It's not my intent to report every recall associated with used cars (because of the volume), but recalls about airbags are important. That's why I wanted to share information from an Automotive News article about the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration investigating Honda's handling of a recall for airbag problems in 2001 model year Accords and Civics.

According to Automotive News (subscription required), "The automaker's first recall, in November 2008, involved 3,940 Accords and Civics from the 2001 model year. The second recall, in June, involved more vehicles of the same models and year. Honda expanded the second recall in July to include certain 2002 Accords and Acuras. In all, the second recall totaled 440,000 vehicles. Honda has said the airbag inflator can rupture from too much internal air pressure, sending metal fragments through the airbag and hitting vehicle occupants. The company has acknowledged one death and multiple injuries from the defect."

I'm not here to task Honda for its handling of the recall. Rather, I want to remind folks buying a used Accord, Acura or Civic from 2001 to 2002 to make sure the car they're buying is not part of this recall. More information on recalls is available by going to the NHTSA recalls website. Make sure you do your homework before buying a used Honda from 2001 or 2002.

Have you ever bought a used car only to find out later it was subject to recall at the time of purchase?

At first glance, it appears alarming that used car prices have risen. According to Edmunds.com, three-year-old used cars currently sell for about 16 percent more than they did this time last year. Typically, used car prices rise 4.6 percent from year to year.

Seems like a big jump until you factor in that prices slumped a bit last year because of higher fuel prices. Some spike could be expected this year. However, this increase is still out of the ordinary. As Edmunds analyst Joe Spina explained in a news release: "The remarkable price increase is easily attributed to basic economic principles: used car supply is down, and demand is up. Why is supply down? In recent years, automakers largely withdrew from leasing and now the effects are starting to kick in, so off-lease inventory is starting to dry up. Also, thanks to relative softness in the new car market, there aren't as many used cars being traded in. Meanwhile, demand is up because many traditional new car shoppers are now considering used due to the economy."

There is some good news, though, if you have waited to purchase a used car. Prices should be stable. As Spina told AutoObserver.Com, "Barring any other atypical market forces or dramatic changes in gas prices, we expect that used car prices will be stable over the next few years - which is good news for consumers who plan to trade in soon."

Here is the breakdown by segment with the price increase in percent from Oct. 2008 to Oct. 2009:

• Standard Compact:13.5%
• Premium Compact: 1.3%
• Midsize: -1.6%
• Standard Sport: 4.7%
• Premium Sport: 19.5%
• Fullsize: 12.7%
• Standard Luxury: 15.9%
• Premium Luxury: 22.9%
• Compact Pickup: 7.3%
• Fullsize Pickup: 26.2%
• Mini SUV: 7.8%
• Midsize SUV: 25.4%
• Fullsize SUV: 7.8%
• Luxury SUV: 14.4%
• Mini Van: 27.1%
• Fullsize Van: 3.0%

Yesterday, Edmunds.Com reported that Cash for Clunkers wasn't the big deal everybody thought it was. So, the White House responded today: "Dear Edmunds, Your Cash for Clunkers analysis is wrong! Love, The White House." OK, maybe it wasn't quite that language but that's the gist.

Edmunds.Com reported that "Cash for Clunkers cost taxpayers $24,000 per vehicle sold. Nearly 690,000 vehicles were sold during the Cash for Clunkers program, officially known as CARS, but Edmunds.com analysts calculated that only 125,000 of the sales were incremental. The rest of the sales would have happened anyway, regardless of the existence of the program."

Well, that upset the White House. It responded on its blog: "Busy Covering Car Sales on Mars, Edmunds.com Gets It Wrong (Again) on Cash for Clunkers." The White House says, "This analysis ignores not only the price impacts that a program like Cash for Clunkers has on the rest of the vehicle market, but the reports from across the country that people were drawn into dealerships by the Cash for Clunkers program and ended up buying cars even though their old car was not eligible for the program."

Of course Edmunds fired back, but let me say this: both sides are right but Edmunds is probably a little more right, truth be told. I've found their analyses over the years to be right on mark.

Tell me what you think below. Who is right in this argument?

Interesting little tidbit from AutoRemarketing.com, the used car industry's trade publication: A study from Virginia Commonwealth University suggests that the domestic automakers' slumping market share since 1996 has been caused primarily by a lack of new-product launches.

It all makes sense when you think about it. I've been covering the new car industry steadily since 2002 and the used car industry for about two years. People want to buy the hot thing - even if it's a used car three or four years old. As long as the car was hot when it first came out (and stayed so for at least a year), its used car sales are going to be strong.

Think back over the last five years. I'd say you could count on two hands the number of new cars and trucks introduced - and I mean really new and not refreshed - from the domestic manufacturers that have generated true excitement. Heck, I think I'm being generous at 10 - and the F150 pictured above is one of the 10.

Let me know what you think by commenting. Has the domestic market lost share over the last 13 years because it's not coming up with sufficiently exciting product?