Tougher Fuel Rules Faltering in Senate
Senate efforts to establish tougher fuel-economy standards for SUVs and other vehicles sputtered Tuesday as lawmakers appeared headed toward approving an industry-backed plan that critics say would produce little, if any, gas savings.
The proposal, likely to be voted on today, would let the Department of Transportation set the miles-per-gallon rules. Supporters say that would allow science, rather than politics, determine the standards. But critics charge that it would leave the decision to an agency susceptible to pressure from Detroit.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a leading advocate of tougher standards, said the alternative “basically does nothing.”
Opponents of the tougher standards, led by Democratic and Republican lawmakers from vehicle-manufacturing states, expressed confidence that they had the votes to pass their measure.
The vote would represent a major defeat for environmentalists who have sought to include tougher standards in a comprehensive energy bill now being debated in the Senate. Instituting such standards, they say, is the single most important step that lawmakers could take to cut U.S. dependence on foreign oil and reduce emissions of carbon dioxide--a gas linked to global warming.
“The Senate is handing our nation’s energy security over to the auto industry,” said Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club.
Opponents contended that the tougher standards would force everyone from farmers to soccer moms into smaller, lighter and less safe vehicles that they don’t want and that the move would cost the U.S. auto industry jobs.
“I don’t want to tell a mom and dad in my home state they can’t get the SUV they want because Congress decided that would be a bad choice,” said Sen. Christopher S. Bond (R-Mo.). He predicted that if the tougher rules went into effect, “we’re going to be driving lots of golf carts.”
But Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), a leading proponent of the tougher standards, accused critics of scare tactics and of ignoring the national security interests of reducing oil imports.
“No one in America will have to drive a smaller car,” Kerry said.
As the debate raged, senators’ own SUVs filled the parking lot outside the Capitol, a testament to the political difficulty of legislating something as popular as the SUV.
The fuel standard issue touched off the fiercest lobbying on the energy legislation and underscored how energy policy is often shaped--not solely by partisan differences but by home-state interests.
Senators opened their debate Tuesday on the fuel-economy standards after delaying a vote on one of the first Enron-inspired reforms--a proposal by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) to bring the kind of energy derivatives traded by Enron under greater government oversight.
Kerry, McCain and Sen. Ernest F. Hollings (D-S.C.) have sought to raise the standards for passenger vehicles to 36 mpg by 2015, the biggest increase since the fuel-economy program was established in 1975 after the Arab oil embargo.
Car makers now must meet a “corporate average fuel economy,” or CAFE, standard of 27.5 mpg for cars and 20.7 mpg for light trucks--a category that includes SUVs, minivans and pickups.
Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and Bond pushed the alternative, which also would direct the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to set standards based on such factors as how the tougher rules would affect U.S. dependence on foreign oil, vehicle safety and auto industry jobs. Their measure also calls for more generous tax incentives to encourage consumers to buy fuel-efficient cars and more government funding for research into fuel-efficient vehicles.
Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.), whose state includes auto manufacturing plants, said she supports the Levin-Bond measure. “I believe in energy conservation, but I also believe in job conservation.”
Kerry disputed contentions that tougher standards would compromise safety or hurt industry jobs.
