As a Drudge headline read: "Car dealer: 'If they can't administer a program like this, I'd be concerned about health insurance'...'"

But, firefighters, a totally government run operation in every locale seem to do just fine, to the point of being local heros.

They aren't run by the federal government.

While I couldn't find a hard total figure of federal dollars spent on various fire programs, while looking I saw references to many different such programs, even including those in the $100s of millions of dollars. Does it really make that much difference who signs the check when the cash is coming from public funds?

Let's turn it around. Lets have local or state administration of the programs, but federally funded. One local single payer is still a single payer.

So Congress declares today:

The House approved a bill Friday afternoon to provide $2 billion to continue the federal government's week-old "cash for clunkers" program, which has proven so popular with consumers that it was almost out of cash. The 316-109 vote split Republicans but attracted the support of nearly every Democrat in the chamber.

The money will come from funds in the already-passed economic stimulus package that were intended for energy loan guarantees. Congress will seek to replenish the energy program at a later date.

What I like to know is how long they projected it will take for the billion to burn? If their projection was way off than this program needs to be shut down right away (I hear some senators are asking to pump in more money). Just because program is popular doesn't mean it is successful especially when the results and projections were way off the target. They should go back to the drawing board as it seems logical.

I agree arifsali...they need to go back 'to the drawing board' on many things that have been "changed" in the last 6 months. That's a whole lot of money for such a short-term impact.