Obama's New CAFE Standards And California's Ability To Control CO2 Emissions On The Chopping Block

Why hasn't Congress fined barry odumbo for his excess CO2 mouth exhaust pollution?

Good fuel economy is a bad idea. The more oil we burn, the more people we put to work in the oil research, extraction, refinement, storage, transportation, and delivery businesses. That's a lot of employed Americans! And all that money ends up back in the US economy.

It Trump really loved this country, he'd pass laws that mandate a 15 MPG average (or lower). That would be a boom to the massive American oil industry, and it would give Americans an incentive to buy and drive the cars they *really* love, like Hummers and Escalades! That would be a boom to the massive American auto industry. Everyone wins.

Steve, I swear someone has hacked your account. You've gone from intelligent to idiotic.

I will assume that TheSteve's comment was tongue in cheek. Obviously - good fuel economy is what led to our Country's ability to become oil independent from the Middle east again. If mileage standards were to drop to 15 mph- that would again put us dependent on the international oil market - maybe that is why Trump is courting Putin (Or maybe Trump was the Manchurian Candidate) - for oil reserves.

The fact is though - if California did not put its environmental laws into place initially - we would not have had the continued improvements in ICE engine cars - as well as Hybrids and EVs. The needs of Nasa to put a man on the moon sparked the first electronic technology breakthroughs. Government policy has often caused the need for newer and better. And up until this point - the manufacturers have been able to produce cars that meet California standards - because its market is too big to ignore.

I believe an attempt by the administration to take away the ability for california to set its own environmental laws would set up a confrontation between the USA and the STATES in court as to whether states can set their own laws. THe problem is - California can argue that their laws do not VIOLATE the minimum standards set by the federal government - simply require additional reductions. THis is not an environmental issue though - since if the Feds wanted to take away such a right to set their own laws - it would apply to LOTS of other laws in a state - from Offshore Drilling -to education standards - to speed limits - etc. In the end this would be 50 states fighting against the federal government - and might mean an end to the country.

TomM wrote "I will assume that TheSteve's comment was tongue in cheek..."

Very much so! Top marks for Tom :-)

Being good to the environment is one thing, but grenading the economy to do so is idiocy. California has prioritized the environment over the economy and jobs and the Democrats are not interested in compromising.

Ah, I see the notion that privatizing profits and socializing responsibility and losses is alive and well with the right wing. Funny how the people touting "personal responsibility" run away from any and all actual real world responsibility when it comes to their actions and ramifications of their business if it means pollution and hazardous waste. They then pass laws to absolve themselves of any and all responsibility for their actions that hurt everyone like the environment. Funny how this is a constant theme. You want to make money? Fine. Clean up your mess. Don't make other people breathe your profits that you alone enjoy. Think about the people 10 years from now. 50 years. 100 years. It's not all about you and your profits.