Trump Takes a Flyer, Starts Process to Gut Auto Mileage Standards

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

Our new EPA director may have his doubts about this, but he’s doing it anyway:

The Trump administration Thursday pushed ahead with plans to unravel the federal government’s most effective action to fight climate change — aggressive fuel economy standards aimed at getting the nation’s cars and trucks to average more than 50 miles per gallon by 2025….The administration’s proposal would freeze miles-per-gallon targets in 2020. It would also move to end California’s current power to set its own, higher standards.

The release of the administration’s proposal was repeatedly delayed in recent weeks as officials debated how aggressively to push. In the end, the White House approved taking a hard line, despite fears of some administration officials that their plan is based on weak evidence that will not hold up under court challenge. The prospect of an extended legal fight has discomfited automakers, who had asked the administration to relax the Obama-era rules but don’t want to see the U.S. market split in two, with different models of cars required in blue and red states.

As I understand it, the “science” behind the Trump proposals has three pillars:

  • High-mileage cars are lighter, and therefore kill more people in collisions.
  • High-mileage cars cost less to drive, so people drive them more, therefore getting into more accidents.
  • High-mileage cars cost more to buy, so people will just stick with their old cars, which are unsafer and will therefore cause more deaths.

This stuff is so ridiculous that I’m surprised the Trumpies aren’t embarrassed to make it public. I think their hope is that it will take a long time to litigate this, and by the time it gets to the Supreme Court conservatives will have had a chance to completely pack the court with shills and hacks who will simply accept any argument that’s tossed their way. Considering that four of them accepted the “broccoli” argument in the Obamacare case and five accepted the “it’s worked so well we don’t need it anymore” argument to gut the Voting Rights Act, I suppose conservatives are justified in taking a shot. Who knows what kind of nonsense the court will accept once they get Brett Kavanaugh confirmed?


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend