By Dschabner

Jan 25, 2009 8:48pm

Obama to Push Process for EPA to Grant States Waiver to Implement Stricter Clean Air Laws*

ABC News has learned that on Monday President Obama will announce that he’s putting into place a process that will almost certainly ultimately allow California and 13 other states the right to set their own, stricter automobile emissions and fuel efficiency standards.

In 2007, the Bush administration’s EPA administrator, Steven Johnson, denied the 14 states — the other 13 are Arizona, Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and New Jersey — a waiver to set their own clean air standards, overruling EPA staff scientists.

Monday President Obama will issue a presidential memorandum requesting the EPA –and its new administrator, Lisa Jackson, who was confirmed by the Senate on Friday — to reconsider the Bush EPA’s 2007 denial of the waiver to the states. President Obama will officially request that the EPA undertake the legal process for reconsidering the waiver, which will include an opportunity for interested parties to comment. The final EPA decision could take several months.

The president will also deliver brief remarks in the morning that deal with the creation of green jobs in his stimulus package:

  • modernizing 75 percent of federal buildings and 2 million homes;
  • doubling enough renewable energy generating capacity to power 6 million American homes;
  • modernizing the nation’s electricity grid will result in more than 3,000 miles of new or modernized transmission lines and 40 million “Smart Meters” in American homes; and
  • launching the Clean Energy Finance Initiative to leverage $100 billion in private sector clean energy investments over three years.

- jpt

* This post was updated at 6 am ET Monday morning with more precise language about President Obama’s action regarding the waiver.

User Comments

How will the states for for that? They can’t even meet the Unemployment payroll?

Posted by: disgusted in Ohio | January 25, 2009, 9:15 pm 9:15 pm

Gallup released a poll last week that showed that environmental concerns were dead last among the things that Amreican’s are most concerned with. Leave it to Obama to whip a dead horse.

Posted by: James | January 25, 2009, 9:18 pm 9:18 pm

How are auto manufacturers, not just American manufacturers, but all manufacturers supposed to design automobiles? A different design for each state? The cost of a new car will skyrocket. Doesn’t air blow from one state to the next? Like interstate commerce is regulated by the federal government, so should air standards. This policy is ABSOLUTE STUPIDITY!

Posted by: abc4111 | January 25, 2009, 9:18 pm 9:18 pm

Hmm
Sounds like right wing conservative whining in those comments.
Let them design car that meets the most stringent standard, and that ONE designs will then meet or exceed ALL the standards.
Too difficult to figure out, or are all republicans as dense as W?

Posted by: EG | January 25, 2009, 9:28 pm 9:28 pm

One thing I don’t like is: Let’s say a State deems it necessary for more cars on the road be electric, it may be great for them. But the problem is that ALL that electricity that “that State” will need to power those cars comes from ALL the Coal Burning plants of the Central states. They will have to burn more coal to produce more electricity to handle that demand and the Acid Rain already killing the trees on the Blue Ridge parkway will double killing more trees.
That is why States should not be able to determine “THEIR OWN” standards.

Posted by: ajax | January 25, 2009, 9:31 pm 9:31 pm

Here we go finally… let the states make their own decissions…. as long as they are as good or better than the federal regs.
I already have an 08 Prius… a good start. Solar heat, extra insulation, e windows, CFB’s and LED lights….
The best we can do is to conserve what we have…better vehicle standards will do that.

Posted by: MrSleepy | January 25, 2009, 9:32 pm 9:32 pm

How will the states for for that? They can’t even meet the Unemployment payroll?
Posted by: disgusted in Ohio
*********************************
The first start, is with education.

Posted by: spacerook1 | January 25, 2009, 9:38 pm 9:38 pm

James, welcome to the new America where no concern is too small to bother with

Posted by: Question | January 25, 2009, 9:38 pm 9:38 pm

Jake, check out your obamicon

Posted by: Question | January 25, 2009, 9:39 pm 9:39 pm

I think the economy tanking will facilitate cleaner air more than any legislation will. Trimmer waistlines will also be coming to a neighbor near you.

Posted by: Huh | January 25, 2009, 9:41 pm 9:41 pm

Americans care about money. The President also has to be concerned with the security of the country. We spend $700 billion/yr on foreign oil. If we use less, we don’t have to buy as much. If we don’t buy as much, we don’t have to sign our childrens names to as many loans to China to pay for it and we don’t give terrorist funding nations as much cash to work with. Oh, and just as an added bonus our kids get less asthma and our parents get less emphysema. This is a good thing.

Posted by: karela | January 25, 2009, 9:43 pm 9:43 pm

Sometimes we act before we think in this country.
They passed a law, I think, last year that required 10% Bio fuels to be put into all Gasoline. Good idea most would say, but guess what. It caused the price for all Cow feed to double in less then a year. A 50 lb bag of 12% Sweet feed used to be about 4.89, now it costs about 10.00. Chicken scratch used to cost about 7.00 for a 50 lb bag, now it is about 14.00. Food that a lot of organizations use to feed the starving in Africa (mostly made of the same foods they make Bio Fuel) doubled and they could only feed less.
They are slashing and burning more and more Rain Forest to make more room to grow switch grass and corn to produce more bio-fuel.
If you ever raised corn, you would know that you have to dump a lot of fertilizer on the ground to do so.
I think getting rid of Oil and finding other alternative fuels is a great thing. BUT, we can’t be stupid about what we do and just do something because it sounds good.
It is like jumping out of the frying pan before noticing the only place you can go is into the fire.

Posted by: ajax | January 25, 2009, 9:44 pm 9:44 pm

The question remains: Will the present EPA implement more realistic air quality standards?

Posted by: kathy | January 25, 2009, 9:46 pm 9:46 pm

Can electric cars go up those steep mountian grades?

Posted by: just wonderin' | January 25, 2009, 9:47 pm 9:47 pm

“ABC News has learned that tomorrow President Obama will announced that he’s putting into place a process to allow California and 13 other states the right to set their own, stricter, automobile emissions and fuel efficiency standards.”
Wonderful. California is bankrupt now and this will only make things worse. To paraphrase an old joke: “I’m Barack Obama and I’m here to help.”

Posted by: drjohn | January 25, 2009, 9:47 pm 9:47 pm

How are auto manufacturers, not just American
manufacturers, but all manufacturers supposed to
design automobiles? A different design for each
state? The cost of a new car will skyrocket…
Posted by: abc4111
*********************************
With this type anal retention reply of doom and
gloom, it makes me wonder how the big three
survived this long. Our foreign
car makers already meet the California (one of the
most rigid standards). If those clowns weren’t so
time invested in their worry of bonuses, perks,
job banks,seniority, executive jets and country
club memberships, maybe they could spend a lot
more time and energy in R & D instead of R & R.

Posted by: spacerook1 | January 25, 2009, 9:50 pm 9:50 pm

YES WE CAN
YES WE CAN
YES WE CAN
Payday has come!!!!

Posted by: Omentum | January 25, 2009, 9:52 pm 9:52 pm

Ajax- Is it corn based ethanol you’re thinking of? With biofuels, you can use a wide range of stuff like cooking grease and it only mixes with diesel.

Posted by: kathy | January 25, 2009, 9:56 pm 9:56 pm

I truly beleive that President Obama is doing an excellent job so far and i can’t wait to see what he does for each State who needs alot of help to make them better. Just as an example my state of Pennsylvania needs funds for roads and bridges,getting people back to work,modernizing schools,giving each student a laptopl computer on all schools here in Pennsylvania and around the United States, and finally help the homeless get housing.
With Obama all of the above will get done.

Posted by: Frank Calderone | January 25, 2009, 9:57 pm 9:57 pm

This is BIG!!!!
Green Economy Here We Come!!!!
Now THIS is CHANGE that we can believe in!!!

Posted by: Debra | January 25, 2009, 10:15 pm 10:15 pm

Obama is doing what he can to break the car companies.

Posted by: Sluggo | January 25, 2009, 10:16 pm 10:16 pm

Wow, he really must have shorted the domestic auto stocks.

Posted by: BertieW | January 25, 2009, 10:29 pm 10:29 pm

Ohio does’nt even inspect there cars.you see alot of ond head light one tail light no muffler cars. and no one cares. China is going to build 50 new coal fired power plants. We are pissing in the wind. Politcal correctness will soon destroy us.

Posted by: jim | January 25, 2009, 10:36 pm 10:36 pm

Lip service, but politicians seem adept at that.
Institute all the regulations you can, it won’t help. There is no way to reduce pollution levels as long as human population continues to grow. More people = more pollution, fewer people = less pollution. Any remedy that does not include efforts to reduce birth rate is a waste of time, effort and will only serve as “feel good legislation”. You feel better but you didn’t accomplish anything.

Posted by: Oonogil | January 25, 2009, 10:39 pm 10:39 pm

Thank you Mr. President for your attempts to bring America into the 21st century. Now can we modernize our transportation system to be on par with Shanghai and Tokyo? Also, we need a drastic overhaul to our education system so our kids can compete with the rest of the world.

Posted by: 1776 | January 25, 2009, 10:42 pm 10:42 pm

Oh and BTW, I don’t mean bullet trains. I mean the magnetic levitation trains that are pollution free (ex: Maglev). Imagine the things we can do with that kind of technology including job creation for the future (and there IS an American patent on the technology).

Posted by: 1776 | January 25, 2009, 10:48 pm 10:48 pm

This president is laking any common sense at all.

Posted by: Don | January 25, 2009, 10:51 pm 10:51 pm

This president has no common sense at all

Posted by: 1961 | January 25, 2009, 10:55 pm 10:55 pm

1776,
Magnetic Levitation Trains use electricity. You do know where most of the Elevtricity in this Country comes from, don’t you???
COAL BURNING PLANTS.

Posted by: ajax | January 25, 2009, 10:59 pm 10:59 pm

Yes, I was referring to Corn when talking about price spikes in Animal Feed and Human Corn based food.
Yes, I know you can make Bio fuel from a lot of different sources. Most in the US come from CORN, because Corn can be grown better in most US places. Sugar Cane is in the south. Hell, you can make it from Grapes, Apples, and a lot of other sources. Anything you can ferment and make into alcohol can be used. Hell, MOONSHINE will work. :)
Switch grass is the one I understand is the best. More Alcohol per polution amount produced. Switch grass and Sugar Cane are what all the slash and burning in the South American Rain Forest is for.

Posted by: ajax | January 25, 2009, 11:05 pm 11:05 pm

Should the auto makers ttrow in the towel. This is said to add 47 Billion dollars to thier costs all for some liberal hoax called global warming.

Posted by: Don | January 25, 2009, 11:18 pm 11:18 pm

drjohn: actually, the named states were in the process of suing the feds in order to be allowed to do exactly what the president is giving them the right to do. they were in more danger of wasting money on the lawsuit…
and abc41111? if the big three had gotten on the lower emissions bandwagon years ago, instead of dragging their feet, perhaps they would already be able to meet those more stringent demands. oh, and possibly not be near backruptcy…

Posted by: antijake | January 25, 2009, 11:18 pm 11:18 pm

ution amount produced. Switch grass and Sugar Cane are what all the slash and burning in the South American Rain Forest is for.
*************************************************
I agree. Corn and alcohol based ethanol fuels aren’t good alternatives. Oddly enough, Hawaii is replacing sugar cane production with corn, even though they both can produce ethanol.

Posted by: kathy | January 25, 2009, 11:37 pm 11:37 pm

The economy is in the tank, the automakers are at risk of going under, so Obama allows California to have stricter emission and mileage laws than the feds? A recent scientific study concluded twenty years of tighter and tighter air quality regs have resulted in our life expectancy being extended by 5 months. How many billions and billions did we spend for practically nothing? I say a few of the major automakers should tell California, we’re sorry, we won’t sell our cars in the People’s Republic anymore.

Posted by: Dave C | January 25, 2009, 11:50 pm 11:50 pm

Don, pollition free MAGLEV trains?? Doesn’t that take electricity?? Hasn’t it been thirty years since California allowed an electric plant to be built in California?? Don’t you guys already have to import elecricity from other states? Aren’t you $40 billion in the hole on taxes because your legislature can’t keep spending below income? We’ll keep our money in Texas. No housing crisis, plentiful jobs and right to work laws (unions can’t keep you from working), a balanced budget and reasonable taxes. Oh yeah, we also refine gasoline and sell power to other states… morons.

Posted by: Dave C | January 25, 2009, 11:56 pm 11:56 pm

Let California go broke enjoying their air quality.

Posted by: Sluggo | January 26, 2009, 12:02 am 12:02 am

Give the man some breathing room people.

Posted by: stan | January 26, 2009, 12:03 am 12:03 am

By the time magnetic levitation trains could be implemented, there would already be a substantial wind and solar energy alternative to conventional electricity production. What naysayers!

Posted by: kathy | January 26, 2009, 12:06 am 12:06 am

Does government feel the need to be involved in every aspect of peoples lives?

Posted by: dan | January 26, 2009, 12:15 am 12:15 am

Has anybody heard of hemp it can grow practically anywhere and it can be made into ethonal.it won’t effect food prices at all so it would solve the whole problem but it has been neglected because people think that hemp is marijauna but its not there’s actually a hemp plant that’s drug free so it can not get people high so why can’t we use that….its because everyone wants to make everything difficult

Posted by: jesse | January 26, 2009, 12:41 am 12:41 am

@Dan
“Does government feel the need to be involved in every aspect of peoples lives?”
Only when Republicans are in charge.

Posted by: Saint Genesius | January 26, 2009, 12:53 am 12:53 am

What an idiot. You can’t change things overnight without an expense being felt somewhere in the economy. This will be the nail in the coffin of the big three and then the idiot will lose the backing of one of his biggest supporters the UAW when they no longer have a job. All of the money he is talking about for jobs will only create temporary jobs, ie once the government funding is removed the job is gone. Need to create private sector jobs which are the result of demand by something other than government funding/contract. Problem with the schools is the teachers union which makes it difficult to get rid of poor performing teachers. need to goto a system where the teacher performs to a defined level or hits the road. Also need to go to a system which will let parents take the money which would go towards a public school (school vouchers) and enroll their child in a private school if they desire. The private schools must be doing something right as they routinely turn out students who perform at a level above those from the public schools.

Posted by: bruce | January 26, 2009, 12:53 am 12:53 am

I say Bravo to Obama. Finally a president concerned with the environment. Hes planning ahead so that we will be efficient when it comes to energy and not leave behind a polluted environment for the next generation.

Posted by: agnosticsocialist | January 26, 2009, 12:54 am 12:54 am

Does ABC have anybody that proofreads their stuff??? Almost every article has typo’s.

Posted by: Ryan | January 26, 2009, 12:55 am 12:55 am

He always promises all these new things yet never tells us how he’s going to pay for them and you all just eat it up. America has become overrun with naive cowards.

Posted by: Ryan | January 26, 2009, 12:57 am 12:57 am

Regarding designing one car to meet the strictest standard, what happens when the next state passes an even stricter standard? Redesign everything? At what cost? Do we really want that?
Do we really want state x passing stricter standards simply to force the coal burning plant to the next state? Do we want state y lowering its standards to attract industry or power generation to an economically depressed area?
Please, this policy makes no sense at all.

Posted by: abc4111 | January 26, 2009, 1:12 am 1:12 am

Obama is doing what he can to break the car companies.,………………………
AND I THOUGHT THAT WAS ONLY a Job for
G.W. Bush….lol
SO WE CAN PUT A MAN ON THE MOON BUT
CAN NOT BUILD A CAR AS WELL AS JAPAN???
……. The big 3 had better be up to
the job or else……………

Posted by: Anita Yova | January 26, 2009, 1:28 am 1:28 am

Man this is gonna tick off the usual crowd of anti-environmental, pro-gas guzzling buffoons.
But enough about Detroit CEOs and their dupes in talk radio.

Posted by: smith | January 26, 2009, 2:04 am 2:04 am

In California, the snow pack is getting thinner every year and is projected to decrease 30% to 70% in the next 30 years. This will have a huge impact on agriculture in California which depends on the snowpack for irragation.
This is just one of many impacts of global warming. It would be helpful to fully understand the problem and best solutions before condemning President Obama’s good decision.

Posted by: Brian | January 26, 2009, 2:22 am 2:22 am

GREAT move !!
At times when you go jogging you feel like you will pass out , so much smog in the AIR.At times i feel like iam in CHINA.

Posted by: mary | January 26, 2009, 3:33 am 3:33 am

Iam surprise people dont fall and die in LA from all those car emissions. Smoking is the least of their problem.
Oh yea and lets not forget the factories pollution.

Posted by: sam | January 26, 2009, 3:40 am 3:40 am

What gives? Repubs/anti-environmentalists are always screaming for states rights and deregulation and when Obama gives it to them on emissions and fuel economy, they cry foul…

Posted by: taking a deep breath | January 26, 2009, 3:53 am 3:53 am

Some of you don’t see the big picture. Even with the economic problems, the environmental sector is the only sector that is growing. In Germany (where I am residing at the moment), the environmental sector(solar panels, windmills, etc) added 3000 jobs to the economy last year. More than the auto industry or (percentage-wise) more than any other industry in Germany.
Also, some of you are complaining about the environmental laws being tightened. Most european countries have much tighter environmental laws on the books, but not all European cars are more fuel-efficient that American cars. The technology is there (since years) to meet the environmental regulation that California demands. The 100% GM company Opel in Germany makes a few cars that meet the regulations. It would be simple for them to produce the same car in the US, since they own the rights to the designs. These cars are also not more expensive than the cars on the US market now.
So, it is not a matter of if it can be done. It is a matter of do you want to protect our environment, reduce our oil dependency and maybe even earn a little money in the process.

Posted by: joe faraway | January 26, 2009, 4:48 am 4:48 am

Y’all don’t get the problem. Its not about meeting stricter laws – it is about the added cost of having to certify 14 different times in 14 different ways. When states enact such laws, they enact very different rules of how to prove you meet them. This isn’t a Big 3 issue either. Toyota and Honda will need to increase the cost of the cars to pay for all this additional testing. So this is about hitting consumers in the pocket and slowing the delivery of new car designs for ALL manufacturers.

Posted by: ED | January 26, 2009, 5:37 am 5:37 am

Hmmm! Not so fast. His poll has already down almost to 58% of approval rating. He must have already breaking promise to the voters and guess the voters are already mad. Glad I didn’t vote for him. He doesn’t have enough experience. Former Pres. George W. Bush did a good job for 8 years. I give Bush about 70% approval rating. Shame on the mainstream news media.

Posted by: anonymous | January 26, 2009, 6:03 am 6:03 am

Toyota and Honda (as well as Ford, GM, and all other cars which are sold here) already do these test for the European market anyways. The test do not have to be repeated. The proposed laws are all (with maybe the excaption of California, are anyway much weaker than the European Union and individual European countries regulations).
Many of the test, like checking emission levels, are not expensive. Heck, I have to have my emission levels checked every two years. That cost me about 40 dollars.

Posted by: joe faraway | January 26, 2009, 6:05 am 6:05 am

This policy will lead to gridlock. The EPA should set one standard and force the states to work together to come up with a standard that works for all.

Posted by: NoMoreMr.NiceGuy | January 26, 2009, 6:25 am 6:25 am

It is great to have a president who isn’t always on vacation.
WHAT A WONDERFUL CHANGE!

Posted by: jim | January 26, 2009, 6:48 am 6:48 am

This might be great in states that care about the environment. My fear is that Republican-controlled states will become big polluters.

Posted by: Eric | January 26, 2009, 6:51 am 6:51 am

Wouldn’t it be better if everyone had the same rules in place? Doesn’t the multiple blends of gasoline required in different places help to increase its’ cost?
If companies flee overseas where there is little or no controls does that help any of us? Don’t we all enjoy the same air?

Posted by: david | January 26, 2009, 7:13 am 7:13 am

BO just keeping the lefties happy… This is pretty stupid…. AIR doesn’t stop @ the border, it makes more sense to have one national policy then have a free-for-all with each states having it’s only special regulations that the car and fuel companies have to deal with. That’s one reason why gas prices are higher because the fuel companies have to make special fuels to meet different state regulations….and then the cost of each state having its own regulations to enforce…. Just a duplication of fed/state services that the taxpayer has to pay for..

Posted by: Vet1973 | January 26, 2009, 7:18 am 7:18 am

all states should have the same emissions and pollution laws and regulations. winds move pollution all over the world. TX sometimes gets china’s pollution due to winds. air does not stay over a clean or dirty air state. as important as this is, it is still the economy stupid!

Posted by: Lawrence | January 26, 2009, 7:23 am 7:23 am

If it were up to Republicans there would be NO environmental regulations on anything. We’d all be wearing dust masks like they do in Beijing.

Posted by: Eric | January 26, 2009, 7:27 am 7:27 am

Why is it that foreign automakers seem to have no problem producing energy-efficient cars while US automakers continually roll out lead sleds. It’s about time we quit pretending that pollution doesn’t matter and that oil will last forever.

Posted by: plantain111 | January 26, 2009, 8:43 am 8:43 am

And what is this going to cost the American consumer? Everytime the government tells the automakers they have to add something to their products, the consumer pays for it in higher automobile costs. Airbags, anti-lock brakes, airbag disablers, pollution controls, etc. The car companies aren’t installing them for free. More pollution controls on power plants? That gets passed to the consumer as well.

Posted by: newamerica | January 26, 2009, 8:51 am 8:51 am

Frank Calderone – You stated that Obama will be great for your state of Pennsylvania because every student needs laptops of their own and your state needs better infrastructure. Are you kidding? Your state is one of the worst in the union. You’ve got one of the worst crime rates than any other state. You’ve got 15 year old girls giving birth for the second time in their lives. I think you need to solve far more worse problems than giving each student a laptop or fixing “infrastructure”. This is the stupidity that Obama brings along and that is this-he thinks throwing money at the problem is the solution. What a joke. Pennsylvania doesn’t need more money, they need a culture change.

Posted by: BT | January 26, 2009, 9:02 am 9:02 am

I’d buy some carbon credits, but I wouldn’t want to contribute to Al Gore’s foundation.

Posted by: LongT | January 26, 2009, 9:04 am 9:04 am

Being green just got easier!
*Yawn* another debate as to why the interests of businesses supersedes those of states and the people living in those states?

Posted by: Mavsreader | January 26, 2009, 9:04 am 9:04 am

Carbon credits are like buying a star for someone, or planting a tree in the rainforest. They are scams meant to make you feel like you are doing something but taking your hard earned money in the process. In fact, the carbon credit scam has more in common with pyramid and Ponzi schemes as the first in fleece the rest.
We can’s “save” the planet. The planet is fine and will long outlive its inhabitants. 90% of all living things are extinct, most were gone long before we arrived. The earth is constantly changing and evolving, and we are but little annoying specks on the timeline of infinity.

Posted by: BrooklynBridge | January 26, 2009, 9:16 am 9:16 am

It will force car manufacturers to manufactur cares to the toughest standards that meet all state needs.
I support this.. and this is why I voted for Obama, because he will push issues that actually matter

Posted by: Death to conservatism | January 26, 2009, 9:23 am 9:23 am

I think its stupid to just Do that in only 13 states. We are a whole nation for christ sakes. Don’t just bring change to part of it. Bring change to it all.

Posted by: LLU | January 26, 2009, 9:27 am 9:27 am

This is getting really scary!! Pelosi wants to pay out our money for other peoples contraciptives…..CitiBank just bought a brand new 50 million dollar jet with our money…..OBama wants to start taking away states rights and we’re all suppose to sit back and let them destroy our lives like good little citizens. Let’s start a 2 terms limit campaign and get these nuts out of Washington!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: M. Smith | January 26, 2009, 9:29 am 9:29 am

Bravo Obama! Finally A President That cares about our Enviorment oh man watch the anti-Enviorment gas guzziling Hummer drivers on the right GO CRAZZZZZY Over this one!

Posted by: Angie | January 26, 2009, 9:35 am 9:35 am

“Being green just got easier!
*Yawn* another debate as to why the interests of businesses supersedes those of states and the people living in those states?

Then why waste $50B (I know, chump change) bailing the automakers out if you plan on killing them with this measure?
Just close them all down now and save the $50B. And the inevitable next round of bailouts.

Posted by: BertieW | January 26, 2009, 10:06 am 10:06 am

Did anyone notice that 600 private jets descended on washington dc for barry’s inauguration? It seems the global warming nuts have really stepped up there attempts at reducing their “carbon footprints”.
FYI- when bush was inaugurated, 300 landed in washington.
Limousine liberals, they are awesome!

Posted by: dave | January 26, 2009, 10:21 am 10:21 am

Joe faraway wrote: “The 100% GM company Opel in Germany makes a few cars that meet the regulations. It would be simple for them to produce the same car in the US, since they own the rights to the designs. These cars are also not more expensive than the cars on the US market now.”
Joe that’s not entirely true as any vehicle made in Europe has to meet different standards than those in the US. Most vehicles created within the EU lack the proper emissions required by the EPA for US as well as several DOT requirements for safety (i.e. side impact, belts and restraints, etc depending on vehicle) which prevents them from getting approval for US sales and/or importation. This is specifically true for any diesel powered vehicles.
For example Jeep offers their Rubicon model with a 2.9 CRD diesel engine throughout the EU; however, it can’t be offered in the United States due to the stricter emission regulations in the US and more so in California. While it gets on average around 30mpg on the highway because it lacks the “necessary” emission standards that are needed on diesel vehicles sold in the United States it isn’t offered.
Ed at 5:37am nailed it on the head. Currently our high EPA and DOT standards make it almost impossible for foreign makers to enter our market or offer their full production line. If you add to the mix allowing states to set their own specific emissions and possibly DOT regulations you make it almost impossible for companies to make a competitive car that would be acceptable for sale if the state sets the laws excessively high. Who’s to say in 10 years we won’t have regulation about how much power a hybrid vehicle draws during peak time thus making all manufacturers retool or attempt to implement unproven (and potentially unsafe) technologies.

Posted by: CrashNebula | January 26, 2009, 10:35 am 10:35 am

Ok M. Smith,
Seems you are mis-guided on many fronts. First off this is about granting states a waiver..bascially giving them back something that Bush took. So this is not a article about eliminating rights. Also, in regards to Citibank, this jet purchase was done on Bush’s clock. He did not moniter the 700 Billion like he said he would. Besides even Rush has a good defense for the wasteful CEOs of these companies. Prehaps you should take your beef up with him. Just call his hotline and ask him why he agrees that its ok to pay over 1mil on the redecoration of an office with taxpayer bailout money. Pls do this ..I would but I have an actual job I have to get on with today.

Posted by: Tara | January 26, 2009, 10:49 am 10:49 am

LLU:
If you read the article, these were the only states that were banned by Bush not to have clean air rights. Everyone else HAS them. There is not a need to give a waiver to a state that decide freely. Get my drift?

Posted by: Tara | January 26, 2009, 10:53 am 10:53 am

If the states can do a better job than the EPA, why not eliminate the EPA?

Posted by: boulderhippie2 | January 26, 2009, 11:05 am 11:05 am

“If you read the article, these were the only states that were banned by Bush not to have clean air rights. Everyone else HAS them. ”
Yeah, thats a fair summary. Lol

Posted by: BertieW | January 26, 2009, 11:22 am 11:22 am

I’m not scared of some guy in a video with a towel on his head saying he’s going to attack us. I’m scared of dying of cancer. How many of you know someone who has been killed by a terrorist? Now how many of you know someone who has been killed by cancer? We can’t afford better water treatment centers for our dirty water or to set better standards for our air but we can spend a trillion on a mismanaged war chasing WMDs that weren’t even there.

Posted by: Skip | January 26, 2009, 12:39 pm 12:39 pm

It’s great to have a REAL President in the White House for a change. President Obama is doing the right thing by reversing Bush’s policies, or should I say lack of policies. President Obama cares deeply about America. Bush never did.

Posted by: leftyintexas | January 26, 2009, 12:54 pm 12:54 pm

Then why waste $50B (I know, chump change) bailing the automakers out if you plan on killing them with this measure?
Just close them all down now and save the $50B. And the inevitable next round of bailouts.
****************************************
In good times as well as bad, the American auto industry has been S-L-O-W to change.
As for the bailout: Can America stand to have that many men and women unemployed? If you say, “Yes” then don’t bail them out. If you say, “No” then do.
I see the bailout as retention of current jobs and not as a “cure” for bad labor/business practices. I am not optimistic about the adoption of new operating procedures, so in that regard, the bailout is problematic.
But you’re correct not approving the bailout of the auto industry is an option.

Posted by: Mavsreader | January 26, 2009, 1:05 pm 1:05 pm

I think BO is just pretending to be President, he’s really doing paper pushing right now for Pelosi. If he wants to go on record as doing a great thing, give him a few pens and let him undo the financial mess Clinton caused in 1999 by deregulating the financial institutions, letting them charge whatever interest rate they feel they want for that day. Also giving lending institutions the right to lend money to folks who couldn’t buy a loaf of bread with a weeks worth of paycheck.
BO need to clean up Clinton’s messes.
If all BO intends to do is reverse this and that, and close this and that, and sign away his better judgement, then what changes was he talking about for our nation? Is he just a Pelsoi paper pusher? She needs to go do something else so our country can heal – and let BO read and research before he signs paperwork for 4 years because she says so.

Posted by: Ellis | January 26, 2009, 1:21 pm 1:21 pm

lefty: Real president? He just told a federal agency to let the states decide an issue that clearly affects all americans. That sounds like passing the buck. If there are 50 different standards, how can the industries effected keep up? It is just another example of regulation without any real benefit.

Posted by: boulderhippie2 | January 26, 2009, 1:30 pm 1:30 pm

Mavsreader:
“As for the bailout: Can America stand to have that many men and women unemployed? If you say, “Yes” then don’t bail them out. If you say, “No” then do. ”
Effectively these state EPA rules eliminate the ability of car companies to sell classes of cars into the markets. For instance, the Dodge Challenger is a perfectly viable car that Chrysler makes a lot of money on. Will they be able to sell it?
Detroit makes their money selling good to great minivans, pickups, and suv’s. If you exclude the ability to sell those vehicles why are you bailing out Detroit? They loose money on every small car, so bailout money is just going to be thrown away.
If you think it is so easy thing to make money on small cars (or hold the quixotic idea that somehow politicians can run the business better) consider Jack Welsh’s philosophy that you need to be #1 or #2 in a market to be profitable.
If we have Honda, Mazda, Nissan, Toyota, Kia, BMW, VW, Hyundai all making small fuel efficient cars, how are you going to wedge all of GM, Ford and Chrysler’s production in that one market segment and have profits?

Posted by: BertieW | January 26, 2009, 2:11 pm 2:11 pm

Quit spazzing, people. Obama did not tell the EPA it HAD to give these states waivers. He told the EPA it had to reconsider the denial. Originally, the EPA staff scientists recommended that the waiver be approved, and the head of the EPA overruled the recommendation. Basically, Obama is giving the new head of the EPA the opportunity to review the issue. Yes, the new head will probably concur with the staff scientists, but the point is that this isn’t Obama stepping in and saying “it will be this way.” He’s leaving it to the process. Seeing as how this is clearly a states’ rights issue, I can’t help but be amused by the Republican dismay at this attempt to relax federal control. Do we now only believe in states’ rights and limited federal power if it means we get policies we like? Because that’s so intellectually dishonest you may as well toss the ideology altogether.

Posted by: Hil | January 26, 2009, 2:50 pm 2:50 pm

hil: This is more an interstate commerce issue than an environmental issue. When there are too many different laws and regulations, commerce stops or is greatly inhibited. The cost of goods go up with no real benefit to the consumer. It creates another layer of unneeded beauracracy. I have bought cars in other states because they were cheaper. That practice will stop when my state enacts more “feel-good” regulations.

Posted by: boulderhippie2 | January 26, 2009, 3:05 pm 3:05 pm

Barry will tell all of us common folk to live like the native Americans did, but he and his liberal friends will continue to live like royalty. Private jets, 5 star hotels, SUV’s, yachts….
Barry even proclaimed in a San Francisco radio interview that “energy prices will sky rocket under my administration” to combat global warming.
The media got him elected and now we are all going to suffer.

Posted by: liberalsaresocialists | January 26, 2009, 3:06 pm 3:06 pm

Obama is a despot. I daresay, most of you who voted for his undefined “change” will rue the day you pulled that lever.

Posted by: starttherevolution2012 | January 26, 2009, 4:54 pm 4:54 pm

This guy is in so far in over his head it’s a scary thing to watch him. Sadly he is clueless on this and everything else he “kind of stands for” ‘cept killing those babies that survive abortions.Yep…think he’s Pelosi’s boy now.

Posted by: DisgustedInOhio2 | January 26, 2009, 9:59 pm 9:59 pm

That’s because Obama believes that Al Gore’s movie is fact rather then laughable cartoon fiction. We now have a president who is so arrogant that he has just determined that your next new car will be a 3 or 4 cylinder putput mobile. ..and if you pay enough money for it and drive a ridiculous enough car, the earth’s temperature will become colder! LOL ’cause al gore said so!! LOL By the way, the democrat media never told you that gore has 4 year degree in government where he finished at the bottom fifth of his class. When crude oil is sold on a GLOBAL MARKET, what does “energy independence” even mean? Does Obama know that our refineries are designed for LSC oil from SA and not domestic sources? No. Why? Because he’s a junior senator with a half page resume and you elected him! Now you all get to see what George W. Bush was protecting the American people from!! LOL …you’re screwed!! LOL

Posted by: Steven | January 26, 2009, 10:48 pm 10:48 pm

“Obama is a despot. I daresay, most of you who voted for his undefined “change” will rue the day you pulled that lever. ”
Thats what usually happens with people who buy products off infomercials. Obama is just another product like Oxyclean or a Juicer where all the money goes into ad budget and next to none into product quality.
Spend a billion dollars and you can get people to buy stuff.

Posted by: BertieW | January 26, 2009, 11:48 pm 11:48 pm

This is the kind of leadership we need! Feel good legislation that doesn’t address the problem!
That’s change you can believe in!
Wait, Washington has been doing that for years, where’s the change?
Try addressing the root problem before you break your arm patting yourself on the back.

Posted by: Oonogil | January 27, 2009, 12:07 am 12:07 am

..let the states make their own decisions…. as long as they are as good or better than the federal regs?
Just another feel good decision. Different grades of gas for different cities and states will slow production of gasoline and increase its price. It will bankrupt the already bankrupt U.S.
automakers when the price increases. And on strengthening Americas infrastructure: where are the new refineries and oil pipelines and oil rigs?
…”If it were up to Republicans there would be NO environmental regulations on anything.”… Yeah just compare Bush’s house at the ranch and Al Gores houses and lear jets he uses to pollute the air to spread his polluted theory of global warming. But really all this is about seperating the classes. Like the book 1984. See you soon.

Posted by: saytain | January 27, 2009, 12:47 am 12:47 am

I think CrashNebula got it all wrong. Near my house is a US Auto import business. They must make changes to nearly all the imported US cars because they do not meet the environmental regulations of the German government (which are the highest in the world). As far as safety goes, the cars must go through the same crash test and meet the same safety standards as the US cars do. The EPA’s standards are way below that of almost all European countries. There is a documentary on PBS which also mentions this. Furthermore, the environmental regulations on cars have been risen twice in the last 10 years in Germany.
As far as safety goes, the US rating system is less rigid as the European system. I quote the web page Safety Car Guide
“Although similar to the American IIHS testing regimen, there is considerable variation between IIHS and the Euro-NCAP chest compression criteria. In particular, more lenient standards in the US for chest compression resulted in discrepancies between IIHS and Euro-NCAP ratings. This has led to some vehicles receiving a markedly different rating under Euro-NCAP compared with IIHS or previous Australian-NCAP procedures. “

Posted by: joe faraway | January 27, 2009, 4:36 am 4:36 am

Dear Scott Dykema,
In reference to you post Jan 27, 2009 2:15:11 AM, I’d love to read your book when you publish it.
It is interesting to read from you that: “Obama is doing exactly what Christ would have Christians do.” That is not totally correct you know. You even quote the bible! “Love your enemy. Do good to those who persecute you and pray for those who wrong you.” [No big deal really, 'cos even the devil quotes the bible and to Christ himself; remember?]
Charity should begin at home, Scott. Obama issued an executive order Friday to restore an 8-year ban on U.S. funding of organizations that perform and promote abortion in developing nations. How can you claim to want to reduce the number of abortions while you fund those who promote and carry out abortions? This kind of double standards and contradiction in living is what Christ vehemently opposed in the hypocritical Pharisees of his time. A nation is judged by the way she treats her most vulnerable and weak members.
Is it not true that to “love” your enemy and “pray” for those who wrong you, you need to first exist? How is Obama doing that for unborn, harmless, and defenceless American babies who are stopped short of being born in America, and now that he has signed the bill, also babies the world over?
PLEASE when you write your book, I think ‘it shoulda be called “Why some Hypocritical Christians are a disservice to Christ”.’
Trish.

Posted by: Trish | January 27, 2009, 6:33 am 6:33 am

If I want to drive a Hummer so what.President Obama tax all cars not made in the usa. they tax ours

Posted by: Craig | January 27, 2009, 7:26 am 7:26 am

Letting the States enact their own EPA regulations will only lead to 50 different EPA standards that the Auto Industry and Oil Companies Must maintain. That means the Auto Makers will have to make cars and the Oil companies will have to produce gasoline based on the states they will be sold in. That will be an unnecessary burden on an already troubled industry and result in excessively high prices for the consumer. IT would be better for the EPA standards to be the same in all 50 states.
This is just Obama appeasing his Environmentalist lobbyist buddies. It is irrational.

Posted by: Steve | January 27, 2009, 8:46 am 8:46 am

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.