Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Credo Mobile

HOME

ABOUT US

OUR ISSUES

Federal Budget

Information & Access

Nonprofit Advocacy


PRESS ROOM

ACTION CENTER

PUBLICATIONS

THE WATCHER

OUR BLOGS


SIGN UP

Receive news, updates, and alerts!

DONATE

Help support our work


OTHER SITES

FedSpending.org

RTK NET

NPAction

Working Group on Community Right-to-Know

Citizens for Sensible Safeguards

Open the Government

OMB Watch Logo

"[P]eople acting in a group can accomplish things which no individual acting alone could even hope to bring about." - FDR

Home :  Regulatory Policy :  RegWatch : 
RegWatch:     

News & Analysis | REG•WATCH Blog | Press Room

 R    E    G    •    W    A    T    C    H 


Thursday, August 16, 2007

Automakers Gear-Up to Stop Fuel Economy Reform

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) has the dirt on the efforts of the big three — General Motors, Ford and Chrysler — to mislead the public about the benefits of improved fuel efficiency. The automakers are holding a public rally as part of lobbying efforts to persuade federal legislators to abandon proposed fuel efficiency reform, according to UCS.

The Senate has passed a bill that would strengthen the federal fuel efficiency program, known as CAFE standards. The House chose not to tackle the issue in its own energy legislation. However, Democratic leaders may push to include CAFE reform during conference proceedings before the final bill is sent to the president.

According to UCS, if the new standard was fully implemented, it would, among other things, "cut 206 million metric tons of global warming pollution in 2020 alone—equivalent to taking more than 30 million of today's average cars and trucks off the road."

But full implementation is far from a given. The Senate unwisely included a cost-benefit provision in its version of CAFE reform. Currently, the national minimum rate for fuel efficiency is a static 27.5 miles per gallon and remains as such regardless of monetized costs or benefits. The Senate bill would change that: The legislation would require regulators to prove a new standard's benefits outweigh its costs before regulating.

For more on the problems with the cost-benefit provision and why it may lead to watered-down standards, see the OMB Watch analysis "Cost-Benefit Provision Latches onto Fuel Economy Standard."



Posted by Matt Madia



Entries by Theme

All Themes

Enforcement

About This Blog

Rollbacks

Safety

Industry Influence

Cost-Benefit Analysis

In Congress

Publications

Consumer Issues

Environment

Public Health

In the Courts

Oversight

In the White House

Most Recent Entries for RegWatch

Industry Ties Bind FDA Advisors

Right Whale Protection Rule Finally Here

Industry Pressuring EPA to Weaken Lead Rule

EPA Won't Keep Rocket Fuel out of Water

Roof Strength Rule Delayed Again

Bush Taking Credit for Whale Rule He Delayed

What Should the U.S. Do about China's Bad Milk?

Did OMB Block Asbestos Cleanup in Montana Town?

Whale Protection Rule Clears White House, 573 Days Later

EPA Just Kidding Around on Children's Health

Archived Entries for Industry Influence

October

September

August

July

June

May

April

March

February

January

December, 2007

November, 2007

October, 2007

September, 2007

August, 2007

July, 2007

June, 2007

May, 2007

April, 2007

March, 2007

February, 2007

January, 2007

December, 2006

November, 2006

October, 2006

September, 2006

August, 2006

June, 2006

May, 2006

April, 2006

March, 2006

January, 2006

December, 2005

November, 2005

October, 2005

September, 2005

August, 2005

July, 2005

June, 2005

April, 2005

March, 2005

February, 2005

January, 2005

December, 2004

November, 2004

October, 2004

September, 2004

August, 2004