INTERVIEW: Senate Majority Leader John Thune explains why dismantling California’s EV rule is important
THE LOWDOWN:
Wednesday night saw the Senate, under Majority Leader John Thune (R., S.D.), move to dismantle California’s controversial electric vehicles (EV) mandate through the Congressional Review Act (CRA) that would lead to the banning of gasoline-powered vehicles.
Thune told the Reporter the move was an important one to make because of the adverse economic impact it would have on America.
Thune warned that, under the Golden State’s rule, “automakers around the country would be forced to close down a substantial part of their traditional vehicle production, with serious consequences such as diminished economic output, job losses, and declining tax revenues.”
Thune also threw water on Democrats’ assertions regarding Senate procedure, explaining this “debate is not about destroying Senate procedure, or any other hysterical claim that Democrats are making.”
Wednesday night saw the Senate, under Majority Leader John Thune (R., S.D.), move to dismantle California’s controversial electric vehicles (EV) mandate through the Congressional Review Act (CRA) that would lead to the banning of gasoline-powered vehicles.
Thune caught up with the Washington Reporter about the move, explaining why the CRA was an important decision to make.
“The Clean Air Act allowed for waivers to address specific pollution problems, and over the decades a number of them have been granted,” Thune told the Reporter. “But the waivers the Biden EPA handed to California on the Biden administration’s way out the door go far beyond the scope Congress contemplated in the Clean Air Act.”
“The waivers in question allow California to implement a stringent electric vehicle mandate, which — given California’s size and the fact that a number of other states have signed on to California’s mandate — would end up not just affecting the state of California, but the whole country,” he continued.
Prior to Thune’s Senate power play, the chamber’s Democrats argued that the vote could not take place on procedural grounds. Thune threw water on those assertions, explaining this “debate is not about destroying Senate procedure, or any other hysterical claim that Democrats are making.”
“And I have to say that my colleagues’ newfound interest in defending Senate procedure is touching — if a touch surprising,” Thune quipped. “After all, it’s only last year that Democrats were planning to destroy one of the bedrocks of the Senate, the legislative filibuster.”
“And, of course, Democrats’ concern about overruling the parliamentarian is a bit unexpected, given Democrats’ documented history of attempting to do exactly that,” the Senate Republican leader continued. “But I am glad to see Democrats demonstrating an interest in safeguarding the Senate.”
“However, the fact of the matter is that their purported concerns here are entirely misplaced. We are not talking about doing anything to erode the institutional character of the Senate; in fact, we are talking about preserving the Senate’s prerogatives,” he added.
Thune told the Reporter that there were “a lot of conversations” within his party prior to moving on the CRA and that the legislation was “fully vetted by the conference” and praised the work by Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works chairwoman Shelley Moore Capito (R., W.Va.) “laying out the arguments to our conference.” Thune noted that the Senate GOP has “a lot of people who are very passionate about this.”
In terms of the consequences of not overturning California’s EV mandate that would ban gas-powered vehicles, Thune warned that, under the Golden State’s rule, “automakers around the country would be forced to close down a substantial part of their traditional vehicle production, with serious consequences such as diminished economic output, job losses, and declining tax revenues.”
“Consumers around the country would face fewer choices, higher prices, and reduced automobile availability,” Thune said. “And our already shaky electric grid would quickly face huge new burdens from the surge in new electric vehicles—- if, of course, automakers were able to ramp up production as fast as California wants them to, and charging stations, which typically take several years to approve, could be built in time.”
