SACRAMENTO, Calif. — In a decisive move, the U.S. House of Representatives, dominated by Republicans, voted on Thursday to prevent California from implementing pioneering regulations intended to eliminate the sale of new gas-powered vehicles by 2035.
This decision followed a prior vote where the House chose to hinder California’s guidelines aimed at reducing tailpipe emissions from medium and heavy-duty vehicles, as well as diminishing nitrogen oxide pollution from trucks.
House Republicans Brett Guthrie of Kentucky and Morgan Griffith of Virginia hailed the passage of these resolutions as significant for Americans who oppose transitioning to costly electric vehicles due to California’s stringent mandates.
They expressed concerns that failing to reverse California’s waivers could result in increased prices for cars, greater reliance on China, and strain the country’s electric grid.
For several decades, California has maintained the authority to enforce vehicle emissions standards that surpass those set by the federal government.
In 2020, Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom announced ambitious plans to cease the sale of all new gas-powered vehicles by 2035, aiming to significantly cut emissions from the transportation sector.
Under these rules, plug-in hybrids and used gas cars would still be available for sale.
Upon formalization of these regulations by state authorities, other states expressed intentions to adopt similar rules, and the Biden administration sanctioned California’s waiver to implement them last December, shortly before former President Donald Trump re-entered office.
The recent House votes occurred mostly along party lines, although some Democrats aligned with Republicans.
The Senate Parliamentarian, however, alongside the U.S. General Accountability Office, advises that California’s policies should not undergo the review mechanism employed by the House.
Employing the Congressional Review Act, Republicans attempted to block these standards,
despite the GAO’s clarification in March that these California standards are not subject to blockage via this legislative tool.
The Act, designed to fortify congressional oversight of agency actions,
was previously used by the Trump administration in 2019 to rescind California’s power to set its own emissions standards, a move later overturned by Biden.
Governor Newsom criticized the Republicans’ actions, noting a shift in the party’s ideology from past policies introduced under former presidents Nixon and Reagan, who enacted significant environmental laws,
to the current efforts by Trump to counteract progress in environmental protection, including air and water quality and climate change measures.
Newsom emphasized that the ongoing initiatives safeguard cleaner air for Californians and vowed to continue defending them.
The California Air Resources Board, responsible for the vehicle emission standards, affirmed its dedication to upholding public health by mitigating harmful air pollution.
The future of this legislative action in the Senate remains uncertain.
In April, the Senate Parliamentarian reaffirmed the GAO’s stance that California’s Clean Air Act waivers fall outside the jurisdiction of the Congressional Review Act.
This sentiment was echoed by California Senator Adam Schiff, who underscored the potential violation of states’ rights and the dangerous precedent that could arise from disregarding Congress’ nonpartisan advisories.
Dan Becker of the Center for Biological Diversity’s Safe Climate Transport Campaign criticized the Congressional Review Act’s application in this situation,
labeling it a covert maneuver indicative of irresponsible Republican behavior.
He warned that the Republicans might face regret for potentially inviting attacks on other non-rules when the party is no longer in control.
Conversely, the American Petroleum Institute and the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers commended the vote, describing it as a significant win for U.S. consumers.
Mike Sommers and Chet Thompson, presidents of their respective organizations, argued against the legitimacy of California’s ban,
asserting that Governor Newsom had overreached in his authority regarding the American vehicle market.