Washington – The United States Chamber took a trio of votes this week aimed at the California decades to enforce their own environmental standards, preparing the scenario for a confrontation in the Senate, where the Democrats say that the leaders of the Republican Party would have to challenge the long data protocol to obtain the approved measures.
The votes questioned the exemption of California of the Clean Air Law of 1970, an authority that has allowed the State to establish more strict pollution guidelines and train its leaders to establish an alternative standard in car emissions to those of the federal government.
On Thursday, the Republicans in the Chamber, united by a handful of Democrats, voted to prohibit California for the sale of new gasoline only cars by 2035. The previous day, the camera voted in similar lines to end the capacity of California to establish emission standards for heavy service trucks and combat smog levels in the state.
For decades, automobile manufacturers have inclined their car production lines to meet the mileage standards of California, partly due to the size of the California market and partly because the industry has found a safer bet, with changes in the common power in Washington, it is stricter with the standards of fuel efficiency than the alternative. Today, more than a dozen states follow California standards, including New York, Colorado, Massachusetts, Washington and Oregon.
But since President Trump assumed the position, the Environmental Protection Agency has questioned whether that authority is equivalent to a technical “rule” that allows the Senate to disapprove of the exemption with a simple majority vote, according to the Congress Review Law.
Trump campaigned in a promise to reverse government programs that promote the sale of electric vehicles, often ridiculed by critics such as “EV mandates”, defended by the then President Biden and the Government of California, whose objective is to eliminate the sale of new vehicles only gasoline by 2035 with their last program, Advanced Clean Cars II.
In the last two months, two independent offices, the Senate parliamentarian and the government's responsibility office have found that the California exemption authority is not subject to review under the law.
California's exemption, said Gao, “is not a rule” under the law, and points out that the matter had been reviewed several times in the last 60 years. The “recent presentation of the EPA is inconsistent with this house,” the office found.
But those decisions were not enough to prevent the votes from proceeding in the camera.
Now he falls to the republican leadership of the Senate, under the leader of the majority John Thune (RS.D.), decide how to proceed, and Thune “has not made commitments” in any way, Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) He said Thursday in an interview with The Times.
“I hope the best, but I prepare for the worst,” said Padilla. “In my heart, I think I would not do it. He has made statements about respecting the determinations of the parliamentarian.
“But given the beginning of the year we have had, and how the Republican Congress, including the republican majority in the Senate, are just a kind of speleology and give Donald Trump everything he has asked for: we have to prepare for anything,” he continued. “I wouldn't put it beyond him, I guess I should say.”
The governor of California, Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, described the vote of the House of Representatives as an act of challenge “without law” against the findings of the Senate parliamentarian.
“Our vehicle program helps clean the air for all Californians, and we will continue to defend it,” said Newsom.
The Atty State Office. General Rob Bonta said he was “monitoring the situation closely”, suggesting that litigation can follow if the Senate Republicans come with a vote.
“The Congress Review Law was designed to provide a mechanism for the supervision of the Congress of the new rules by federal agencies, not for partisan attacks in state laws duly adopted,” said Bonta. “The improper use of the CRA would not only undermine the integrity of our democratic process, but would also be illegal.”
A spokesman for the EPA declined to comment on the process to reach the Senate, but said that Shelley Moore Capito, a West Virginia republican senator, issued a statement in support of the camera's measures shortly after his votes.
Climate activists are expressing concern for the activity in Capitol Hill, with the Institute of Climate Law of the Center for Biological Diversity that characterizes republican actions as a “cunning and illegal” procedure trick to try to kill the protections of the clean air of California. “
Others who have long advocated the influence of California on the fuel efficiency standards acclaimed the votes on Thursday.
In a statement, the president of the American fuel manufacturers and the petrochemical manufacturers, Chet Thompson, and the president and executive director of the American Petroleum Institute, Mike Sommers, said that the action in the Chamber was “a great victory for US consumers”, stating that the states are far from achieving their sales numbers Low Advancezed Clean Clean Cars II.
“We are one step closer to restoring the ability of consumers to choose cars that best meet their needs,” executives said. “The illegal prohibition of California should never have been authorized, and Governor Newsom should never have taken this great control over the American vehicle market.”
“We urge the Senate to act quickly,” they added.
The California senator's office, Adam Schiff, said he would urge others in the Senate to adhere to the findings of the GAO, noting that Thune previously committed himself to following the “regular order” in the votes, which, traditionally, has meant paying attention to the parliamentary offices and the GAO.
“Republicans have admitted that the Congress Review Law is not a tool at their disposal to ignore the law and cancel the precedent, just like the Senate parliamentarian,” Schiff said in a statement.
“We will fight with this last attack on California's power to protect its own residents,” he added, “and I will urge my colleagues in the Senate to recognize the severe implications of proceeding with this violation of the rights of the State, as well as the dangerous precedent that I would establish when the unanimous opinion of the reliable arbitrators of the congress float.”
