Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Shakedown Street, Japan
    Posts
    30,250
    vCash
    1500

    Obama’s Order Is Likely to Tighten Auto Standards

    Obama’s Order Is Likely to Tighten Auto Standards
    By JOHN M. BRODER and PETER BAKER

    WASHINGTON — President Obama will direct federal regulators on Monday to move swiftly on an application by California and 13 other states to set strict automobile emission and fuel efficiency standards, two administration officials said Sunday.

    The directive makes good on an Obama campaign pledge and signifies a sharp reversal of Bush administration policy. Granting California and the other states the right to regulate tailpipe emissions would be one of the most emphatic actions Mr. Obama could take to quickly put his stamp on environmental policy.

    Mr. Obama’s presidential memorandum will order the Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider the Bush administration’s past rejection of the California application. While it stops short of flatly ordering the Bush decision reversed, the agency’s regulators are now widely expected to do so after completing a formal review process.

    Once they act, automobile manufacturers will quickly have to retool to begin producing and selling cars and trucks that get higher mileage than the national standard, and on a faster phase-in schedule. The auto companies have lobbied hard against the regulations and challenged them in court.

    Mr. Obama will use the announcement to bolster the impression of a sharp break from the Bush era on all fronts, following his decisions last week to close the detention facility at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba; tighten limits on interrogation tactics by Central Intelligence Agency officers; order plans to withdraw combat forces from Iraq; and reverse President George W. Bush’s financing restrictions on groups that promote or provide abortion overseas, administration officials said.

    Beyond acting on the California emissions law, officials said, Mr. Obama will direct the Transportation Department to quickly finalize interim nationwide regulations requiring the automobile industry to increase fuel efficiency standards to comply with a 2007 law, rules that the Bush administration decided at the last minute not to issue.

    To avoid losing another year, Mr. Obama will order temporary regulations to be completed by March so automakers have enough time to retool for vehicles sold in 2011. Final standards for later years will be determined by a separate process that under Mr. Obama’s order must take into consideration legal, scientific and technological factors.

    He will also order federal departments and agencies to find new ways to save energy and be more environmentally friendly. And he will highlight the elements in his $825 billion economic stimulus plan intended to create jobs around renewable energy.

    The announcements, to be made in the East Room, will begin a week of efforts to get the stimulus plan through Congress. The White House hopes the Senate will confirm Timothy F. Geithner as Treasury secretary on Monday, and Mr. Obama plans to travel to Capitol Hill on Tuesday to meet with both Senate and House Republican caucuses and lobby for his stimulus package. Mr. Obama’s aides expect the House to vote on its plan on Wednesday.

    But the centerpiece of Monday’s anticipated announcement is Mr. Obama’s directive to the Environmental Protection Agency to begin work immediately on granting California a waiver, under the Clean Air Act, which allows the state, a longtime leader in air quality matters, to set standards for automobile emissions stricter than the national rules.

    California has already won numerous waivers for controls on emissions that cause smog, as opposed to global warming.

    The Bush administration denied the waiver in late 2007, saying that recently enacted federal mileage rules made the action unnecessary and that allowing California and the 13 other states the right to set their own pollution rules would result in an unenforceable patchwork of environmental law.

    The auto companies had advocated a denial, saying a waiver would require them to produce two sets of vehicles, one to meet the strict California standard and another that could be sold in the remaining states.

    The Bush administration’s environmental agency director, Stephen L. Johnson, echoed the automakers’ claims in denying California’s application, ignoring the near-unanimous advice of agency lawyers and scientists that the waiver be granted.

    Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California, a Republican, wrote to Mr. Obama last week asking him to swiftly reconsider Mr. Bush’s decision. The head of California’s Air Resources Board, Mary D. Nichols, also wrote to the new director of the environmental agency, Lisa P. Jackson, asking for a quick reversal of the Bush policy.

    Ms. Nichols said Sunday night that she had not been formally notified that Mr. Obama intended to move toward granting the waiver. But she said, “Assuming that it is favorable to our request, we’re delighted that the president is acting so quickly to reverse one of the worst decisions by the Bush administration and to get the E.P.A. back on track.”

    Ms. Jackson indicated in her confirmation hearing this month that she would “aggressively” review California’s application. The environmental agency has routinely granted California such waivers dozens of times over the past 40 years.

    The California law, which was originally meant to take effect in the 2009 model year, requires automakers to cut emissions by nearly a third by 2016, four years ahead of the federal timetable. The result would be an increase in fuel efficiency in the American car and light truck fleet to roughly 35 miles per gallon from the current average of 27.

    The emissions standards are part of an ambitious California plan to reduce emissions of the gases that are blamed for the heating of the atmosphere. Automotive emissions account for more than one-fifth of all such greenhouse gases.

    California was joined in its plea by 13 other states, including New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Oregon and Washington. Three other states have indicated they plan to adopt the California standard. Together they account for about half of the American market for cars and light trucks.

    Charles Territo, a spokesman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, said the car makers would prefer a single national standard and needed time to develop new fuel-sipping models. “Applying California standards to several different states would create a complex, confusing and very difficult situation for manufacturers,” he said last week in anticipation of the Obama administration’s announcement.

    Mr. Obama wants to use the Monday event to promote the environmental and energy elements of his economic plan, aides said. According to a report released by the White House this weekend, the plan is intended to double renewable energy generating capacity over three years, which would be enough to power six million American homes.

    It would also pay for 3,000 miles of new or modernized transmission lines as part of a new national electric grid as well as 40 million “smart meters,” which provide instant readouts of electricity uses, on American homes. The money would also help refurbish two million homes and 75 percent of federal building space to better guard against the weather and conserve enough energy to save low-income families $350 a year and the federal government $2 billion a year, according to the report.

    The White House also said that Mr. Obama wanted to start a “clean energy finance initiative” to leverage $100 million in private sector investments over the next three years through loan guarantees and other financial support.

    Environmentalists and California Democrats had pressed hard for the tougher automotive standards. Daniel J. Weiss, director of climate strategy at the Center for American Progress in Washington, plans to attend Monday’s announcement and said he was pleased by the quick action.

    “This is a complete reversal of President Bush’s policy of censoring or ignoring global warming science,” Mr. Weiss said. “With the fuel economy measures and clean energy investments in the recovery package, President Obama has done more in one week to reduce oil dependence and global warming than George Bush did in eight years.

    The California rules would not take effect immediately, but would require several months of legal review and public comment. The auto companies could challenge them in court, but they have been unsuccessful in previous lawsuits.

    The Clean Air Act allows California to seek a waiver from federal rules if it can demonstrate that its own regulations are more stringent, and needed to address its air pollution problems. California’s trend-setting air resources board has done this successfully more than 50 times. Other states can adhere to either the California or the federal standard.
    nyt


    Serious question for the Republicans/Bush supporters here:

    It seems to me that Bush's stance against stricter environmental regulations was at odds with the general call I hear a lot from Republicans for more power to be shifted away from the federal government and into the hands of the states. So my question is, on this issue does deregulating environmental controls trump states' rights for most Republicans?
    Last edited by DenButsu; 01-26-2009 at 06:15 AM.
    I blog basketball at Roundball Mining Company///Twitter: @denbutsu

    Atheists Of PSD

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    40,033
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by DenButsu View Post
    nyt


    Serious question for the Republicans/Bush supporters here:

    It seems to me that Bush's stance against stricter environmental regulations was at odds with the general call I hear a lot from Republicans for more power to be shifted away from the federal government and into the hands of the states. So my question is, on this issue does deregulating environmental controls trump states' rights for most Republicans?
    well the states want it. But i'm wondering how many executive orders Obama can do without people thinking he's a king.


    Come to psd where admitted dupes who do nothing but troll the gd and fs forum are free. But man don't you dare mention trolling on someone's wall.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    St. Louis, MO / SIUe
    Posts
    35,041
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by behindmydesk View Post
    well the states want it. But i'm wondering how many executive orders Obama can do without people thinking he's a king.
    I agree. It's good that he's trying to act quickly. But isn't this the same problem we had with Bush? Why is Obama bypassing the legislature?
    Member of the Owlluminati

    Quote Originally Posted by James Madison
    "Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives."
    2011 Knicks Salary Cap Information

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Shakedown Street, Japan
    Posts
    30,250
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by ari1013 View Post
    I agree. It's good that he's trying to act quickly. But isn't this the same problem we had with Bush? Why is Obama bypassing the legislature?
    Because the matter of executive orders - and whether they're reversed or not - isn't up to the legislature?
    I blog basketball at Roundball Mining Company///Twitter: @denbutsu

    Atheists Of PSD

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NOR CAL
    Posts
    8,763
    vCash
    1500
    Sometimes leaving things in the hands of legislators means getting zilch done.

    We should be able to set the standard in California.........I mean it would be a lot different in places like Iowa and Idaho so why have the same standards.

    Our air quality is not the greatest so hopefully we can set a higher standard for automakers to follow. Question two would be could they follow a stricter standard?
    Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government, owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day.-Theodore Roosevelt


    There's no country on Earth that would tolerate missiles raining down on its citizens from outside its borders.
    -Barack "drone" Obama, 11/18/2012

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    St. Louis, MO / SIUe
    Posts
    35,041
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by DenButsu View Post
    Because the matter of executive orders - and whether they're reversed or not - isn't up to the legislature?
    Why pass an executive order when Congress is very well capable of passing a law?

    AFAIC executive orders are there as filler -- if something needs to be done quickly and can later be supported by an actual act or bill from Congress.

    But Bush used executive orders to completely bypass Congress -- that's part of the whole Unitary Executive mantra that the executive branch is above the legislative and judicial branches, and the President is the executive branch.

    I wasn't happy about that under Bush, and I don't think a new version of Bush is the best solution right now.
    Member of the Owlluminati

    Quote Originally Posted by James Madison
    "Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives."
    2011 Knicks Salary Cap Information

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Shakedown Street, Japan
    Posts
    30,250
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by ari1013 View Post
    a new version of Bush
    Really? Did you just go there? Already? And based on... that little?

    pfffffft


    Wasn't it you who just said yesterday that you wished someone in the Democratic Party had some balls?
    I blog basketball at Roundball Mining Company///Twitter: @denbutsu

    Atheists Of PSD

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    40,033
    vCash
    1500
    The democratic party is fighting amongst are eyes!

    Now republicans, do not pick sides, we want this to play out as long as possible, and burn up their cash.


    Come to psd where admitted dupes who do nothing but troll the gd and fs forum are free. But man don't you dare mention trolling on someone's wall.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Shakedown Street, Japan
    Posts
    30,250
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by behindmydesk View Post
    The democratic party is fighting amongst are eyes!

    Now republicans, do not pick sides, we want this to play out as long as possible, and burn up their cash.


    Ari's take - Obama should concede in his executive power and kick *** in the legislature.

    Mine - He should kick some executive *** that is high reward and little consequence, and not make too many enemies too quickly in Congress

    At least that's my read - Ari can speak for himself as to whether I'm interpreting his position correctly or not.

    But take heart in this, bmd - the positive thing about the Democrats is that we're not about blind loyalty to our leader at any cost.
    I blog basketball at Roundball Mining Company///Twitter: @denbutsu

    Atheists Of PSD

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    St. Louis, MO / SIUe
    Posts
    35,041
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by DenButsu View Post
    Really? Did you just go there? Already? And based on... that little?

    pfffffft


    Wasn't it you who just said yesterday that you wished someone in the Democratic Party had some balls?
    Yeah I'm talking about Congress having some balls.

    I don't want to see power unchecked. I don't care who is in office. Don't get me wrong, I like this policy. I just don't agree with the means to achieve it.
    Member of the Owlluminati

    Quote Originally Posted by James Madison
    "Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives."
    2011 Knicks Salary Cap Information

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    St. Louis, MO / SIUe
    Posts
    35,041
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by DenButsu View Post


    Ari's take - Obama should concede in his executive power and kick *** in the legislature.

    Mine - He should kick some executive *** that is high reward and little consequence, and not make too many enemies too quickly in Congress

    At least that's my read - Ari can speak for himself as to whether I'm interpreting his position correctly or not.

    But take heart in this, bmd - the positive thing about the Democrats is that we're not about blind loyalty to our leader at any cost.
    I don't think he should give up his executive power -- I just think that he shouldn't be relying on signing statements as his only source of legislation.

    For all we know, this could just be a fluke this week and starting from here on out, things will change. But after the last administration, I'm not sure I can blindly trust Washington like that.
    Member of the Owlluminati

    Quote Originally Posted by James Madison
    "Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives."
    2011 Knicks Salary Cap Information

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Shakedown Street, Japan
    Posts
    30,250
    vCash
    1500
    I hear what you're saying.

    But I just think there has been a MASSIVE rush to judgment (from those both extremely critical of Obama to those extremely supportive, and everything in between), when the man's been in office less than a freakin week. It's a window of time far too short to get an accurate enough picture of things to reasonably predict how his presidency will unfold and what direction it will take. Hysteria has already reached a fever pitch, and it's only been 6 days.

    -----------------

    About those executive orders: If Bush enacted policy through executive orders, is it even logistically possible to reverse that policy through legislative action? I'd assume not, since the 2006 Congress might otherwise have made a go at doing so. Way I see it, Obama's not failing to do things legislatively, but rather the things that he's able to execute quickly just happen to be those which he can do singlehandedly without the need for legislative approval. Also, he's not as far as I'm aware issuing any new executive orders, but simply reversing some of the ones Bush ordered in the first place. He promised change, that's some change he can deliver on quickly with potent results... I don't get the fuss.
    I blog basketball at Roundball Mining Company///Twitter: @denbutsu

    Atheists Of PSD

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    6,181
    vCash
    1500
    Poor BMD, the fight ended before he could get a bet down.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •