Posted on 12/26/2012 7:07:20 AM PST by IbJensen
Ever since the Senate rejected President Obama’s cap-and-trade scheme in 2009, his administration has been hard at work to find other ways to implement a radical, environmentalist agenda.
Obama made these intentions clear at a press conference in 2010 when he explained, “Cap and trade was just one way of skinning the cat. … It was a means, not an end, and I am going to be looking for other means to address this problem.” And this is a promise he’s doing his best to keep.
With the help of the Environmental Protection Agency and other departments, this administration has relied on backdoor, behind-the-scenes tactics to impose stringent mandates in order to regulate what it has been unable to legislate. This tactic empowers unelected bureaucrats in Washington to implement rules that have far-reaching, negative impacts on our nation’s economy and the way we live our lives.
The Obama Administration’s announcement of new fuel-efficiency standards is a good example of its determination to regulate through administrative fiat.
Average cost of new car will increase $3,000
Earlier this year, the Department of Transportation (DOT) and EPA released the finalized, new fuel-efficiency standards for cars and light-duty trucks, which will require 2025 model year vehicles to have an average fuel economy of 54.5 miles per gallon (mpg). The new standard comes close to doubling the current CAFE average of 29 mpg and, combined with the administration’s fuel efficiency standards for 2011–2016, will increase the average cost of a new car by $3,000 by 2025.
Proponents of the rule argue that it will save consumers money on fuel, reduce dependence on foreign oil and reduce global warming. But as Heritage’s Nick Loris and Derrick Morgan explain in their new paper, “Fuel-efficiency mandates restrict consumer choice and completely overstep the boundaries of the role of the federal government.”
The standards are unnecessary, benefit special interests, and have numerous unintended consequences that will adversely affect American families.
Cars priced under $15,000 could vanish
The new CAFE standard requires American families to bear all the costs the regulation imposes, while allowing special interests receive all the benefits. As Loris and Morgan note in their paper, “Under this new mandate, the Energy Information Administration warns that new cars priced under $15,000 may no longer be available.” While the federal government acknowledges the regulations will drive up the sticker price of vehicles, “consumers will likely realize only a fraction of the fuel savings that the government claims.”
This is not the only way the new fuel efficiency will affect car buyers. It also limits consumer choice. Consumers have other preferences as well, including weight and engine power, for safety, enjoyment, and practical reasons. Ignoring those preferences and forcing companies to make vehicles that are lighter and thus more fuel efficient has the unintended consequence of making them less safe.
Perhaps worst of all, “Unlike previous rulemaking, manufacturers cannot pay a fine if they cannot meet the standards. Instead, they would need to buy costly credits from other manufacturers.”
Cap-and-trade is unsuitable for auto industry
Prompting a bout of déjà vu, the new CAFE standard creates a whole new form of cap-and-trade. This time around it’s a cap-and-trade for cars. Not only was cap-and-trade proposal a severely flawed solution to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, it is equally unsuitable for the auto industry.
These realities have not stopped the administration from attempting to justify the new standard. In fact, it rationalizes the additional costs and burdens consumers must bear as a result of this rule by arguing that the new standards will decrease greenhouse gas emissions. In reality, the resulting reduction in global emissions will be almost unnoticeable.
There is a way to stop the administration’s flagrant regulatory overreaching, and the solution begins with Congress stepping up to the plate. Loris and Morgan recommend that “Congress should intervene to prevent the EPA and DOT from enforcing the fuel-efficiency standards, either by withholding funds or by passing legislation that prohibits the regulation.”
The bottom line is that consumers value saving money on fuel expenses, but they also consider safety, size, performance, price, and many other factors. Auto manufacturers, not the federal government, are much better equipped to meet the demands of consumers.
When the entire central socialist government is staffed with America-hating, economy ruining lying rats, I'd say we've had quite enough of this government!
when we STOP buying cars except for emergency purchases and STOP all other consumer spending to make our presence known and felt in the consumer economy
The goal of progressives has always been to limit personal mobility and drive people into large, more manageable enclaves. The attack has gone on for 40 years under the guise of safety and pollution control.
If you can drive up the price of new vehicles enough, and force the older ones off the road via draconian safety and emission inspection requirements, mission accomplished.
“Fuel-efficiency mandates restrict consumer choice and completely overstep the boundaries of the role of the federal government.”
Among many other unintended consequences.
Presently there is a crises approaching in the maintenance of roads bridges and highways. The increase in good gas mileage for vehicles has reduced the income from the gasoline tax in the various states to the point of limited funding for maintenance, which is why ideas like taxing people for the mileage they drive on state roads rather than the gasoline they buy are becoming very popular.
There are other consequences of government being in control of literally every facet of our lives from food to toilets. When was the last time you did a freedom check? We just may not be as free as we once thought.
“The goal of progressives has always been to limit personal mobility...”
Can we spell S-O-V-I-E-T U-N-I-O-N?
I believe one of the reasons that progressives wage war on fast food is that it is primarily dispensed via drive thru lanes.
“High speed” rail will be such a thrill.....sigh....
“When will Americans say ‘enough’?”
I no longer expect enough Americans to say ‘enough’. At least not any time soon.
We had our chance last month. Too many Americans said ‘more government’ and ‘more taxpayer handouts’.
A decade of crushing world-wide depression, starvation and governmrnt collapses might change peoples’ viewpoints but that future isn’t any more appealing than the current situation.
“....new cars priced under $15,000 may no longer be available.”
Will no longer be available regardless of the EPA’s
regulations. Obama-flation is going to take care of
that shortly. Bottom of the list is going to be
around $20g easy if not more. Not to mention the added
cost of the mandatory black boxes with built in breathalyzer
sensing, GPS tracking and remote engine shutdown. I predict
rooftop bar codes for satellite tracking soon.
agenda 21
On a good day I can see the House passing legislation like this. But it would run into a brick wall in the Senate, assuming Dingy would let it come up for a vote. And even if the Senate passed it, nobama would veto it.
Methinks the Heritage Foundation need to pull their heads out of the clouds.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.