Earth Day stab-in-the-back?

Question

The Bush Administrations proposed federal fuel economy standards seem to represent a backdoor attempt to thwart Congress, the federal courts, the state of California and perhaps even the Supreme Court.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's draft regulations on fuel economy standards looks like a green gesture since it goes a little further than Congress had anticipated when it directed automakers to build more fuel-efficient cars as part of last year's energy legislation. But deep in the proposal is a statement rejecting the right of states to set greenhouse-gas standards for vehicles.

California's Attorney General has threatened to sue if the proposal is adopted.

Answer 1

lets hope we can build cars small & light enough to meet the 35 mpg average on reduced energy fuel by 2020. you are aware that it takes MORE gasahol to go the same miles as gasoline due to the reduced btu content in every gallon?

I expect the next step will be to limit cars to100 or 150 horse power to save fuel.

if you ask the government to mandate fuel economy, you cant cry about the limits imposed,

be carefull what you ask for, you may get it!

Answer 2

Bush-co. statements reflect nothing more than a hay-day of future gains for the ultra-rich at the expense of every 'commoner' of U.S. stature. I suspect that he is the demon to enact a world reduction in population by billions before he is assassinated for his actions.

Answer 3

No it makes sense. The Federal standards were very close to the state standards and were proposed before those states tried to one-up the federal standards. So in essence the states were trying to trump the government. The federal rules are good, and the car companies can move more quickly toward more economic and cleaner cars if they only have to worry about one set of rules. Economy and emission standard are one portion of auto safety that should be standardized to reduce cost to auto makers and hassle to the public. Just try moving from one state to another with a car that does not comply with local standards. California was a pain in the past with these rules and I am glad their law was rejected.  I am unaware of any proposed economy standards proposed by Bush he already approved new laws in December that was drafted and voted on by congress.  Bush is not the root of all evil, he has two other branches of government to share the blame for any boondogle in this country.

Answer 4

Yeah that's how the Bush Administration works.  They like to pretend they're addressing global warming when in reality they're taking the most miniscule steps possible while preventing real action from being taken.  It's just despicable.

Answer 5

Hey - This is what you get when you turn to the federal gvmt to run the show.

You're right, this should be a state issue.  It's time to get rid of the NHTSA

Answer 6

I really wish we could give California back to  mexico.

Our nation would be so much better off with that h**l hole.

Answer 7

His fuel economy standards mean nothing at all!   Why not mandate that by the year 2389 all cars be able to fly and run on water?   He'll be out of office in another 280+ days, so anything that is mandated for the future can be changed or deleted.

Answer 8

I don't think you have an issue with the federal government dictating to the states as such - only if you happen to disagree with federal governments position.  

You wouldn't disagree with the federal government dictating to Arkansas over civil rights would you?

Answer 9

I'd love to see this go to the Supreme Court! The Bush Administration freaked when after they refused to let the EPA do it's job the States said they would do it for them.  Then they started trying to block the States.  These guys belong in prison, every one of them.  The EPA has already been to the Supreme Court and Bush lost as usual.  Yet they still won't obey the law.  How can you fight when the Supreme Court has already ruled against you?  Oh well, as someone said, they did it all the time during the Civil Rights Integration attempts.  In those cases it took Federal Troops to enforce the Courts ruling.  I don't see how that could work now.  Federal Troops against the White House?  These guys need to face charges in the World Court.  They would look good at the end of a rope.  It isn't just California now, seventeen other States have joined them.

Answer 10

Global warming cannot be prevented by getting rid of a couple of cars.  States shouldn't be allowed to set standards for vehicles because vehicles are used to cross state lines.  And also if you did this automakers would have created different cars for different to meet the needs of these "standards".  Yet again the government should step back and let things play out

Answer 11

What gives you the right to determine what car a person should own?  Why do you feel the need to control other people and make them conform to your way of thinking?

Answer 12

Do you know how ridiculous those standards are?  Do you know how expensive cars would be if they were put into place all over the country?

They're too strict.  I, for one, am glad that I'll have the right to own a Mustang someday here, and not be forced to own a Prius or something else not as pretty.

Answer 13

The government has no business dictating fuel economy standards; consumers are adult enough to decide for themselves what kind of car is appropriate.