California Secedes from the Union

Hey California I have idea… Why don’t you become the capital of the United States? Or even better, why don’t we change our country’s name to the United States of California? That way when you impose your own emissions regime over the rest the country, you won’t look so bad. Though regulating your state’s auto emission standards may look like a good idea on paper, it will not make the changes you are hoping for and it will further damage the economy of the rest of the country.

In case one is unfamiliar with these developments, this whole debate erupted when the Bush administration initially rejected California’s waiver to become exempt from the federal emissions standard in 2007. After this happened democrats began rallying back, calling for Bush’s head. During Obama’s campaign he pledged to overturn the decision that denied the state’s waiver. However, Obama hasn’t quite lived up to his promise yet, but nonetheless has brought the issue back on the table.

On January 26, 2009 President Obama signed a Presidential Memorandum directing EPA to assess whether denial of the waiver based on California's application was appropriate in light of the Clear Air Act. On March 5th a public hearing was held to begin this discussion.

The stage is set, but the plot still has not to be determined. The hearing was just the beginning. The public has until April 6th to continue to submit their views in writing to the EPA. The EPA will consider written comments submitted during the comment period with the same weight as oral comments presented during the public hearing.

All the same, I along with the public am confused of how this type of state regulation is going to do any good for our country at this time. Yes, I understand the message that California is trying to send. However, a message of this nature should not be divided amongst states. If we really want to push for an environmental change than we must do it as a nation united not divided. During the public hearing, Democratic Senator Carl Levin argued the need for a single national standard.

“If we take advantage of the unique opportunity to bring these efforts together, we can have a strong national policy that incorporates technology innovation into the vehicles sold in the U.S. and that contributes to reducing our greenhouse gas emissions globally. The standard should be based on science and technological feasibility, and it should be written in a way that is non-discriminatory, i.e., by applying the same standard for similar size and weight vehicles regardless of manufacturer. This approach would take advantage of significant new advanced technologies that have the potential to transform the way in which people drive and that offer enormous potential to increase fuel efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions”

Yes, we should get tougher on the automotive companies to produce more energy efficient cars. In many ways we are starting to. Consequently, state regulation is going to have very ill effects on the industry as a whole. It will split up auto production by the state’s differing policies and will complicate manufacturing at a time when they cannot afford any more problems. Senator Levin explains, “Auto manufacturers need predictability, stability, and adequate lead-time to meet new standards.” So, why should we further jeopardize the tax dollars that were already invested in the auto industry? If we want to combat global warming and green house gasses then we should do it in a way that is going to push automakers toward innovation but not break their backs at the same time.

If this waiver is passed it will create a fascist auto market in California. Dealers will have to pay a larger premium for their specialty cars, which will fall on to the consumer. Sales will drop even further and consumers will have less of a demand to purchase a new car. Though today’s cars are already improving in their emission technology, Californians will not want to pay the price of a state regulated car. It will have a counter-effect on pollution because California’s population will be tempted to keep their older cars longer because they will be exempted from the new laws.

In addition, California’s admission of the uniqueness of their situation brings up another interesting point. This shows that it is not just the automaker’s fault for the troubles they face. Transportation, infrastructure, and population density problems are among the many city flaws that contribute to California’s diminishing air quality. Thus, it is not right that they mandate changes that others have to make excluding while themselves away from responsibility. California needs to step up and contribute their own funds and planning to begin this resolution. For example, they could invest in the production of their own efficient cars or invest in research for the automakers. They could also fund more public transportation works that alleviate the demand for as many cars in California cities. Nevertheless, it is not their job to decide how cars are made. This is up to the government.

So what does the future hold for California and its cars? Luckily, the government is examining the opinions of the public. Hopefully, both realize the implications of these decisions. As Eric Peters of the American Spectator put it best, this will only “slam shut and nail down the coffin lid on the U.S. auto industry.”