Big Auto pleads for smaller gains in fuel efficiency

The Whine of the Motor

The heads of Ford, GM, and Chrysler returned to Washington, D.C., yesterday to try to convince Congress not to hike fuel economy standards. Next week, the Senate will consider a proposal to raise average fleet-wide mileage to 35 miles per gallon by 2020 from the current 25; several bills have sprung up to float more modest increases. At least two, including one cosponsored by Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.), contain escape clauses for car companies if the new standards prove too difficult to achieve. While the industry acknowledges that some increase in efficiency is due -- mileage requirements for cars have not changed since 1983 -- GM CEO Rick Wagoner said the current proposals "don't look achievable." There's that American can-do spirit! Faced with the usual litany of industry concerns, including health-care costs and trade woes, reps were less than receptive. "I think the issue is over," said Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.). "I think you've lost that issue. I think your position is yesterday forever."

straight to the source: The New York Times, Edmund L. Andrews, 07 Jun 2007

straight to the source: The Washington Post, Sholnn Freeman, 07 Jun 2007

straight to the source: The Mercury News, Associated Press, Ken Thomas, 07 Jun 2007

ADVERTISING POLICY

Comments: (3 comments)

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have a Gristmill account, log in below. If you don't have a Gristmill account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

What? Me worry?

Let me see if I have this straight - because the automakers have not been improving mileage and/or the marketing of better mileage vehicles over time, and have put THEMSELVES in a spot where meeting requirements in the required timeframe would be difficult, we should just let them continue to not worry about improving more than they feel they want to?

That "required timeframe" isn't completely arbirary. No political body, no special interest group, no meeting of scientists decided there would be bad effects from having a lot of carbon in the air. That's a fact of physics. How can you argue that the requirement is unfair? Nobody made a rule about how the planet will act, it just IS, and we ALL have to figure out how to live on it. NOW!

Sorry but, I think everytime they say that the requirement should go up.

by cjp129 at 9:50 AM on 07 Jun 2007

There's that American can-do spirit!

The whiners have made it clear for years that they CAN'T DO much at all. They can't make money, compete in the market even at home, live up to their responsibilities to their employees. We absolutely must continue to elect representatives who do not succumb to the whining of any business, or any of the rest of America's threat mongers and nay sayers. MOVE ON ALREADY!

by abqjudy at 10:12 AM on 12 Jun 2007

HUH?

I simply cannot understand the attitude toward efficiency in the U.S. when they HAVE to comply with more strigent standards in Europe and elsewhere. What a bunch of whiners. I think it's because they are already hurting so bad, they're afraid they will lose their bleeding cash cow - US, the AMERICAN CONSUMER. We're the only idiots that buy such gluttonous vehicles. (Although, to be fair, they are forcing the Chinese into the petrol junkie habit!)

by lindyann63 at 6:58 PM on 12 Jun 2007

The comments of Grist users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?