White House Punts On Petition To Allow Tesla Direct Sales

First time accepted submitter neanderslob (1207704) writes Last Friday, over a year after the petition gained the required signatures for a response, the White House rejected a We the People petition to "Allow Tesla Motors to sell directly to consumers in all 50 states." The letter went on to defend the administration by citing their initiatives "in promoting vehicle efficiency." In response, Tesla is firing back, blasting the White House for a lack of leadership on the issue and stating "138,469 people signed the petition asking the White House to allow Tesla Motors to sell directly to consumers in all 50 states. More than a year later, at 7.30pm EST on Friday as most of America prepared for the weekend, the White House released its disappointing response to those people. Rather than seize an opportunity to promote innovation and support the first successful American car company to be started in more than a century, the White House issued a response that was even more timid than its rejection of a petition to begin construction of a Death Star." There's a legal issue here: the executive can't just wave state law aside. But they could suggest Congress write new laws instead of just noting that Congress would need to take action.

Re:For us dummies....

[Andrew Sterian]

Not an easy read but a good backgrounder on this, which also seems to be a Department of Justice advocation of direct manufacturer sales:

http://www.justice.gov/atr/pub... [justice.gov]

Re:He cant or wont?

[tysonedwards]

As a country, the United States has not Declared War against anyone since World War II, it has however by Executive Order by the Commander in Chief gone to war with several countries.

Re:What?

[Ralph Wiggam]

Did you read the response? It's great.

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/response/isnt-petition-response-youre-looking

"Why would we spend countless taxpayer dollars on a Death Star with a fundamental flaw that can be exploited by a one-man starship?"

Re:For us dummies....

[Raseri]

Car dealerships form extremely powerful lobbies in most (all?) states, and have purchased laws in most (all?) states banning the direct sale of vehicles from the manufacturer to the consumer. This, obviously, is a protectionist racket that serves no purpose but to line the pockets of said dealers. I'm not aware of any other consumer good with such a restriction (though I will grant that such a thing is possible and I simply am not aware of it).

The real reason

[Anonymous Coward]

The real reason that the dealerships care isn't about Tesla at all.

Dealerships have worked to create laws that forbid car manufacturers from selling direct to consumers. And if Tesla gets around that, then Ford, GM, etc. will be hot on their tracks and dealerships will see significant impact from this. In the age of the internet anyone would become finally able to purchase goods from the car manufacturers. Their way of life would die off.

That's why they fight Tesla like the fate of the world is at stake.

Re:He cant or wont?

[thaylin]

It is actually interstate commerce which congress has a say in under the commerce clause. Also most states charge you sales tax via your EOY tax forms for out of state purchases.

No need to qualify

[sjbe]

Most states, prodded perhaps by dealer associations, have forbidden auto manufacturers from selling directly to the public.

There is no "perhaps" about it. Auto dealer associations are entirely the reason - no need to qualify your statement. They are parasitic middlemen and they know they have a good deal going. They cost both customers and the automakers money. They should have to compete and provide value just like any other business. There should be no legal prohibition against me buying a car directly from Tesla, GM, Toyota or any other car maker if I want. If the dealer can provide me extra value then fine but if they cannot (and most cannot) then they should disappear like the obsolete businesses they are. There is no rational justification I have heard for protecting their business model at my expense. Perhaps you know of a good reason but frankly for me if auto dealers disappear tomorrow it won't be too soon.

Re:Not a duty of the Executive Branch

[bluefoxlucid]

Exactly. Congress has to write a law saying, "By Constitutional law, we are tasked to facilitate interstate commerce. This is impeding interstate commerce; therefor, the new law says: stop doing that." Then the President can point and say, "Go Go Federal Agents!" and any lawsuits raised by Tesla can get to the Federal Courts where the Judge is obligated to say, "Your state laws are in conflict with Federal regulations which are supported by powers Constitutionally granted to the Federal government, therefor the Federal regulations trump your State laws."

That worked for Clinton, only non-suck president

[raymorris]

The only president of the last twenty years who is generally considered to have been reasonably good is Clinton. What did Clinton do? Not much. Pretty much, he entered the White House during a time of economic growth and got a blowjob. For that (doing nothing) he's considered to be better than Bush Jr. or Obama. Before Clinton, George HW Bush wasn't bad and what did he do? Domestically, pretty much nothing. He was all foreign policy - START I, Noriega, beginning NAFTA.

Obama's legacy probably would be better if he'd play even more golf, throw another blowout party, and stop messing with the country.