OpenMarket: Automobiles and Roads

It’s the ultimate dealmaker versus the ultimate dealmaking challenge. President Trump has again sought changes to the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) that he hopes both supporters and critics of this program can live with. The previous reform effort granted ethanol producers and corn growers their request to raise the amount of ethanol allowed year-round in gasoline from 10 to 15 percent (E-15), while, on the other hand, giving the refining sector more exemptions for small facilities which serves to lower the overall RFS targets.   

The Federal Highway Administration announced it will rescind its World War I-era regulation governing the use of patented and proprietary materials in federal-aid highway projects. We are glad FHWA agreed with us and other commenters urging for a clean rescission of this obsolete regulation. Going forward, we expect state departments of transportation to be better positioned in modernizing their highways for a 21st century of self-driving cars and other novel beneficial road transportation technologies currently under development.

​​​​​​​A California-led coalition of 24 states and three cities today petitioned the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to declare unlawful the Trump administration’s One National Program Rule, which finds that California’s motor vehicle greenhouse gas emission standards and zero emission vehicle mandate are unlawful because they are pre-empted by the Energy Policy and Conservation Act.

Today, the U.S. Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) took the first step towards finalizing the proposed Safer, Affordable, Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles rule by issuing a final action entitled the “One National Program Rule.”

Congestion is a persistent and growing problem facing America’s road networks. The challenge facing policy makers is how to address this growing problem. Given that traffic congestion is inherently a local phenomenon, the federal government has a limited set of tools to address it.

Since at least March 2018, the Trump administration and the state of California have been engaged in a legal and political struggle over the stringency of motor vehicle fuel economy standards and, more importantly, the legality of California’s power to set and enforce such standards. Last week the Trump administration opened two new fronts in this contest of wills and war of words.

Pollster Frank Luntz discussed climate policy Thursday night with Laura Ingraham on her Fox News program “The Ingraham Angle.” In the previous segment, Ingraham interviewed Competitive Enterprise Institute Senior Fellow Patrick Michaels, who debunked the “existential threat” rhetoric permeating CNN’s 7-hour “Climate Crisis Town Hall” on Wednesday. Michaels and Ingraham observed that for progressives, climate change is a pretext for confiscating other people’s assets and running their lives.

The Washington Post reported on July 25th that Ford, Honda, Volkswagen, and BMW North America have “struck a deal with California to produce fleets that are more fuel-efficient in coming years, undercutting one of the Trump administration’s most aggressive climate policy rollbacks.”

After two years of work, last week the Uniform Law Commission (ULC) published its model state legislation on automated vehicles. By and large, ULC’s Uniform Automated Operation of Vehicles Act is a very positive step in the right direction.

Modern transportation is hugely beneficial in American society, but it carries the potential for significant, and sometimes fatal, risks. The average American is expected to experience at least four car crashes over the course of a lifetime. For teens and young adults between the ages of 15 to 25, traffic collisions are the leading cause of death.