A Dozen More States Virtue Signaling Over Vehicle Bans

Matt Posky
by Matt Posky

Having noticed that Washington got a bit of publicity for vowing to ban all vehicles reliant on internal combustion after 2030, a dozen other American states decided it would be a good idea to reaffirm their own religious-like commitment to the environment by saying they too will be restricting your choice of automobiles by 2035.

The coalition of states — most of which don’t have a populace that’s dependent on automotive manufacturing for work — also formally asked the Biden administration to introduce standards that would obligate the United States to ban everything that emits smoke within the next fifteen years. Many activist groups are calling it a heroic act, though it’s difficult to recall any parables where the hero went around banning things and also represented an institutional power structure.

Requests were issued in a letter to the White House and signed by the governors of the following states: California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Washington. Initially reported by Reuters, the correspondence mentions that there’s no framework in the Biden-Harris administration’s $2.3 trillion infrastructure plan that would progress the country toward an all-out ICE ban.

From Reuters:

They argued that “by establishing a clear regulatory path to ensuring that all vehicles sold in the United States are zero-emission, we can finally clear the air and create high-road jobs.”

The governors also want Biden to set standards and adopt incentives aimed at ensuring 100% zero-emission sales of medium-duty and heavy-duty vehicles by 2045.

The White House did not immediately comment on the governors’ letter.

States and some lawmakers hope that Biden’s endorsement of a phase-out date will speed the transition to EVs by users and automakers. EVs currently make up just 2 [percent] of U.S. vehicle sales.

This comes directly after the president has seen increased pressure from Democrat lawmakers to adopt California’s aggressive environmental doctrine on a national scale, which includes the prohibition of gasoline and diesel-driven passenger vehicles by 2035. While Biden’s opposition to the proposal during the 2020 campaign might lead you to believe this is a waste of time, the administration has actually gone back on numerous issues since the election — with fracking bans probably being one of the more relevant examples.

While it’s certainly possible, we’re not expecting anything committal from the White House. Truth be told, we’re not even all that confident most of these states will adhere to the timelines they’re demanding. These internal combustion bans usually seem to be more about scoring brownie points with a subset of the public than trying to establish realistic environmental policies and that’s one reason you see them constantly revised or pushed back to later dates.

The industry does this as well, vowing to provide rampant electrification or autonomous capabilities within the lineups of various brands by some irrelevant date that is perpetually revised in the hopes that you’ll have forgotten the original target. But the UAW is clearly getting worried. With EVs requiring few man-hours to manufacture, union groups around the world are becoming fearful that the transition to electric cars will mean massive layoffs. However, governments always claim that the road to electrification and automation will ultimately create new jobs in exciting technical fields that will offer much better pay than a line worker could have hoped for.

[Image: Marc Bruxelle/Shutterstock]

Matt Posky
Matt Posky

A staunch consumer advocate tracking industry trends and regulation. Before joining TTAC, Matt spent a decade working for marketing and research firms based in NYC. Clients included several of the world’s largest automakers, global tire brands, and aftermarket part suppliers. Dissatisfied with the corporate world and resentful of having to wear suits everyday, he pivoted to writing about cars. Since then, that man has become an ardent supporter of the right-to-repair movement, been interviewed on the auto industry by national radio broadcasts, driven more rental cars than anyone ever should, participated in amateur rallying events, and received the requisite minimum training as sanctioned by the SCCA. Handy with a wrench, Matt grew up surrounded by Detroit auto workers and managed to get a pizza delivery job before he was legally eligible. He later found himself driving box trucks through Manhattan, guaranteeing future sympathy for actual truckers. He continues to conduct research pertaining to the automotive sector as an independent contractor and has since moved back to his native Michigan, closer to where the cars are born. A contrarian, Matt claims to prefer understeer — stating that front and all-wheel drive vehicles cater best to his driving style.

More by Matt Posky

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 77 comments
  • Stuki Stuki on Apr 22, 2021

    After all, every hour is idiot hour at the dumbhouse.

    • JD-Shifty JD-Shifty on Apr 22, 2021

      remember when we had that fad Adderall riddled moron tweeting all day and night? HAHAHAHAHAHA

  • Craiger Craiger on Apr 23, 2021

    We were told for decades that if we DON'T ACT NOW! that we would soon "pass the point of no return." How many of those dates have come and gone? Yet, a sizable number of people still fall for it.

  • Dartman https://apnews.com/article/artificial-intelligence-fighter-jets-air-force-6a1100c96a73ca9b7f41cbd6a2753fdaAutonomous/Ai is here now. The question is implementation and acceptance.
  • FreedMike If Dodge were smart - and I don't think they are - they'd spend their money refreshing and reworking the Durango (which I think is entering model year 3,221), versus going down the same "stuff 'em full of motor and give 'em cool new paint options" path. That's the approach they used with the Charger and Challenger, and both those models are dead. The Durango is still a strong product in a strong market; why not keep it fresher?
  • Bill Wade I was driving a new Subaru a few weeks ago on I-10 near Tucson and it suddenly decided to slam on the brakes from a tumbleweed blowing across the highway. I just about had a heart attack while it nearly threw my mom through the windshield and dumped our grocery bags all over the place. It seems like a bad idea to me, the tech isn't ready.
  • FreedMike I don't get the business case for these plug-in hybrid Jeep off roaders. They're a LOT more expensive (almost fourteen grand for the four-door Wrangler) and still get lousy MPG. They're certainly quick, but the last thing the Wrangler - one of the most obtuse-handling vehicles you can buy - needs is MOOOAAAARRRR POWER. In my neck of the woods, where off-road vehicles are big, the only 4Xe models I see of the wrangler wear fleet (rental) plates. What's the point? Wrangler sales have taken a massive plunge the last few years - why doesn't Jeep focus on affordability and value versus tech that only a very small part of its' buyer base would appreciate?
  • Bill Wade I think about my dealer who was clueless about uConnect updates and still can't fix station presets disappearing and the manufacturers want me to trust them and their dealers to address any self driving concerns when they can't fix a simple radio?Right.
Next