> >> > You can thank the Sierra Club et al.
> >> >
> >> >
> >
http://www.smogcheck.ca.gov/ftp/pdff...smog_check.pdf
> >> >
> >> > /herb
> >
> >
>
>
Earle
"billy ray" <Kill.them.all@God.knows.his.own.com> wrote in message
news:41d84$446270ba$48311525$11726@FUSE.NET...
> You can buy it though...
>
> "Earle Horton" <NurseBustersNoSpam@msn.com> wrote in message
> news:44626e4d$0$6063$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.co m...
> > "You can't fight city hall."
> >
> > Earle
> >
> > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > news:44625704.BD2193E2@***.net...
> >> It was so.... close and with Arnies thirteen Hummers, I thought
> >> with a little nudging they wouldn't change the law. So I wrote them:
> >>
> >> From: L.W.(ßill) ------ III <----------@***.net> 9/14/04 11:42 AM
> >> Subject: Veto AB 2683
> >> To: Governor Schwarzenegger <governor@govmail.ca.gov>
> >>
> >> Dear Governor Schwarzenegger:
> >> I am a collector of Jeeps with historical significance. I am
> >> writing to request your veto of Assembly Bill 2683 (Lieber), which
would
> >> repeal the state's current rolling Smog Check exemption for vehicles 30
> >> years old and older.
> >>
> >> I have studied the issue, and also the "junk science" relied
> >> upon by the bill's proponents. I am convinced that the repeal of the
> >> 30-year rolling exemption would cause definite harm to large numbers of
> >> California citizens and businesses for no verifiable emissions
reduction
> >> benefit. The facts are consistent with my objections to this bill:
> >> â?¢ California law recognizes the minimal impact of vehicles
> >> 30-years old and older on vehicle emissions and air quality;
> >> â?¢ Vehicles 30-years old and older constitute a minuscule portion
> >> of the overall vehicle population and are a poor source from which to
> >> look for emissions reduction;
> >> â?¢ Antique and classic vehicles are overwhelmingly
well-maintained
> >> and infrequently driven (a fraction of the miles each year as a new
> >> vehicle); and
> >> â?¢ Legislators and regulators are feeling the heat from a failed
> >> effort to meet air quality goals and are looking for a convenient
> >> scapegoat, using false data and inflated annual mileage assumptions to
> >> further their case. It is unfair for classic car afficionados to carry
> >> the burden of their mistakes. There is no principled distinction
between
> >> a 1975 vehicle with a lifetime smog check exemption and a 1976 vehicle
> >> without. While I support the goal of improved air quality and believe
> >> further emission reductions from
> >> mobile sources are possible, I am convinced that A.B. 2683 will not
help
> >> to achieve these reductions. This legislation will only serve to impose
> >> unnecessary social and economic burdens upon the citizens of
> >> California. It should be vetoed.
> >> Thank you for your consideration.
> >>
> >> And a plea written the way I talk:
> >>
> >> From: L.W.(ßill) ------ III <----------@***.net> 9/14/04 2:14 PM
> >> Subject: Please veto AB 2683
> >> To: Governor Schwarzenegger <governor@govmail.ca.gov>
> >>
> >> Hi Arnold,
> >> Please veto AB 2683 as your friend Jay Leno and I would like:
> >>
> >
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...llinheadlights
> >> This extra hundred bucks every couple of years may not sound like much
> >> to you, but it will place a financial hardship on me, retired, and just
> >> driving my '78 Bronco to the grocery store and back. I keep it
> >> mechanically perfect, as you may see in it's certificate:
> >> http://www.----------.com/smog.jpg
> >> Sincerely,
> >>
> >> To no avail!
> >> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> >> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> >>
> >> Herb Leong wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Unless the law gets changed, it's got a loooooong wait to be smog
> > free... =)
> >> > You can thank the Sierra Club et al.
> >> >
> >> >
> >
http://www.smogcheck.ca.gov/ftp/pdff...smog_check.pdf
> >> >
> >> > /herb
> >
> >
>
>
05-10-2006, 07:08 PM
#64
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: WJ to XJ Engine Swap smog bill AB 2683
http://malaems.tripod.com/PanelB.htm
Earle
"billy ray" <Kill.them.all@God.knows.his.own.com> wrote in message
news:41d84$446270ba$48311525$11726@FUSE.NET...
> You can buy it though...
>
> "Earle Horton" <NurseBustersNoSpam@msn.com> wrote in message
> news:44626e4d$0$6063$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.co m...
> > "You can't fight city hall."
> >
> > Earle
> >
> > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > news:44625704.BD2193E2@***.net...
> >> It was so.... close and with Arnies thirteen Hummers, I thought
> >> with a little nudging they wouldn't change the law. So I wrote them:
> >>
> >> From: L.W.(ßill) ------ III <----------@***.net> 9/14/04 11:42 AM
> >> Subject: Veto AB 2683
> >> To: Governor Schwarzenegger <governor@govmail.ca.gov>
> >>
> >> Dear Governor Schwarzenegger:
> >> I am a collector of Jeeps with historical significance. I am
> >> writing to request your veto of Assembly Bill 2683 (Lieber), which
would
> >> repeal the state's current rolling Smog Check exemption for vehicles 30
> >> years old and older.
> >>
> >> I have studied the issue, and also the "junk science" relied
> >> upon by the bill's proponents. I am convinced that the repeal of the
> >> 30-year rolling exemption would cause definite harm to large numbers of
> >> California citizens and businesses for no verifiable emissions
reduction
> >> benefit. The facts are consistent with my objections to this bill:
> >> â?¢ California law recognizes the minimal impact of vehicles
> >> 30-years old and older on vehicle emissions and air quality;
> >> â?¢ Vehicles 30-years old and older constitute a minuscule portion
> >> of the overall vehicle population and are a poor source from which to
> >> look for emissions reduction;
> >> â?¢ Antique and classic vehicles are overwhelmingly
well-maintained
> >> and infrequently driven (a fraction of the miles each year as a new
> >> vehicle); and
> >> â?¢ Legislators and regulators are feeling the heat from a failed
> >> effort to meet air quality goals and are looking for a convenient
> >> scapegoat, using false data and inflated annual mileage assumptions to
> >> further their case. It is unfair for classic car afficionados to carry
> >> the burden of their mistakes. There is no principled distinction
between
> >> a 1975 vehicle with a lifetime smog check exemption and a 1976 vehicle
> >> without. While I support the goal of improved air quality and believe
> >> further emission reductions from
> >> mobile sources are possible, I am convinced that A.B. 2683 will not
help
> >> to achieve these reductions. This legislation will only serve to impose
> >> unnecessary social and economic burdens upon the citizens of
> >> California. It should be vetoed.
> >> Thank you for your consideration.
> >>
> >> And a plea written the way I talk:
> >>
> >> From: L.W.(ßill) ------ III <----------@***.net> 9/14/04 2:14 PM
> >> Subject: Please veto AB 2683
> >> To: Governor Schwarzenegger <governor@govmail.ca.gov>
> >>
> >> Hi Arnold,
> >> Please veto AB 2683 as your friend Jay Leno and I would like:
> >>
> >
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...llinheadlights
> >> This extra hundred bucks every couple of years may not sound like much
> >> to you, but it will place a financial hardship on me, retired, and just
> >> driving my '78 Bronco to the grocery store and back. I keep it
> >> mechanically perfect, as you may see in it's certificate:
> >> http://www.----------.com/smog.jpg
> >> Sincerely,
> >>
> >> To no avail!
> >> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> >> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> >>
> >> Herb Leong wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Unless the law gets changed, it's got a loooooong wait to be smog
> > free... =)
> >> > You can thank the Sierra Club et al.
> >> >
> >> >
> >
http://www.smogcheck.ca.gov/ftp/pdff...smog_check.pdf
> >> >
> >> > /herb
> >
> >
>
>
Earle
"billy ray" <Kill.them.all@God.knows.his.own.com> wrote in message
news:41d84$446270ba$48311525$11726@FUSE.NET...
> You can buy it though...
>
> "Earle Horton" <NurseBustersNoSpam@msn.com> wrote in message
> news:44626e4d$0$6063$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.co m...
> > "You can't fight city hall."
> >
> > Earle
> >
> > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > news:44625704.BD2193E2@***.net...
> >> It was so.... close and with Arnies thirteen Hummers, I thought
> >> with a little nudging they wouldn't change the law. So I wrote them:
> >>
> >> From: L.W.(ßill) ------ III <----------@***.net> 9/14/04 11:42 AM
> >> Subject: Veto AB 2683
> >> To: Governor Schwarzenegger <governor@govmail.ca.gov>
> >>
> >> Dear Governor Schwarzenegger:
> >> I am a collector of Jeeps with historical significance. I am
> >> writing to request your veto of Assembly Bill 2683 (Lieber), which
would
> >> repeal the state's current rolling Smog Check exemption for vehicles 30
> >> years old and older.
> >>
> >> I have studied the issue, and also the "junk science" relied
> >> upon by the bill's proponents. I am convinced that the repeal of the
> >> 30-year rolling exemption would cause definite harm to large numbers of
> >> California citizens and businesses for no verifiable emissions
reduction
> >> benefit. The facts are consistent with my objections to this bill:
> >> â?¢ California law recognizes the minimal impact of vehicles
> >> 30-years old and older on vehicle emissions and air quality;
> >> â?¢ Vehicles 30-years old and older constitute a minuscule portion
> >> of the overall vehicle population and are a poor source from which to
> >> look for emissions reduction;
> >> â?¢ Antique and classic vehicles are overwhelmingly
well-maintained
> >> and infrequently driven (a fraction of the miles each year as a new
> >> vehicle); and
> >> â?¢ Legislators and regulators are feeling the heat from a failed
> >> effort to meet air quality goals and are looking for a convenient
> >> scapegoat, using false data and inflated annual mileage assumptions to
> >> further their case. It is unfair for classic car afficionados to carry
> >> the burden of their mistakes. There is no principled distinction
between
> >> a 1975 vehicle with a lifetime smog check exemption and a 1976 vehicle
> >> without. While I support the goal of improved air quality and believe
> >> further emission reductions from
> >> mobile sources are possible, I am convinced that A.B. 2683 will not
help
> >> to achieve these reductions. This legislation will only serve to impose
> >> unnecessary social and economic burdens upon the citizens of
> >> California. It should be vetoed.
> >> Thank you for your consideration.
> >>
> >> And a plea written the way I talk:
> >>
> >> From: L.W.(ßill) ------ III <----------@***.net> 9/14/04 2:14 PM
> >> Subject: Please veto AB 2683
> >> To: Governor Schwarzenegger <governor@govmail.ca.gov>
> >>
> >> Hi Arnold,
> >> Please veto AB 2683 as your friend Jay Leno and I would like:
> >>
> >
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...llinheadlights
> >> This extra hundred bucks every couple of years may not sound like much
> >> to you, but it will place a financial hardship on me, retired, and just
> >> driving my '78 Bronco to the grocery store and back. I keep it
> >> mechanically perfect, as you may see in it's certificate:
> >> http://www.----------.com/smog.jpg
> >> Sincerely,
> >>
> >> To no avail!
> >> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> >> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> >>
> >> Herb Leong wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Unless the law gets changed, it's got a loooooong wait to be smog
> > free... =)
> >> > You can thank the Sierra Club et al.
> >> >
> >> >
> >
http://www.smogcheck.ca.gov/ftp/pdff...smog_check.pdf
> >> >
> >> > /herb
> >
> >
>
>
05-10-2006, 07:09 PM
#65
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: WJ to XJ Engine Swap smog bill AB 2683
Hi Earle,
The trouble is I really like my full sized Bronco, it's just heavy
and powerful enough to tow my Jeep safely. I guess I'll have to give up
on it, and buy a Suburban like yours, only with a rat motor.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> "You can't fight city hall."
>
> Earle
The trouble is I really like my full sized Bronco, it's just heavy
and powerful enough to tow my Jeep safely. I guess I'll have to give up
on it, and buy a Suburban like yours, only with a rat motor.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> "You can't fight city hall."
>
> Earle
05-10-2006, 07:09 PM
#66
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: WJ to XJ Engine Swap smog bill AB 2683
Hi Earle,
The trouble is I really like my full sized Bronco, it's just heavy
and powerful enough to tow my Jeep safely. I guess I'll have to give up
on it, and buy a Suburban like yours, only with a rat motor.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> "You can't fight city hall."
>
> Earle
The trouble is I really like my full sized Bronco, it's just heavy
and powerful enough to tow my Jeep safely. I guess I'll have to give up
on it, and buy a Suburban like yours, only with a rat motor.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> "You can't fight city hall."
>
> Earle
05-10-2006, 07:09 PM
#67
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: WJ to XJ Engine Swap smog bill AB 2683
Hi Earle,
The trouble is I really like my full sized Bronco, it's just heavy
and powerful enough to tow my Jeep safely. I guess I'll have to give up
on it, and buy a Suburban like yours, only with a rat motor.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> "You can't fight city hall."
>
> Earle
The trouble is I really like my full sized Bronco, it's just heavy
and powerful enough to tow my Jeep safely. I guess I'll have to give up
on it, and buy a Suburban like yours, only with a rat motor.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> "You can't fight city hall."
>
> Earle
05-10-2006, 07:52 PM
#68
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: WJ to XJ Engine Swap smog bill AB 2683
Bill,
I would have liked a Bronco too, but the Suburban is three quarter ton,
holds a stack of drywall, and tows the Jeep just fine. I was looking for a
standard shift, but I found one with a TH400 that I really like. 1989 Chevy
Silverado Suburban, with a zillion miles on it, from John Elway in Boulder,
add a new engine, new AC compressor, brakes, and spring bushings, and it was
good to go. Still looks like hell, but that's all right. You can get them
with the 454 cid or 7.4 liter engine last time I checked.
Earle
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:446272A7.8D430754@***.net...
> Hi Earle,
> The trouble is I really like my full sized Bronco, it's just heavy
> and powerful enough to tow my Jeep safely. I guess I'll have to give up
> on it, and buy a Suburban like yours, only with a rat motor.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
> >
> > "You can't fight city hall."
> >
> > Earle
I would have liked a Bronco too, but the Suburban is three quarter ton,
holds a stack of drywall, and tows the Jeep just fine. I was looking for a
standard shift, but I found one with a TH400 that I really like. 1989 Chevy
Silverado Suburban, with a zillion miles on it, from John Elway in Boulder,
add a new engine, new AC compressor, brakes, and spring bushings, and it was
good to go. Still looks like hell, but that's all right. You can get them
with the 454 cid or 7.4 liter engine last time I checked.
Earle
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:446272A7.8D430754@***.net...
> Hi Earle,
> The trouble is I really like my full sized Bronco, it's just heavy
> and powerful enough to tow my Jeep safely. I guess I'll have to give up
> on it, and buy a Suburban like yours, only with a rat motor.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
> >
> > "You can't fight city hall."
> >
> > Earle
05-10-2006, 07:52 PM
#69
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: WJ to XJ Engine Swap smog bill AB 2683
Bill,
I would have liked a Bronco too, but the Suburban is three quarter ton,
holds a stack of drywall, and tows the Jeep just fine. I was looking for a
standard shift, but I found one with a TH400 that I really like. 1989 Chevy
Silverado Suburban, with a zillion miles on it, from John Elway in Boulder,
add a new engine, new AC compressor, brakes, and spring bushings, and it was
good to go. Still looks like hell, but that's all right. You can get them
with the 454 cid or 7.4 liter engine last time I checked.
Earle
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:446272A7.8D430754@***.net...
> Hi Earle,
> The trouble is I really like my full sized Bronco, it's just heavy
> and powerful enough to tow my Jeep safely. I guess I'll have to give up
> on it, and buy a Suburban like yours, only with a rat motor.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
> >
> > "You can't fight city hall."
> >
> > Earle
I would have liked a Bronco too, but the Suburban is three quarter ton,
holds a stack of drywall, and tows the Jeep just fine. I was looking for a
standard shift, but I found one with a TH400 that I really like. 1989 Chevy
Silverado Suburban, with a zillion miles on it, from John Elway in Boulder,
add a new engine, new AC compressor, brakes, and spring bushings, and it was
good to go. Still looks like hell, but that's all right. You can get them
with the 454 cid or 7.4 liter engine last time I checked.
Earle
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:446272A7.8D430754@***.net...
> Hi Earle,
> The trouble is I really like my full sized Bronco, it's just heavy
> and powerful enough to tow my Jeep safely. I guess I'll have to give up
> on it, and buy a Suburban like yours, only with a rat motor.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
> >
> > "You can't fight city hall."
> >
> > Earle
05-10-2006, 07:52 PM
#70
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: WJ to XJ Engine Swap smog bill AB 2683
Bill,
I would have liked a Bronco too, but the Suburban is three quarter ton,
holds a stack of drywall, and tows the Jeep just fine. I was looking for a
standard shift, but I found one with a TH400 that I really like. 1989 Chevy
Silverado Suburban, with a zillion miles on it, from John Elway in Boulder,
add a new engine, new AC compressor, brakes, and spring bushings, and it was
good to go. Still looks like hell, but that's all right. You can get them
with the 454 cid or 7.4 liter engine last time I checked.
Earle
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:446272A7.8D430754@***.net...
> Hi Earle,
> The trouble is I really like my full sized Bronco, it's just heavy
> and powerful enough to tow my Jeep safely. I guess I'll have to give up
> on it, and buy a Suburban like yours, only with a rat motor.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
> >
> > "You can't fight city hall."
> >
> > Earle
I would have liked a Bronco too, but the Suburban is three quarter ton,
holds a stack of drywall, and tows the Jeep just fine. I was looking for a
standard shift, but I found one with a TH400 that I really like. 1989 Chevy
Silverado Suburban, with a zillion miles on it, from John Elway in Boulder,
add a new engine, new AC compressor, brakes, and spring bushings, and it was
good to go. Still looks like hell, but that's all right. You can get them
with the 454 cid or 7.4 liter engine last time I checked.
Earle
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:446272A7.8D430754@***.net...
> Hi Earle,
> The trouble is I really like my full sized Bronco, it's just heavy
> and powerful enough to tow my Jeep safely. I guess I'll have to give up
> on it, and buy a Suburban like yours, only with a rat motor.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
> >
> > "You can't fight city hall."
> >
> > Earle