[s-cars] US-MA legislative alert: Right To Repair bill

Mon Feb 15 08:12:31 PST 2010

Well.having lived in MA as a foreigner I can certainly say the regulation
there is so high I thought I was back in Canada...  if the bill passes first
there I would believe it.  And the taxes?? I can't believe how many angles I
get nailed for taxes in MA. In Florida there was nothing like this....  Too
many lawyers etc in MA who KNOW how to get the money from the consumer..or
owner as it were.  There isn't much you can say about MA in terms of
hands-off /progressive government..there isn't any.

On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Brian K. Ullrich
<bullrich at ullrichsys.com>wrote:

> Wow. Egg on my face. I did indeed misread the intent of the legislation. I
> then have to say that I laud the MS legislature.
>
> Will you all allow a foul-mouthed Texan a moment to remove his rather large
> foot from his even-larger mouth?
>
> :-)
>
> Brian
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Phil Rose [mailto:pjrose at frontiernet.net]
> Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2010 12:20 PM
> To: Brian K. Ullrich
> Cc: 'Brett Dikeman'; '200q20V mailing list'; quattro at audifans.com;
> s-car-list at audifans.com
> Subject: RE: US-MA legislative alert: Right To Repair bill
>
> Brian,
> I'm not sure why you decided to take aim at the state of Massachusets
> (or even just liberal Democrats) as the target of your rant. The
> proper target ("they") it seems to me, is NOT Massachussets, but
> rather the automobile manufacturers. So, I wonder: have you misread
> the thrust of the legislative issue that Brett was describing?
>
>  What appears to be going on in MA is an effort to enact a law
> putting some "teeth" in the existing laws requiring auto
> manufacturers to provide information (to the public) needed to carry
> out diagnosis and repair of our vehicles. The proposed legislation is
> targeted at (i.e., against) automobile manufacturers who try to
> withhold information needed to repair vehicles. Yes, MA is
> considering  legislation to enforce the rights of independent shops
> and owners to repair their own vehicles.
>
> IMHO, your rant against liberal Democrats has things sort of
> backwards. If you're still in a (Texas) ranting mood, direct the heat
> at the group who actually opposes assuring our ability to repair our
> vehicles: that would be the automobile MANUFACTURERS. An example is
> the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers--not especially known as a
> bulwark of left-wing politics. They oppose this legislation. Based on
> the legislative effort so far, Massachussets (or Democrats in
> Massachussets?) is not deserving of your implication that they're
> hypocrites for having a previous record of being "all for diversity
> and liberty of any person". Of course, if MA defeats the proposed
> legislation, I'd reconsider...
>
> BTW, while you're hugging your guns (concealed guns?) keep in mind
> that what the Massachussets legislature is trying to do is an example
> of "States Rights"--something so cherished by Texans, correct? But of
> course I agree with you: what MA is trying is something that
> logically **should** be done by the Federal government: rights
> protected for ALL car owners in the USA! A national Right to Repair.
> Not state by bloody state. But that doesn't yet exist--perhaps one
> reason being Conservative elements who have tended to fight most any
> (i.e., federal) legislation intended to create uniform standards.
> Them liberals are just aching to push "Socialized Auto Repair" down
> our throats, ain't they? ;-)
>
> Phil
>
> P.S. Disclaimers:  I don't reside in MA or have any blood relatives
> in MA; I have never resided in MA; I have no business, financial or
> political connections with MA. But I do know and admire a lot of
> people I've met from there.
>
>
> At 7:43 PM -0600 2/13/10, Brian K. Ullrich wrote:
> >Freakin' MA. Why am I not surprised? In one sense, they are ALL for the
> >diversity and liberty of any person, yet in another, they actually
> consider
> >restricting the ability of their own constituency to repair their own
> >vehicles in a cost effective manner.
> >
> >You know, now that I think about it, there is just so much wrong with
> this.
> >How exactly would the manufacturer enforce it? Create "MA" cars? That
> works
> >in limited capacity, where changes are minor, universal, and the market is
> >large enough to justify it (a la "CA" emissions cars). I don't see how
> that
> >would work with what is being discussed here.
> >
> >Besides, doesn't buying the automobile give you a de facto license to
> repair
> >it? Or shouldn't it?
> >
> >This whole thing is disgusting to me. But then again, I'm from Texas.
> >
> >OK...off my soapbox. I'm sure I've overspoken, or worn out my welcome on
> >this topic, but it just irks me that there are some states whose political
> >climate is so polarized as to even consider such a thing.
> >
> >OK...now I'm really done. I'm retreating into my den filled with hunting
> >trophies, life-sized wax figures of LBJ and Sam Rayburn, smelling of Lone
> >Star Beer brewed with pure Artesian water, and mesquite-smoked BBQ. I'll
> be
> >hugging my guns, my dog, and my Audis. And remembering the day of the
> >Conservative Democrat.
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Brett Dikeman [mailto:brett.dikeman at gmail.com]
> >Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2010 6:17 PM
> >To: 200q20V mailing list; quattro at audifans.com; s-car-list at audifans.com
> >Subject: US-MA legislative alert: Right To Repair bill
> >
> >http://www.mass.gov/legis/bills/house/186/ht00/ht00282.htm
> >http://www.boston.com/business/ticker/2010/02/right_to_repair.html
> >
> >It just cleared committee- and moves to voting/discussion THURSDAY in
> >the MA Senate.
> >
> >If you live in MA, PLEASE WRITE YOUR STATE SENATOR NOW.  Fax, email,
> >call, whatever (actual written notes tend to impress the most.)  Call
> >'em too, even if you write.  Get your local independent mechanic to do
> >the same.
> >
> >As someone who owns a (non-Audi) vehicle which suffers from pretty
> >horrendous manufacturer lock-in on diagnostics, repair info- even
> >firmware (a problem when modules/parts bought from the manufacturer
> >have no firmware, and firmware is coded to individual vehicles!) this
> >IS A PROBLEM.
> >
> >  Manufacturers are doing everything in their power to lock out (or
> >'tax') both owners and indie shops and non-dealer service chains.  A
> >couple years ago Audi was working on piezo-electric bolts for
> >assemblies...which would only operate with tools that authenticated
> >themselves to the BOLT!  Some day you may not even be able to take
> >apart your car without paying a license fee.  They are fighting the
> >'right to repair' movement tooth and nail, claiming it would expose
> >trade secrets and (horrors!) allow other companies to MAKE PARTS and
> >COMPETE!   I can hear your screams of horror now at the thought of
> >facing CHOICE when buying parts...
> >
> >There's a large coalition of parts/service/small business associations
> >and chains behind this push, and we can only benefit as owners (I hate
> >the word "consumer") and DIY'ers. Check in your state to see if
> >there's a similar bill afoot.  More info on the coalition:
> >http://www.righttorepair.org/
> >
> >
> >-Brett
> >_______________________________________________
> >200q20v mailing list    http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/200q20v
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >200q20v mailing list    http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/200q20v
>
>
> --
>
> Phil Rose.....Rochester, NY USA
> '06 A3q 3.2 V6 (20K, silver)
> '91 200q        (165K, Lago blue)
> Gone to Audi Valhalla:
> '91 200q   (Tornado red)
> '89 100 (Bamboo gold)
>
> _______________________________________________
> quattro mailing list
> http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/quattro
> http://www.audifans.com/kb/List_information
>