By on March 10, 2022

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has opted to reinstate California’s ability to set tailpipe rules and zero-emission vehicle mandates that are more rigid than federal standards. After quarreling for years over the Trump administration’s decision to roll back Obama-era fueling standards deemed untenable, the Golden State now has the ability to once again make harder for its citizens by forcing them to purchase the kind of vehicles it feels they should be driving — rather than leaving it up to the individual that’s actually buying the car.

Though it might not matter at this point. While California effectively served as a defensive shield against proposed fueling rollbacks while Trump was in office, the Biden administration strategy is broadly in line with its agenda of making gasoline unappetizing to consumers to ensure a speedy transition to electric vehicles. California doesn’t even want people to have access to gas-powered lawn care equipment. The state has effectively served as a test case for Build Back Better since before the phrase passed through the lips of a single politician. 

If you need a refresher on how we got here, we recently posted a recap on why fuel prices have gotten so high ahead of President Biden’s decision to ban Russian energy from coming into the United States. But, if you want a chronicling of government actors bickering about who gets to control what kind of car you drive over the last few years, I would suggest reviewing our Gas War series. It covers the formation of the conflict, automakers’ habitual switching of sides, California’s highly influential role, how a changing of the guard effectively secured a win for the Golden State, and just about everything in between.

There are dozens of articles covering the matter on this website. However, those preferring the abridged version need only know that waivers under the Clean Air Act allowing California to set its own emissions laws were being nixed under the rollback to prevent it from leveraging its size to influence the national market. Though that’s ultimately what happened anyway after numerous automakers and like-minded states vowed to adhere to Cali’s rules instead of rolling with more-lax rules proposed by the Trump administration. Now, the Biden EPA has opted to reinstate any privileges revoked by the previous White House.

“Today, we proudly reaffirm California’s longstanding authority to lead in addressing pollution from cars and trucks,” EPA Administrator Michael Regan said in a statement. “Our partnership with states to confront the climate crisis has never been more important. With today’s action, we reinstate an approach that for years has helped advance clean technologies and cut air pollution for people not just in California, but for the U.S. as a whole.”

In the same announcement, the agency also confirmed that it would be withdrawing the SAFE-1 interpretation of the Clean Air Act that would prohibit other states from adopting the California greenhouse gas (GHG) emission standards. Any state may now formally choose to adopt and enforce California’s stringent standards, rather than national standards, through Section 177 of the Clean Air Act.

Late in 2021, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) similarly withdrew its contributions to the Trump administration’s rollback in the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule Part One.

California Governor Gavin Newsom has said the decisions solve remedies the prior presidency’s “groundless ​attack on a critical program that is based on California’s decades ​of experience setting emissions standards as authorized by law.”

Meanwhile, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) announced plans on Thursday to significantly increase electric vehicle requirements by 2030 to ensure gasoline-powered vehicles are entirely phased out by 2035. Though it should be said that the state has the absolute highest fuel prices in the whole country with an average of $5.70 per gallon for 87 octane.

While we could certainly speculate as to why our betters in the government have advised us to simply endure higher prices as part of our civic duty. Vice President Kamala Harris and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg have both suggested Americans annoyed with the rising cost of fuel quickly purchase electric vehicles — which typically retail for at least $10,000 over the average price of a new automobile in the United States. Tesla, whose CEO has been begging the government to allow for more oil production, also raised prices on its most affordable models this week after citing material costs. Shipping rates have likewise gone up across the board, with the trucking industry presently incapable of transitioning to EVs that don’t yet exist.

[Image: Konstantin Yolshin/Shutterstock]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

87 Comments on “Gas War: EPA Reinstates California’s Ability to Set Emission Limits, EV Mandates...”


  • avatar
    CoastieLenn

    Oh this comment section is gonna be a good one.

  • avatar
    RHD

    “State’s Rights” only apply to abortion laws and voting restrictions…?
    Keeping the air as clean and healthy as possible when 1 in 8 Americans live in one state is actually a very good thing.
    And truckers who drive 73MPH when their legal speed limit is 55 should temper their complaints about fuel costs.
    The article is pointedly provocative.
    Perhaps there are a few pennies per comment to be made.

    • 0 avatar
      CoastieLenn

      “And truckers who drive 73MPH when their legal speed limit is 55 should temper their complaints about fuel costs.”

      According to an official CDL Job Training website, there is no such thing as a universal speed limit for trucks vs. cars. Most states don’t differentiate the limit for each type of vehicle. Nevada, for instance, has 80mph speed limits and semi’s are able to do those speeds.

      “The NHTSA, FMCSA, and lawmakers all tend to agree that a maximum speed limit for trucks should be under 70 mph. The high-water mark tends to be 65 mph in many cases. While that number may seem reasonable, few states adhere to the 65 mph standard.”

      Then you have, right from the Fed:
      “Ranging from a speed limit of 55 miles per hour (mph) to 85 mph, the maximum speed limit for trucks varies from state-to-state. Currently, California has the most conservative maximum speed limit for trucks–55 mph. At the other end of the spectrum, Texas has some roads where the truck speed limit is 85 mph.”
      https://www.energy.gov/eere/vehicles/fact-929-june-13-2016-heavy-truck-speed-limits-are-inconsistent

      Then you need to consider that not just truckers are complaining about fuel prices.

      • 0 avatar
        RHD

        In California and some other states, any vehicle pulling a trailer has a 55MPH speed limit, even on the interstates.

        I still see people parked, playing on their phones or eating lunch while their engine runs idling. They apparently don’t understand that their money is going right out the tailpipe.

        • 0 avatar
          lne937s

          BTW, vehicles pulling a trailer on the autobahn also have a 90 km/h speed limit (~56 mph) in Germany and are restricted to the right lanes. And unlike the US, the limit is enforced as the limit there (not +10 mph).

    • 0 avatar
      Matt Posky

      I absolutely think that California can do what it wants. But I also believe its energy and transpiration policies are overwhelmingly stupid, blatantly counter productive, and should never be made national.

      • 0 avatar
        CoastieLenn

        Matt, I commented this in an article on another site about a similar topic, but regardless of whether you agree or disagree with California’s ability to set their own standards, there’s something inherently wrong and undeniably corrupt when one singular state has been (and seemingly will always be) granted the ability to hold more influence and regulatory power on a national scale than the Federal Government.

        (Quite possibly my longest run-on sentence ever.)

        • 0 avatar
          Astigmatism

          California has been granted the power to set its own rules for its own state. The market forces impacted by this are no more evidence of “corruption” than are textbook publishers who modify their textbooks to comply with whatever Texas wants to teach.

          • 0 avatar
            CoastieLenn

            You have a point, but in an accurate comparison, those Texas textbooks wouldn’t only be distributed in Texas, the Federal Government would be pushing all other states to adopt those same textbooks.

        • 0 avatar
          Matt Posky

          As run-on sentences go, this one was pretty good.

  • avatar
    probert

    War looks like a whole lot of dead people (see Ukraine) – mandating fuel efficiency and emissions is not war. As to why prices are so high at the pump – The oil companies are making record profits – they make them based on the price they charge for gas/diesel etc. (70% of all oil is used in transportation). You want the government to regulate corporate profits – how commie socialist woke and somehow pro abortion. where is JFK jr. when you need him!! Otherwise buy gas stock, drive less, and root Exxon on as your dividends roll in. Free market baby – hurts so good….

  • avatar
    EBFlex

    Gotta love virtue signaling

    • 0 avatar
      Luke42

      Your grandparents probably thought “waste not, want not” was virtuous.

      The idea that wasting fuel is a good and patriotic thing that provides American Jobs is a real brain-buster.

      Wasting food and fuel is simply a a bad idea when I look at it through the perspective of my rural upbringing, and also through my perspective as an armchair economist.

      I’m with the “waste not, want not” people.

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    “…forcing them to purchase the kind of vehicles it feels they should be driving”

    California’s government is a product of free and fair elections in that state. If they don’t like the outcome, they can change the people they vote into office. CA does have a habit of recalling its governors.

    As for the regulations themselves, I thought conservatives hated centralized control and the EPA. Can’t have states’ rights both ways, but everybody invokes state’s rights when they don’t like the Federal rules, and vice-versa.

    Do I think there should be one national standard? Yes, mainly for the efficiency of having one set of rules instead of multiples.

    What should that standard be? I don’t know, but something in step with the rest of the world makes sense.

    • 0 avatar
      CoastieLenn

      I tend to lean conservative and I love my EPA counterparts in my Environmental Law Enforcement (USCG) job. I don’t *mind* California’s overall plans, what I mostly have an issue with is the Fed not finding a happy middle ground and mandating that as a national standard. I also don’t like how the CARB basically gets carte blanche reign to push whatever it’s state level overseers want, and almost regardless of whomever is sitting in the Oval Office at the time, they still continue to act like a Federal legislative branch.

      • 0 avatar
        joesurfer

        The issue with Carb is that the rules were designed for California which has special needs/conditions with its air quality. Insisting that the rest of the country go along with that is what sticks in people’s craw.

    • 0 avatar
      jkross22

      “free and fair elections”

      LOL!

      And the only governor to be recalled in the last few decades was Gray Davis.

  • avatar
    pmirp1

    Thanks God I got my Vette, Mustang, Grand Cherokee, and two trucks already. I probably won’t need another car in future.

    But knowing the leftists in charge of California, they try everything so gas is 20 dollars a gallon soon, so we are forced in obeying their rules, and not be able to live out there in country.

    Remember gang, he used to say inflation is transitory. Yeah right.

    And they use the excuse of a war in Ukraine to say that is why gas is expensive, forgetting that inflation was already here because of idiotic policies of Branden giving free money to people which the caused the inflation.

    • 0 avatar
      CoastieLenn

      It always amazes me when people think that the free government money they get deposited in their accounts (be it welfare, or stimulus funds) won’t be paid back in some form or fashion. Some people refuse to see that free money isn’t free, free phones aren’t free, free housing isn’t free, free healthcare isn’t free.

    • 0 avatar
      Dave M.

      Yes, thank God you got those heavy duty fuel sippers. But if you can afford the gas, God bless. We all make choices.

      Meanwhile, choose not to live in California and their emissions rules won’t affect you.

  • avatar
    SoCalMikester

    i remember the smog in the 80s, and how as more people bought new cars, the air kept getting cleaner. yeah, there are limits. nobody expects gardeners to be using 20v stuff on commercial properties. 20v should be just fine for weekend warriors with the typical front/back lawn.

    i dont see gas mowers ever being “banned”

  • avatar
    jmo2

    “ rather than leaving it up to the individual that’s actually buying the car.”

    And that’s fine. But when Putin invades Ukraine or there is a Revolution in SA to overthrow MBS and gas gets expensive, don’t f-big bitch about how much it costs to fill your F-250 and your wife’s suburban.

    • 0 avatar
      pmirp1

      So much ignorance in this comment.

      Putin invades Ukraine because America pushed Russia to edge. Ukraine has always been part of Russia. Recent history notwithstanding. If Ukraine and its president didn’t say garbage about becoming part of NATO and EU, this war won’t be happening. We already got Poland, Lithuania and all those other countries now part of NATO. What if Russia says they put nukes in Cuba again? Do we agree to it? We forced this war on Russia. Let’s just hope American boys don’t go there. Or we don’t die here if Russia attacks America with nukes.

      As for oil, America and Canada and Mexico have enough oil if Brnaden and his cronies allow us to drill and frack and lay pipelines. But Branden wants to submit to greenies and lefists, so he rather beg Saudi Arabia and OPEC and Venezuela and Iran. How stupid is that? Those countries will give us oil and now get their own oil from Russia.

      • 0 avatar
        dal20402

        Stop blaming the victim. This war is happening because Putin never hears no from an answer, has become detached from reality, and wants to reassemble the Russian Empire. It is not the fault of Ukraine, NATO, Biden, or even (as incredible as it may be) Trump.

        • 0 avatar
          pmirp1

          dal20402, victim? Ukraine wants to be part of EU and NATO. That does not make them a victim. That makes them guilty about this war. If you don’t get that, you don’t get the big picture.

          Every other day their president wants America to declare a no fly zone over their country. What do you think that means? At least Branden is smart enough not to commit to that.

          Putin is a Russian nationalist. We have surrounded Russia with all these NATO countries. Make no mistake America is 100% behind this war. I am American as any one in this country. But I know when my country and my agencies and my system are pushing all the buttons. I don’t give a damn about Putin, but damn it, he has nukes. Do you get that? It is his neighborhood. Stay out of it.

          • 0 avatar
            Astigmatism

            “Ukraine wants to be part of EU and NATO. That does not make them a victim. That makes them guilty about this war.”

            I haven’t seen this level of guilt since the last time a jilted ex killed his former girlfriend because she dared date someone else after he warned her not to.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            Guilt? No. Gaslighting? Oh, boy. This is like saying a rape victim “had it coming” because she showed cleavage at a bar.

          • 0 avatar
            jkross22

            I can’t say with certainty, but I’d bet a round of drinks that the people who hold the strongest views of Russia and Ukraine probably know the least about the history, culture and events that led up to 2022.

            I’d like to hear from commenters in Ukraine or Russia, or people that lived there for more insight.

            Even better – for everyone so completely star spangled sure you’re right, how do you know what you’ve heard is true? Example: I bet many here think Putin ordered his nuclear force on high alert, or some variation of that. Go read the transcript from his speech where this was allegedly said. That’s not what he said.

            I know I’m tired of getting gaslit like this. Aren’t you?

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            Ukrainians have every right to determine, through their elected representatives, in what alliances they wish their country to participate. It is they, not us, that decided they preferred the EU and NATO to Russia and its five-dwarfs CSTO. If Putin thinks that is a threat, the onus is on him to persuade Ukrainians to think differently and elect governments accordingly. As he is discovering, bombing their hospitals is not something they find very persuasive.

          • 0 avatar
            mcs

            @jkross22: I’m familiar with eastern Europe and its history. I had several friends living in Ukraine. I’ve been in close contact with them and they’ve all left. Two of them I was in almost constant communications with them helping them find the best way out. I have friends in Russia as well. I know the history of most of the region. Even down to the history of their technology from the Electronika 60s to the Elbrus CPU. I know what Kvass and Baltica is. I also know that no one in Ukraine likes the the Russian government. Not even the east. At least that’s what some people that live there have said. Actually, the younger Russians I know don’t like the government either. Regular Russians and Ukrainians don’t want to fight each other. Lots of them are related too. One friend’s father was a Soviet pilot stationed in Ukraine where he met her mother. I do get a lot of direct information as to what’s going on there. I haven’t been there myself but probably would have if the invasion hadn’t happened.

            But if you want some direct information, call (499) 245-3368 and tell them you have questions. That’s the SVR in Russia. Go ahead. Test me. I can get you other numbers as well.

          • 0 avatar
            jkross22

            @mcs, I’ve heard the same. Russians distrusting their government. Putin and the Russian thugocracy have given them plenty of reasons to believe that.

            Why are you defensive? Believe what you’d like to believe.

            I am curious though….Do you care this much about Uyghar slave labor camps? How about the Yemenites getting blown up by arms we’ve (the US) sold to Saudi? Selective outrage is a feature of propaganda. I’m sure you’d agree all of it is unacceptable and morally outrageous.

            Props to TTAC for doing their level best to call balls and strikes on all of these issues. In many ways, it seems like someone has turned over the monopoly board…. again.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            @jk:

            Do you have some evidence that Putin *didn’t* put his nuclear forces on higher alert?

            As far as the history between Russia and Ukraine is concerned, it’s long, and includes stuff like the Holodomor, a famine that killed millions of Ukrainians in the ’30s and was caused directly (and intentionally) by Soviet efforts to collectivize agriculture.

            https://www.britannica.com/event/Holodomor

            In any case, given that history, and how ferociously these guys are fighting back against a much more powerful foe, I’d say the question of whether Ukrainians want to be reabsorbed back into Mother Russia has been conclusively settled. Clearly they want no part of it, and Russia invaded them anyway.

          • 0 avatar
            Arthur Dailey

            @pmirp1: how does wanting to escape being under the dictatorial control of Russia make Ukraine ‘guilty’? Ukraine has a different language and religion. Ukrainians are ethnically different from Russians. And wanting to have their own independent nation is a recognized human right. Invading another nation to subjugate it is not.

            You might disagree with NATO becoming an active participant in the war but do not blame Ukraine.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            “how do you know what you’ve heard is true?’

            @jkross22 – there’s a huge Ukrainian community in my town. One of my colleagues is Ukrainian. Several other colleagues are from various Eastern European countries.

            So what’s your point exactly?

            I need to know someone who’s bleeding on a battlefield to understand what it’s like to bleed?

            We have a country whose population is fighting for freedom and self determination but we have those saying it’s their fault.

            The same group goes on and on and on about mask, vaccine and social mandates with covid-19 all in the name of freedom. Do you really understand what freedom is?

        • 0 avatar
          Dan

          It’s less that Putin departed from reality than that reality departed from him. Did you, or anyone else, think an agrarian buffer was important enough to blow up the international banking system and our own energy markets the way we didn’t in 2014?

          Our lizard people are out for blood.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            That “agrarian buffer” has 41 million people in it (about 15% of our own population), a substantial majority of whom do not wish to be ruled by Putin. We didn’t take much action in 2014 because the populations affected then did not, for the most part, feel the same way.

          • 0 avatar
            Dan

            That’s rich. Lockheed Martin et all are doing this on behalf of who the poor Ukrainians wish to be ruled by? They don’t even pretend to give a goddamn anymore who Americans wish to be ruled by.

            We put their puppet government in, we used that puppet to push Russian buttons for the next 8 years, they finally did what they said they’d do all along and look who just coincidentally gets to seize a couple hundred billion dollars in Russian assets, steer a couple hundred billion dollars in defense spending, cancel Nordstream, and break the couple trillion dollar energy market so the government can take it over and give it to Blackrock.

            Also look who gets their country bombed and their people killed.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            I don’t know where you’re getting your information, but it appears to be the same place where Putin learned that the Ukrainians would welcome him with roses and parades.

            Given that gas prices are the single best predictor of political fortunes in this country, I’m surrrre that the Biden administration was just champing at the bit to take an action that would raise them by 40 cents a gallon in a single weekend. So very convincing.

          • 0 avatar
            Dan

            You’ve already figured it out, you just need to take the blinders off and realize that you’ve figured it out. Yes 5.00 gas is going to be career ending given any public opportunity to vote on it. Yet they did it anyway. What’s more plausible here?

            A, That the most ambitious and successful of the sociopaths who spent their entire careers clawing their way to the very top in Washington found a cause worth risking it all for, keys to the money printers and all? And that cause is the noble right of political self determination for Slavic flyover country? White, Christian Slavic flyover country no less.

            Or B, that those sociopaths in Washington doing something so prima facie career ending aren’t calling their own shots.

            Or C, and here’s the big one, that those sociopaths in Washington doing something so career ending know something that you’re unwilling to admit also knowing about voting booth accountability.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            If you have solid evidence of either of your conspiracy theories—either the one that the feckless leaders of defense contractors are somehow in control or the one that our elections aren’t what they appear to be—then bring it. So far, no one has shown any evidence that has stood up to scrutiny.

            Yes, people care about fellow democracies, even ones you (quite incorrectly, as you’d know if you’d ever been to Kyiv) demean as “Slavic flyover country.”

          • 0 avatar
            Astigmatism

            “The fact that the evidence doesn’t support my conspiracy theory, is itself evidence of a much deeper and more shocking conspiracy theory” is the sort of logic that one associates with a guy yelling about the Rothschilds and the end of the world outside a Waffle House.

        • 0 avatar
          deanst

          Countless advisors within the U.S. government warned/predicted this would happen if more countries around Russia joined NATO. You can argue that they have every right to join NATO, but you shouldn’t be surprised at the consequences.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            Surprise isn’t the issue. The issue is blame. The blame is not on the country whose citizens elected a government based on a promise to integrate more closely with the part of the world that has secured the best outcomes for its residents. The blame is on the psychotic madman who would rather try to become an 18th-century tsar than lead to improve the welfare of his country’s citizens.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            @deanst:
            “Countless advisors within the U.S. government warned/predicted this would happen if more countries around Russia joined NATO.”

            So…an appeasement policy?

            I haven’t taken world history in a while, but I seem to remember a similar policy towards another dictator from around 1938. In fact, that dictator used the same “we have people who want to rejoin the motherland (well, Fatherland, actually)” argument.

            I recall that policy failed.

            What approach would you rather have taken to a country that’s literally bent on violating other countries’ sovereignty?

      • 0 avatar
        FreedMike

        Have you ever wondered if acid flashbacks were a real thing or not? They’re very real, and as proof, I offer every word out of pmirp1’s mouth.

        • 0 avatar
          Jeff S

          @FreedMike–Do we really know who pmirp1 is? You can easily hide your identity on a website. Possibly he is a Putin supporter posting propaganda. Not saying he is but I am suspicious.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            @Jeff:

            I have no idea who this guy “really” is, but his “blame America for the war” stuff is straight out of the mouth of none other than Tucker Carlson.

            https://news.yahoo.com/tucker-carlson-somehow-blames-u-053356297.html

            Apparently Kamala Harris did the Jedi Mind Trick on Putin and made him invade Ukraine. She’s one helluva powerful Jedi, that Kamala…

      • 0 avatar
        jmo2

        “ Putin invades Ukraine because America pushed Russia to edge. ”

        English not your first language there Ivan?

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      @pmirp1 – I wouldn’t be accusing anyone of ignorance since your comments about Ukraine and Russia are straight from Russian propaganda trolls.

      Doubling down on the stupid doesn’t make you correct.

  • avatar
    mike9o

    Russia starved to death 3 million Ukrainians during the 1930’s. If I was Ukrainian, I would fight to keep the Russians out. The Russians invaded Crimea first and then Ukraine to get their hands on the oil that was discovered off their southern coast in the 2000’s. Russia doesn’t want Ukraine as a competitor to their near monopoly of supplying oil and gas to the Western Europeans.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    “Though it should be said that the state has the absolute highest fuel prices in the whole country with an average of $5.70 per gallon for 87 octane.”

    Soon to be the highest electricity rates in the whole country, especially after Diablo Canyon is closed.

  • avatar
    FreedMike

    Welcome to the wild, wacky world of states’ rights.

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      It’s really a “state’s rights” issue if only one state is allowed to do it.

      • 0 avatar
        ajla

        I’d personally be fine with seeing the CAA amended to remove California’s waiver rights in favor of a national standard, but I highly doubt I’ll live to see 60 senators agree with me.

      • 0 avatar
        FreedMike

        Theoretically, any state could do it.

        I get that California has unique topography that makes its’ cities unusually susceptible to pollution, but this strikes me as going a touch too far.

        I would be in favor of the carrot approach when it comes to EVs, versus the stick approach that California’s using.

        • 0 avatar
          ajla

          It would be illegal and unenforceable if any other state tried.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            I see nothing wrong with incentivizing EV ownership. Mandating it will backfire.

          • 0 avatar
            CoastieLenn

            @Freed, it can’t backfire if they’re successful in their attempts to get anything that runs on expired dinosaurs off the road. There’s no alternative. You literally will have no choice.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            @coastie:

            I think that’s a bit of a stretch. Even if the state *wants* ICE cars off the road, there are probably upwards of a hundred million of them in the state as it stands, all owned by someone who is going to be PIS*ED when the big bad gubmint says they can’t drive it anymore.

            That sounds like a recipe for a good old fashioned taxpayer revolt, even in a California.

            I don’t think they have the political capital to do that, and such capital won’t materialize for a LONG time…if ever.

  • avatar
    MitchConner

    As a 40 year California resident who finally got fed up with its oppressive Team Donkey one party regime — all I can say is if you agree with anything that goofy state does you’re either (a.) crazy, (b.) stupid, (c.) live in a fantasy world, or (d.) never lived there.

    Its taxes and fees are crazy high yet all you get in return are high prices, rundown and litter strewn roads, and ever more oppressive mandates from a government that thinks it’s smarter than you — as crime skyrockets and its economy outside of Silicon Valley bumps along the bottom with very high poverty rates and a non-existent middle class.

    Of course the Biden administration just plays along because of all the tech money behind it. Ca-Ca-Kamala Harris is an unqualified joke of a VP. Alejandro Mayorkas, the head of DHS, might as well be a Kmart mannequin for all he does — as drugs and illegals pour in.

    What a dumb decision. Then again, Biden is a really dumb guy who lied and cheated his way through life while going zero applicable real world experience.

    Come on, midterms!

    • 0 avatar
      Arthur Dailey

      @Mitch, Your statement that VP Harris is ‘unqualified’ demonstrates that you are not taking an objective, fact based approach. Her credentials compare favourably to those of previous VP’s or even the previous resident of the White House. Stating that you dislike or oppose someone based on your subjective opinion is one thing. But making a demonstrably incorrect statement is indicative of something entirely different.

      Harris graduated from Howard University and the University of California, Hastings College of the Law. She began her career in the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office, before being recruited to the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office and later the City Attorney of San Francisco’s office. In 2003, she was elected district attorney of San Francisco. She was elected Attorney General of California in 2010 and re-elected in 2014. Harris served as the junior United States senator from California from 2017 to 2021. Harris defeated Loretta Sanchez in the 2016 Senate election.

      • 0 avatar
        285exp

        Kamala served under Willie Brown too.

      • 0 avatar
        MitchConner

        Art, she was awful in San Francisco, putrid in Sacramento, and a complete joke in Washington.

        Your cut and paste bio of hers actually proves my point that she’s unqualified. What experience in Washington did she have? Basically zero as within a month of starting as Senator she was off and running one of the worst campaigns for President in history. What qualifications does she have internationally? Zero. She made a fool out of herself in Central America while doing nothing to stem the flow of drugs and illegals over our border. She looked like the incompetent idiot that she is yesterday in Europe.

        Since your head is obviously stuck up a donkey’s butt — do it a favor and look around for polyps up there. Objective. You don’t know the meaning of the word. She’s only there to be a shill for the Silicon Valley money behind her. She’s so bad even Team Donkey has already decided she’s off the ticket in 2024.

        You probably think Biden is doing a good job.

        • 0 avatar
          Arthur Dailey

          @Mitch. It amuses me how people like you revert to insults when proven wrong. Is even just a little research too much work? Harris is both qualified and experienced. A lawyer or doctor can both be qualified and experienced but not ‘competent’. You appear not to understand the difference. And as far as experience and qualifications, Harris has far more than The Former Guy whose primary experience was inheriting money, appearing on television and operating a number of organizations/corporations that went into bankruptcy. Based on those ‘qualifications’ a Kardashian is as qualified to be president.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        No one is elected in a one party state, they are appointed and given rubber stamp approval by the “electorate”. This is part of the danger of a one party state, no matter who is in charge.

  • avatar
    DenverMike

    If they just want to ban all ICE engines from Los Angeles, I’d be fine with that. Why do they want everyone else to share in their misery?

    And it could be just from 9 to 4pm. But they don’t want a simple solution. CARB should be killed off immediately, F them. Plus California has its own, already redundant EPA.

  • avatar
    bullnuke

    We live in a constitutional republic. If one of the members of this republic chooses to enact laws and regulations regarding activities within its borders, so be it as long as those laws and regulations do not conflict with the constitution. The citizens of California are getting exactly what the have voted for. Not my circus, not my monkeys as I left the State of California as quickly as I could after retiring from the Navy 30 years ago this year.

    • 0 avatar
      285exp

      The rest of the states are also going to get what the citizens of California voted for, so it’s going to be our monkeys and our circus too. California can set their own laws on abortion or mask mandates or men competing in women’s sports and it doesn’t affect me at all, their setting their own mileage and emission standards affects the vehicles that all of the states will drive.

      • 0 avatar
        bullnuke

        Ahh…for the good old days when California received their own special vehicles such as the 305ci Corvette with 3-speed auto (the only model available there). LOL!

  • avatar
    Margarets Dad

    Oh, I hope everyone has a great day today!

    (moderated)

  • avatar
    Margarets Dad

    Great job (moderated)

  • avatar
    BSttac

    Rolling blackouts for everyone! This is worse than the Jimmy Carter era.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • nrd515: Drive something with the ZF 8 speed. That’s a transmission done right. I don’t see how it could...
  • SPPPP: :) Nice.
  • Steve S.: Those ribbed bumpers are highly sought after by customizers, and could probably sell for a couple hundred...
  • detlump: Please change out that plastic fuel filter ASAP! They are fire hazards. Replace with a steel filter....
  • Frobig: The newest vehicle I owned that had crank windows and no AC was a ’93 Toyota pickup. I don’t...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber