[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 6 (Thursday, January 11, 2024)]
[House]
[Page H64]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]





                              {time}  1115
                     CORPORATE AVERAGE FUEL ECONOMY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
California (Mr. LaMalfa) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, there is a proposal by the National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration, often coupled with EPA as well on this 
topic, regarding corporate average fuel economy. This is a standard 
that was developed many years ago in order to increase the fuel 
efficiency of automobiles and trucks sold in America.
  They have been cranking up that standard over the years, including a 
giant leap during the Obama era, where the manufacturers basically came 
into hearings and acquiesced to these really far-reaching standards 
they would have. This basically means the fleet of vehicles that the 
manufacturers would sell has to meet a certain level of average miles 
per gallon for cars and for light trucks.
  Years ago, when it was first established, these were within reach, 
with work, with new technology, with the efforts modern manufacturers 
were making. During the Obama era they wanted to raise it from the 
ultimate goal of, I believe, 27 miles per gallon by X year to 55 miles 
per gallon by, I believe, 2025 at the time. Think about that a minute, 
55 miles per gallon. This is before any of this electric car mess we 
are talking about right now being forced upon consumers.
  How many cars do you know of today that get 55 miles per gallon that 
are not electric assist or electric in total, which gets, I guess, 
infinite miles per gallon in that sense? Now, the electricity still 
comes from somewhere, whether it is a coal plant, a natural gas plant, 
or a windmill that runs only when the wind blows or a solar plant that 
is taking up many hundreds of acres of land that only works when it is 
daylight or not cloudy or rainy or snow covering the solar panels, but 
I digress a bit.
  Basically, during the Obama era they wanted to double it to 54. There 
are not a lot of cars that most people want to drive day in and day out 
that get 54, 55 miles per gallon. Indeed, right now, the fleet, when 
you average trucks and cars, at this moment is about 26.4 miles per 
gallon across the board. This is after some years of fuel efficiency 
since this first came out. Consumers have voted for what they want. 
They vote with their wallets, and that is where the average is right 
now.
  Some folks want a high-mileage car for their commute or that is what 
they use every day, or what have you. Some folks want electric cars. 
They think they are being part of an ecological solution. However, a 
lot of Americans have shown already that they don't want to have 
electric cars forced upon them, the EVs. Indeed, we are seeing the 
manufacturers, after all this enthusiasm, the CEOs coming out and 
saying, Oh, it is the wave, it is the future; they are finding that 
after an initial jolt of people buying these vehicles, that market has 
more or less become saturated for this moment.
  It has taken a lot of incentives, a lot of government money thrown 
around to help manufacturers put these out, and then giant incentives 
to buyers to buy these electric cars. Now we have the National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration trying yet again to push even harder on 
these fuel standards to be what might take 58 miles per gallon to reach 
the goals that they set out.
  They say ``our'' goals. Whose goals are these? This is government, 
this is not people's goals. You are going to be even availed less 
choice of vehicle to drive and use, and it has shown by sales. People 
are less inclined to want to buy an electric vehicle unless they are 
forced to. They like internal combustion engines.
  What has not really been given a whole lot of credit is that in the 
last 30, 40, 50 years there has been an incremental gain. When 
electronic fuel injection really started hitting in the 1990s on more 
and more, and pretty much all vehicles, the efficiency jumped up as far 
as MPG; it improved. Emissions dramatically improved, as well. However, 
nobody really gives credit for that.
  It is like, oh, no, that doesn't count because we have the California 
Air Resources Board in California just dreaming up a new regulation 
every month because that is what they do. They just grind them out. 
Other States follow along blindly and say, oh, let's be like 
California, the so-called progressive States. We find out that we are 
going to have fewer choices. We find out that we are going to have an 
issue where people can't buy what they need.
  If a person needs an F-150, F-250 truck to do their job, it is not 
going to be solved by buying four Priuses, okay? Other people just like 
what they like. I personally am a car enthusiast. I like a Mustang with 
a V-8. It feels good, and it is fun to drive. I don't want that taken 
away from me or even the people who drive Camaros. They may not have as 
good a taste. I am kidding.
  It is a deal where the car enthusiasts have this thing they like to 
do together, whether it is a rivalry, but it all works together, car 
shows, the whole thing. That is an important part of Americana, 
including politicians who like to ride in these cars in parades. Who 
doesn't like a 1972 Cadillac convertible to use in a parade? No, I am 
going to go back to using my Prius or acting like I am later on.
  This corporate average fuel economy is going to take away choices 
that people want, that people can afford. This forced mandate of 
electric vehicles by NHTSA is basically what they are doing here. They 
are not even supposed to be using electric vehicles in calculating the 
corporate average fuel economy standard, yet they are sneaking that in 
there in this proposal. They take away consumer choice via this.

                          ____________________