A quarterly magazine of urban affairs, published by the Manhattan Institute, edited by Brian C. Anderson.
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Obamas California Dreamin
The new presidents granting of an emissions waiver to California is the height of irresponsibility.
26 January 2009
In his inaugural address, President Barack Obama quoted the famous verse from Scripture that declares, The time has come to set aside childish things. Yet the first major environmental decision of his presidency, announced today, represents politics at its most childish and irresponsible. Obama is setting a disastrous course not just for future environmental policy, but for legal precedent as well.
At issue is whether the Obama administration should grant the State of California a waiver from federal law on automobile tailpipe emissions and allow the Golden State to set its own, more stringent standards on emissions and fuel economy (by and large, the same thing). California has sought this waiver for several years to comply with an ambitious mandate to curb greenhouse-gas emissions that the state legislature passed in 2006. The Bush administration denied Californias request, arguing that Washington should set standardized policies affecting the auto industry. Obama indicated throughout the campaign that if elected, he would grant Californias waiver. This week he put the administrative wheels in motion to do just that.
One might ask what the harm is in letting California pass its own laws and Californians deal with the consequences. In theory, its a good idea, and represents the essence of federalisms guarantee of states rights. But in this case, advocates admit their aim is the complete opposite. They expect the effects of Californias stricter regulations to radiate far outside the Golden States borders. Indeed, they want to use California to circumvent federal law and, in the process, substitute Sacramentos more onerous regulations for the ones that Congress passed in the 2007 energy bill.
Its already quite costly for the nations automakers to meet federal mileage-efficiency mandates, which are uniform for the entire country. It would be cost-prohibitive for them to have to tailor their product lines to satisfy rules and regulations for 50 different states. Henry Ford showed that mass production is the key to making cars affordable for the common man. Even if California were the only state with its own separate standards, allowing it this privilege would toss Fords cost-lowering efficiencies out the window. Because of Californias enormous automobile marketits population is nearing 40 million people, and more than half are licensed driverscarmakers would likely adjust their entire fleets to meet Californias strictures. The practical effect would be that cars manufactured in Detroit and the South would cost more and be made of lighter, less crash-resistant materials. Translation: higher sticker prices and more highway fatalities nationwide.
Californias law applies to cars sold, rather than made, in the state. The truth is that California no longer has any automobile industry of its own. Decades of aggressive anti-energy policies have caused energy prices in California to skyrocket, driving heavy industry to more business-friendly locales. Still, California wants to flex its bureaucratic muscle and regulate an industry located elsewhere.
For Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and Californias environmental activists, thats precisely the point. Green groups are hailing Obamas move as bold, decisive leadership to address climate change, just as they celebrate Californias muscular approach to regulating greenhouse gas emissions. But far from being a courageous move from the new president, Obamas decision just passes the buck. The idea is to implement in blunt fashion costly regulations that Obama is unwilling or unable to persuade Congress to endorse, despite heavy Democratic majorities in both houses.
Its bad enough that the result will be more expensive cars and trucks. More costly still is the price paid by letting states dictate policies that are expressly the preserve of the federal government. One of Washingtons few explicit constitutional responsibilities is to regulate interstate commerce and prevent states or localities from stymieing or hijacking it. By granting California its waiver, and letting Sacramentos out-of-touch political class make the laws that all Americans must follow, President Obama serves as an accomplice to a brazen theft of the federal governments legal authority. If thats not irresponsible, what is?
Max Schulz is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute.