Stop the EPA’s De Facto Ban on Americans’ Cars
Amanda Eversole
Posted April 10, 2024
Heads Up: Big vote coming! Senators must reject a radical vision for America’s transportation future.
Background On S.4072: New EPA rules would essentially restrict sales of new light- and medium-duty vehicles powered by internal combustion engines in a few years. Sponsored by Sen. Mike Crapo of Idaho, S.4072 would prohibit the use of funds to implement, administer or enforce these unrealistic rules.
Imagine EPA’s Ideal World: In eight short years, 68% of passenger vehicle sales are electric. It’s a reckless policy when you consider that less than 8% of new vehicle sales in 2023 were electric.
How About The Existing Fleet? EPA’s rules also discourage innovation for reducing emissions in 270 million gas-powered cars already on the road in the U.S. by not accounting for lower-carbon fuel blends.
✔ Gasoline cars and trucks accounted for 92% of U.S. vehicle sales in 2023.
✔ One-third of electric vehicle (EV) sales in 2023 occurred in just one state – California.
✔ Only EVs and a few hybrids meet the mandate.
Three Reasons Why The Senate Should Tell The EPA To Stay In Its Lane …
1) EPA’s De Facto Ban Disregards Basic Freedom
Consumer Selection, Vehicle Freedom … Say Goodbye to Both! Americans do not like being told what to buy. U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg’s landlines-to-cell-phones analogy is a false one because mobile technology was driven by consumers, not federal mandates. For many Americans, EVs simply do not meet their needs, whether it’s a lack of charging stations, harsh weather or personal preference.
2) EPA’s De Facto Ban Is Bad Climate Policy
An Incomplete Picture On Climate: EVs are NOT zero-emission vehicles. The absence of a tailpipe does not mitigate emissions produced in the mining and refining of minerals for batteries or power needed for charging. If the goal is to reduce emissions in the transportation sector, the administration should evaluate vehicles on a life-cycle basis, not a haphazard approach that has major accounting errors.
3) EPA’s De Facto Ban Threatens National Security
The Threat to National Security Is Real: In January, 17 retired military officials sent a letter to President Biden warning the proposed tailpipe rule was a threat to national security. The Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) heavily subsidized EV sector can produce these vehicles cheaply; EPA’s de facto ban creates a gap only China can fill. The mandate doesn’t only threaten liquid fuels; it’s a threat to the U.S. automotive industry and national security.
Bottom Line: We need more energy, and electric vehicles are part of the future. But they’re not for everyone. Such a personal decision should not be made by Washington. EPA’s de facto ban will restrict consumer freedom, eliminate competition, distort the market and create a big dependency on unreliable nations for our transportation needs. Vote “Yes” on S.4072 to prevent taxpayer dollars from being used to implement, administer, or enforce EPA’s unrealistic tailpipe standards for light/medium-duty vehicle.
About The Author
Amanda Eversole is API’s executive vice president and chief advocacy officer, and leads efforts to integrate API’s diverse functions and develop and implement a strategic plan. Eversole came to API from JPMorgan Chase & Co., where she was managing director and head of public affairs, building the organization’s public affairs function and creating the framework for the firm’s philanthropic activities. Prior to JPMorgan Chase & Co., she served in a number of leadership positions at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, including president of C_TEC, the Chamber Technology Engagement Center. Before joining the U.S. Chamber, she worked for RTC Relationship Marketing in business development. Eversole graduated cum laude from the College of William & Mary with a bachelor of business administration and a minor in French, and she earned an M.B.A. from the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School where she was a Palmer Scholar and graduated first in her class. She serves on the Board of Directors of Our Energy Policy. She lives in Virginia with her husband, their two daughters and their dog, Gus.