Bush passes the buck on CAFE standards

April 28, 2006

The president hosted a rare Rose Garden press conference this morning with a few interesting exchanges, but this one stood out for me.

Q: In talking about gas prices, in 2001, when you did your first energy policy, and gas prices were about $1.50, a lot of people were saying, you know, you have to push CAFE standards higher for the entire fleet of vehicles; you have to scrutinize oil companies more closely; you have to spend a lot more in alternative fuels than even you were proposing. Do you have any regrets now that gas is $3 that you didn’t do enough in your first term to prevent these prices?

Bush: As you know, in order for there to be a CAFE standard increase on cars it requires congressional action. I think it’s a good idea to give the President, through the Secretary of Transportation, the opportunity to raise CAFE standards, just like I did on light trucks.

A couple of things. One, I love the way Bush basically said CAFE standards are Congress’ problem, not his. Would the president have us believe he really, truly wants to raise the standards, but can’t because the mean ol’ lawmakers can’t get their act together? Please.

Two, before Bush pats himself on the back for raising standards, he probably should recognize the fact that a) his policy on light trucks is a bit of a joke; and the policy b) actually encourages automakers to produce bigger, less fuel efficient vehicles, while preventing states from taking strong, progressive action to reverse global warming.

I guess Bush just forgot to mention this. Must have slipped his mind.

CAFE standards don’t mean very much. We really shouldn’t be trying to push them.

I am 100% positive that if we have gas prices over $3 for the next year that every car company in the world will easily meet all the CAFE requirements.

Why should I have to pay extra if I want to buy a gas guzzler that I drive 1,000 miles a year? I am not wasting much gas. It isn’t the car that I OWN that uses gas. It is the car that I DRIVE that uses gas.

We would be far better off to listen to John Anderson and save social security and reduce greenhouse gases by having a huge $1 or $2 a gallon tax on gas and rebate it through FICA taxes. The idea made sense in 1980 and it still makes sense today.

  • So in Bush’s view the President needs approval from Congress to deal with gas mileage of cars, but not to START WARS?????!!!!!! Douche… Bag…

  • Why should I have to pay extra if I want to buy a gas guzzler that I drive 1,000 miles a year? I am not wasting much gas.

    That certainly sums up the conservative/libertarian line of thought on just about every domestic and foreign policy issue facing the country: Why should I have to make sacrifices and follow the rules? I’m an American and it’s my right to (insert name of stupid activity here

    Of course, this ignores a couple of things One, limited oil supplies are directly related to exorbitant prices paid at the pump. The more gas that consumed, the less the supply, the higher the price.

    Second, and more importantly, if your “F*** You mobile” sucks up two to three times as much gas as a small fuel efficient car over the same distance, you certainly are “wasting gas.” A SUV that gets 20 mpg/highway is bound to use more a car that gets 30+ mpg/highway.

  • “One, I love the way Bush basically said CAFE standards are Congress’ problem, not his.”

    I believe Bush was referring to the congressional freeze on CAFE. From policyalmanac.org:

    “Months prior to the midterm elections in 1994, NHTSA published a notice of possible adjustment to the fuel economy standards for trucks before the end of the decade. The following year, however, the House-passed version of H. R. 2002, the FY1996 Department of Transportation Appropriation, prohibited the use of appropriated funds to promulgate any CAFE rules; the Senate version did not include the language, but it was restored in conference. ”

    Why congress saw it necessary to check the executive branch’s ability to set fuel standards under Clinton, but not under Bush is a story for another day.

  • If I remember correctly, the Republican Congress, beginning in 1995 passed laws prohibiting the EPA and Department of Transportation from enacting new CAFE standards. This tied the hands of the Clinton Administration (and I remember being personally outraged when new Energy Secretary in 2001 very haughtily talked about the Clinton Administration lacking an energy policy without bothering to mention these actions of the Republican congress). So I guess in that sense, Bush believes that Congress does have the power – but previous to Republican meddling in the 1990s, I believe that things like CAFE standards were strictly adminstrative rather than legislative actions.

  • I could care less about high gas prices. If it encourages people to drive less and buy more efficient cars, great.

    If assholes driving Ford Expeditions and Hummers fifty miles each way to work every day have to suffer, so f’ing what. They made that choice. Let them live with it.

  • #7. I see your point. However, also look at older folks, the disabled, and the very poor. Higher gas prices to them can mean the differnce between having enough to pay the exhorbidant prices that medicine costs nowadays and having to go without lifesaving medicines…, or without enough food, or a birthday present for their granddaughter. These people are often living on fixed incomes, and as the price of necessary consumables goes up (or DOUBLES, as in the case of gas under oil men Bush, and Mr. ‘Secret’ Big Oil Produced Energy Policy Cheney), these people especially suffer. Bush offers no relief except to eliminate environmental standards. Thanks Bush, I hope YOUR children are the first ones to taste the petroleum by-products in their food and water, and to feel the effects, not mine. bush could decide to eliminate the billions in subsidies, OUR tax money, handed over to these multi-billionaire companies and invest it in renewable energy sources, provide real tax relief for lower and middle class Americans so we can ALL afford gas. But no, he tells the oil industry to put more pollution into the environment. Thanks for all the help. I wonder, how much money did bush and the repulsive-cons get from the oil/petrolium industry over the last 5 years?

  • Well, if we actually had a functioning social safety net for the poor, the high gas prices would be less of a problem, now wouldn’t they?

    Europe does it right. They have exhorbinant taxes on petrol, which are used to… fund public transportation! Now *that* would be a boon to the poor. Somehow Europe’s poor manage to not starve in the street despite the high price of petrol. Why? They– along with many of the rich and middle-class– take public transportation. High gas prices also force more middle-class people to use public transportation, which is smart for the same reason it’s smart that Social Security is for rich and poor alike: it means everyone has a stake in funding and improving the systems and keeping them running.

    I ride the bus. You know who I see on the bus? 1) senior citizens, 2) teenagers and pre-teen kids, 3) poor laborers travelling back and forth from work. And that’s about it. Not too many middle-class commuters or families– they’re all in their SUV’s I supose.

    I’d guess that price of gas isn’t nearly as big an issue for the poor as the price– and quality, and availability– of public transportation. High gas taxes can solve that problem.

  • When you start out at a low mpg, technology may not be of much help in improving mileage significantly. GM and Daimler just announced a new hybrid technology that offers an improvement of 25%. They plan to put it in their 2007 Chevy Tahoes. If you start with 15 mpg, if my math is right, the new Tahoe will be getting about 19 mpg. Great. At $3.00 per gallon, drive 100 miles and you save about $4.00 or about 1.3 gallons of gas. Pull an RV or motor boat and what have you saved?

    No matter how efficient we may make them, burning gasoline, ethanol or whatever in internal combution engines will always be a very inefficient process, and a low net yielder of the energy contained in gas.

    Imagine a world with all of your needs within easy walking, biking or public transit distance from your doorstep. Imagine an economy that does not depend on the Chinese or the global trading system raping every last remaining natural ecosystem on earth. Imagine an economy that is not based on growth. Difficult.

    Imagine trying to sustain our existing system built on cheap oil. Imagine apocalyptic collapse. Easy.

    Our leaders, political and economic, can only imagine the easy street.

  • This is simply another example of the Bush administration puting politics ahead of policy and puting Machiaveli into practice – Image is Everything

    Polls and focus groups tell Karl Rove that the American people think Bush is doing a lousy job on energy.

    Polls and focus groups tell Karl Rove that the American people are angry about gasoline prices and that they want more to be done.

    Polls and focus groups tell Karl Rove that many Americans think milage standards could be higher while a lot fewer actively oppose “reasonable” measures.

    Polls and focus groups tell Karl Rove that the Americans dont like Congress.

    Karl Rove Solution: Look “strong” by demanding more authority to act on behalf of the people to raise CAFE standards.

    It doesnt matter whether or not the President actually plans to do anything, or whether or not he has the authority he already needs, the key is that he needs to appear to be doing something. Those that can see through the charade arent likely to be changing their minds anyway.

    Another good example of this is the GOP plan to send taxpayers $100, here have some money, oh we are calling it a gasoline tax rebate.

  • prm:

    Thanks for the insult and thanks for not even trying to understand my point.

    If I buy a big SUV and drive it 1,000 miles a year then I am using 83 gallons at 12 mph. If I could have used a small car that got 35mph then I would have used 29 gallons. So it is possible to complain that I wasted 55 gallons of gas (rounding differences).

    Of course, this assumes that it was possible to take 8 people in the small car and carry the luggage. But skip that point.

    While we are casting stones— How far do you drive to work? I take the bus.
    How many miles a year do you drive? I drive about 6,000.

    But getting back to my point. The best way to reduce gas use is NOT to raise CAFE requirements. The best way is to increase the price of a gallon of gas.

    I guess I don’t understand the conservative/libertarian line. I didn’t know that any of them were in favor of RAISING taxes

  • My coworker and I must be the only ones that remember that one of President Bush’s first acts when he took office was to postpone the CAFE standards put in place by Clinton in his last year in office. He felt they were too restrictive on car manufacturers. AND NOW, he’s a knight in shining armor for revisiting this. While I am not a Kerry fan, I do recall a term the Bush people used that may apply more to Bush than Kerry: “flip-flopper”. They tried to impeach Clinton for lying about having a personal affair with his intern but nothing gets done about this President running our country into the ground. Excessive spending and tax cuts have plunged us into record deficits. Mispresentation of the situation in Iraq. Weapons of mass destruction…War on Terrorism. C’mon how can you declare war on an action and not a person or country?? The more we stir the hornets nest the more we aid their call!!! We provide the uncle sam poster for their recruitment of new terrorists. It’s not a war we can WIN!! period!!! So much of this defies logic and yet so many people still scavenge anything they can to defend this man. Wake up AMERICA!!!

  • #12.

    it is possible to complain about people wasting a small amount of gas. like any waste, if everyone is wasting that same small amount then it adds up very quickly.

    the truth is, it is wonderful that you take a bus. where i grew up (in south jersey- in a suburb of philly- hardly rural), there was no public bus system. if you wanted to get around, you needed a car. unfortunately, this is a problem in most of america. unlike other countries, we have not invested in infrastructure hardly at all. we need to improve this- and this sort of improvement could come from decreasing entitlement spending (payments to individuals) and increasing spending in areas like infrastructure and schools that help us all. no need for a tax increase- just a readjustment of our sense of entitlement.

    we need to change how we spend. we also need to see the price of gas rise to what the rest of the world is paying so we think before wasting.

    • Comments are closed.