[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 95 (Wednesday, June 30, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7921-S7923]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 AN EFFORT TO RAISE THE CAFE STANDARDS

  Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. President, I rise today to talk about an issue of 
critical importance to the families in my State. Throughout Michigan, 
men and women are working hard every day to produce the cars that make 
our economy and our Nation move. They and their families depend on the 
jobs produced by our automobile manufacturing industry, just as the 
rest of us can depend on the cars they produce.

[[Page S7922]]

  But those jobs in Michigan's economy are jeopardized by efforts to 
increase the standards for Corporate Average Fuel Economy, or CAFE. I 
have come to the floor today because I want to make certain that my 
colleagues are aware of the extremely serious impact of increased CAFE 
standards, not just on Michigan but on every State in the Union. I also 
point out that these punitive measures will be ineffective and fly in 
the face of ongoing efforts on the part of our automakers to increase 
fuel economy, efforts that promise to produce fruit in the very near 
future.
  The Federal Government currently mandates that auto manufacturers 
mandate a fuel economy of 27.5 miles per gallon for cars and 20.7 miles 
per gallon for sports utility vehicles and light trucks.
  Since 1995, Congress has wisely refused to allow the Federal 
bureaucracy to unilaterally increase these standards. We have 
recognized that it is our duty as legislators to make policy in this 
important area of economic and environmental concern.
  Now, however, I understand that a number of colleagues are calling 
for an end to this congressional authority. They are calling on the 
administration to unilaterally increase CAFE requirements for sports 
utility vehicles and light trucks to 27.5 miles per gallon.
  This action is misguided. It will hurt the working families of 
Michigan. It will undermine American competitiveness. I want to put the 
Senate on notice that I will use every legislative means at my disposal 
to see that it does not happen.
  CAFE requirements costs jobs with few tangible positive affects. It 
really is that simple.
  Let me explain what I mean.
  To meet increased CAFE requirements, SUVs and light trucks would have 
to be dramatically reengineered. Auto makers would be forced to 
implement and design radically new engine and autobody changes. Such 
changes would be enormously challenging, and would be reflected in 
decreased power and carrying capacity, coupled with an increase in 
price. The result would be a less desirable automobile. It would spell 
the doom of the line vehicles which are largely responsible for the 
resurgence and continued success of American automobile industry.
  Of course, this is precisely the goal of CAFE advocates: reduced 
public demand and consumption of this line of vehicle, but it is an 
unwise course.
  A government engineered campaign to steer the public away from the 
sport utility market, one which the U.S. producers dominate, will also 
be of enormous benefit to overseas competitors.
  The fact is, the U.S. dominates the light truck market because sky-
high gasoline prices in countries such as Japan have forced foreign 
auto makers to make smaller, lighter cars.
  This matters because CAFE requirements are averaged over a producers 
entire fleet of vehicles. Since the Japanese auto producers produce 
relatively few light truck models, these producers will have to make no 
changes in vehicle capacity or production in order to meet U.S. CAFE 
requirements.
  Thus, foreign producers would avoid the cost and challenge of 
modifying their fleet fuel economy averages. And that means the 
government, not the market, will have placed an uneven burden on 
American workers.
  Consumers also suffer when their choices are narrowed. And auto 
makers and their employees suffer when they are forced to make cars the 
public simply does not want.
  In a statement before the Consumer Subcommittee of the Senate 
Commerce Committee, Dr. Marina Whitman of General Motors notes that in 
1982: ``we were forced to close two assembly plants which had been 
fully converted to produce our new, highly fuel-efficient compact and 
mid-size cars. The cost of these conversions was $130 million, but the 
plants were closed because demand for those cars did not develop during 
a period of sharply declining gasoline prices.''
  This story could be repeated for every major American automaker, Mr. 
President. And the effects on our overall economy have been 
devastating.
  During this time of economic prosperity, it is easy for some people 
to forget the massive dislocation of workers which occurred during the 
1970's and 1980's.
  But we should keep in mind, not only the thousands of jobs in the 
auto manufacturing industry that were lost during this period, but also 
the massive impact this downturn in a key industry had on our economy 
as a whole.
  The story of plant closings were devastating for domestic automakers 
back in the 1970s and 1980s.
  It is unfortunately the case, sometimes when we are in a period of 
economic prosperity, as we are now, it is easy to forget the massive 
dislocation of workers which did occur back at that time.
  We should keep in mind not only the thousands of jobs in the auto 
manufacturing industry that were lost during that period, but also the 
massive impact that downturn in a key industry had on our economy.
  The American auto industry accounts for one in seven U.S. jobs. 
Steel, transportation, electronics, literally dozens of industries 
employing thousands upon thousands of Americans depend on the health of 
our auto industry.
  If we do again to our auto industry what was done to it during the 
1970's and 1980's, we will quickly see our current prosperity turn to 
an era of significant unemployment, in my judgment.
  Mr. President, the last thing our economy and our people need is a 
repeat of those hard times.
  Our automakers simply cannot afford to pay the fines imposed on them 
if they fail to reach CAFE standards, or to build cars that Americans 
will not buy. In either case the real victims are American workers and 
consumers.
  Nor should we forget, Mr. President, that American automakers are 
investing almost $1 billion every year in research to develop more fuel 
efficient vehicles.
  Indeed, we do not need to turn to the punitive, disruptive methods of 
CAFE standards to increase fuel economy for American vehicles. 
Especially since domestic manufacturers have increased passenger car 
fuel economy 108 percent and light truck fuel economy almost 60 percent 
since the mid-1970s.
  And more progress will soon be realized. Since 1993, the Partnership 
for a New Generation of Vehicles has brought together government 
agencies and the auto industry to conduct joint research--research that 
is making significant progress and will bridge the gap to real world 
applications after 2000.
  By enhancing research cooperation, PNGV will help our auto industry 
develop vehicles that are more easily recyclable, have lower emissions, 
and can achieve up to triple the fuel efficiency of today's midsize 
family sedans. All this while producing cars that retain performance, 
utility, safety and economy.
  By next year, Mr. President, technologies developed in the PNGV 
program will be incorporated into concept vehicles. These vehicles will 
help the auto industry determine their functional benefits, develop 
production infrastructure and determine commercial viability.
  By 2004 we will have production-feasible prototypes that can be 
brought to mass production within 3-5 years.
  Direct-injection engines, new forms of fuel cells, lithium batteries, 
new polymers, and many other technological developments are now in the 
works. They are in the works thanks to a strategy that places 
cooperation over punitive government mandates.
  We have made solid progress, Mr. President. Progress toward making 
vehicles that achieve greater fuel economy without sacrificing the 
qualities consumers demand.
  And we should remember, Mr. President, that we can remain competitive 
and retain American jobs only if people will actually buy the vehicles 
our industry produces.
  Cooperation will produce the results we need. New punitive mandates 
will produce an economic downside none of us want to see.
  Again, I will use every legislative means at my disposal as a U.S. 
Senator to stop bills or amendments to increase CAFE standards. I urge 
my colleagues to reject this misguided attempt to increase the 
destructive CAFE requirements.
  As the son of a man would worked as a UAW member on the line for 
about 20 years of his life, and the son-in-law of a man who did it for 
39 years in the State of Michigan, my family understands, as do 
thousands of other families in our State, exactly what happens

[[Page S7923]]

when people stop buying American-made cars. People in our State and 
people in other States start to lose their jobs.
  We don't want that to happen. We can achieve the twin goals of 
keeping people at work and producing more fuel-efficient vehicles if we 
continue the course that has been working. The development, the 
research, the technology, which the Federal Government has participated 
in is going to produce the success we want. We can do it without 
government-imposed mandates of people losing their jobs.
  This Senator plans to fight in every way he can to make sure that is 
the course we follow.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________