The House of Representatives passed legislation in September to try and stop states from banning or limiting the sale of gas-powered cars. The Preserving Choice in Vehicle Purchases Act (H.R. 1435) passed by a 222-190 vote, with Republicans largely in favor, and is a reaction to California’s 2022 mandate that all new cars sold in the state after 2035 must be zero-emission vehicles, though the bill did not mention California or its mandate specifically.
The state’s air resources board acknowledged that the move is “aggressive” and described its timeline to eliminate new gas-powered car sales by 2035 as “ambitious but achievable.”
The board also estimated that by 2037, the regulation would translate to a 25% reduction in smog-causing pollution from light-duty vehicles. California was able to institute the mandate due to a waiver from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as part of the Clean Air Act, which allows states to create clean-transportation rules that are more strict than those of the federal government as long as they can get permission from the EPA.
The recently passed House bill would prevent the EPA from issuing such waivers. “Americans should be able to make choices — and vehicle purchases — that work best for themselves and their families,” Rep. Bob Latta (R-Ohio) said in a statement following the bill’s passage.
“The state of California, however, has made it their mission to outright ban vehicles with internal combustion engines and force people to purchase more expensive electric vehicles.” Others who opposed the ability of the EPA to issue state waivers echoed Latta’s sentiments and criticized the Biden administration for allowing “oppressive” state mandates.
“There is nothing more quintessentially American than the freedom of the open road, and I’m grateful to my colleagues for supporting this important legislation protecting the freedom of all Americans to drive the vehicles of their choice,” Rep. John Joyce (R-Pa.), who co-sponsored the legislation, said in a statement.
Supporters of the bill also pointed to the higher price and lower performance of electric vehicles (EVs) and the lack of EV charging infrastructure as additional reasons to avoid mandating a transition to EVs.
They also pointed out that China controls the majority of the mining and processing of EV materials and parts, including lithium-ion batteries.
“Restrictive government mandates isn’t how we’re going to lead the next hundred years, yet that’s what EPA and California are trying to do,” House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairwoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) said after the bill’s passage. The White House, meanwhile, issued a statement that it “strongly opposes” the House bill and pointed to California’s 50-year history of regulating and addressing “its unique and ongoing air quality challenges.”
The administration did not, however, issue a veto threat. House Democrats who opposed the bill argued that it would continue U.S. dependence on oil and wouldn’t help the Biden administration’s plan that American companies produce the cars of the future.
“This bill is a love letter to Big Oil — legally mandating that Americans think first of the internal combustion engine before considering air quality or public health,” Rep. Doris Matsui (D-Calif.) said during floor debate. “The only thing we have to show for an entire week in session is a bill that attacks states’ rights and California’s ability to decide for its own what regulations it wants under the Clean Air Act,” Rep. Teresa Leger Fernandez (D-N.M.) said.
The issue of whether or not to mandate a move to EVs has also made its way into the presidential campaign as former President Donald Trump, has been calling out the Biden administration for its EV policies in hopes of gaining more Michigan voters.
Such policies, Trump posted on Truth Social, would mean that “the Great State of Michigan will not have an auto industry anymore.”
While H.R. 1435 passed the House, it is unlikely to make headway in the Democrat-controlled Senate, and while the White House has not openly stated that it would veto the legislation, the likelihood that the president would sign such a bill is low given its agenda to move America toward cleaner transportation options. California and 17 other states that have agreed to adopt California’s EV mandate will likely be able to do so for the time being.
For more background, see the February 2020 issue of Congressional Digest on “Clean Cars.”
