Automakers spared tougher CAFE rules - for now
The U.S. congress gave automakers a break Thursday, as the House Energy and Commerce Committee voted down a proposal to require 33 mpg fuel economy standards (averaged over cars and trucks) by 2015.The same committee voted in favor of a bill to give the administration more authority to change CAFE rules going forward, as part of its attempt to get in front of voters' growing concerns about the rising cost of fuel.
The next stop for the Bush administration's bill is the full House of Representatives - expect a host of amendments as lawmakers try to respond to their constituents' growing concerns about the nation's energy policy.
[Source: Automotive News]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
_thumbnail.jpg "2011 Audi A8: Live from Miami")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
bud dailey 8:05PM (5/11/2006)
What would you expect from a White House full of oil men and a Congress paid for by corporate America.
Looking forward to five dollar a gallon gas and continue to watch the Mega vehicle owners whine and whine about the unfairness of it all, Bet most of them voted republican
Reply
iQuack 9:44PM (5/11/2006)
Sounds like a bit of sanity to me. CAFE rules are silly and unnecessary.
CAFE is bad law that, among other things, forced car makers to downsize cars and encourage people to buy trucks and SUVs instead. In that respect, CAFE has been a flat failure because we now have Susie Cell Phone driving to Walmart in her 5000 pound monster.
The pricing mechanism works just fine and nobody needs Congress--Republicans nor Democrats--screwing around with it.
Reply
David Lazarus 3:35AM (5/12/2006)
The CAFE starndards should be pushed through otherwise the Big Three auto makers will find that they will end up with a smaller share of their domestic market than ever. Ford is apparently doing well in Europe where they sell far more efficient vehicles than you get there. We have gas prices more than double that you have there and so if our manufacturers can make a profit here then they should have no problems selling to the USA.
If you are so annoyed and 90 lb women putting their makeup on in 5000lb SUV's and trucks make them comply as well.
Reply
PJ 3:40AM (5/12/2006)
iQuack - At first I was tempted to make a knee-jerk liberal reaction to your comment, but it makes a very good point. Because of CAFE rulings, automakers have been eager to push consumers into vehicles so huge, they're exempt from CAFE standards altogether.
What really needs an overhaul--and I can't believe this hasn't been done already--is the EPA classifications for various vehicle types. Vehicles once fairly classified as "Light Trucks" are now being used for the same purposes as "Passenger Cars," (Explorer, TrailBlazer, Durango, et cetera) and should be held to the same standards for environmental impact and passenger safety.
And those that are classified as "Heavy-Duty Trucks"--H2, H1, and the late (unlamented) Excursion, among others--should most definitely be held to stricter standards. These vehicles are being driven by Suzie Cell-Phone to take the kids to school, but are held to the same environmental/safety standards as a UPS delivery truck because of their GVWR, which is almost never used by the vast majority of owners.
Reply
Tim 12:28PM (5/12/2006)
An even better solution, eliminate CAFE and increase gas taxes. Let market forces do their work. High gas prices will increase demand for fuel efficent vehicles and the automakers will respond. CAFE was a good idea when it was introduced but has loopholes you can drive an SUV through.
Reply
Tom Design 11:11PM (5/13/2006)
What are you thinking? We need higher standards for mpg not lowering? We need bumpers on any licensed vehicle to match in collisions for safety and insurance cost lowering. We need each vehicle surveyed for its liveability and low cost of collision and high regard for safety. That's what a government concerned about the people would be doing. If consumers and carmakers want to drive 4 foot high bumpered, 6,000 pound, 8-15mpg vehicles, then they should pay surcharges. It's going in the wrong direction, guys.
Reply