• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • New Vehicle Standards Mean High Priced and Unsafe Cars Americans Don’t Want

    Take good care of your current car. Given what the proposed Environmental Protection Agency/Department of Transportation regulations are going to do to new vehicles, you may want to hang on to it for as long as possible.

    Pursuant to federal law as well as a 2007 Supreme Court case, these two agencies have proposed a sharp increase in vehicle fuel economy. The proposal requires a 5 percent annual increase in fuel economy starting with the 2012 model year, reaching 35.5 miles per gallon by 2016. Note that this would be the vehicle fleet average, a figure that only a handful of models now meet.

    Technological improvements can and have led to annual improvements in vehicle efficiency without sacrificing size, performance, safety, or affordability. But past Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards pushed too far. This has raised sticker prices, but the real cost comes from the fact that the standards necessitated a downsizing of cars that has adversely affected safety. According to a 2002 National Research Council study, the highway death may have been increased by 2,000 annually thanks to these standards.

    This new round of regulations is the most aggressive ever, forcing vehicle mileage increases very quickly. It may well prove to be a backlash in the making in the years ahead, as new car buyers learn that the vehicles they want at the prices they are willing to pay are no longer available, thanks to Uncle Sam. And the required downsizing could further add to the government-caused highway death toll from too-small vehicles.

    Posted in Energy [slideshow_deploy]

    8 Responses to New Vehicle Standards Mean High Priced and Unsafe Cars Americans Don’t Want

    1. Bobbie Jay says:

      GET GOVERNMENT OUT!

      …they'll have us killed one way or another…

    2. Timothy, NY says:

      No, It does not. That is propaganda

    3. Hal Horvath (finding says:

      This is somewhat of a can't-do idea.

      Americans makers can't accomplish safe, fuel-efficient autos.

      I think this idea is entirely wrong.

      I have friends who are engineers, and I can tell you the idea of can't-do is just uninformed and wrong.

    4. Chris (christopherre says:

      Hal Horvath: "Americans makers can't accomplish safe, fuel-efficient autos. I think this idea is entirely wrong."

      Straw man – no one's ever said that they can't. The right question is "what will it cost them to do so?" Either they spend more engineering time on the vehicle, and increase the price as a result(which results in fewer new vehicles being purchased and more people driving their older, less safe current vehicles), or they prioritize getting a 5-star crash test rating at the expense of safety in accidents that the government doesn't test for.

      Bottom line – government mandates for vehicle design have never been the cause of increased safety or fuel economy.

    5. Pingback: EPA to Impose Global Warming Regulations: Will Congress Intervene? | Old People News

    6. Pingback: The EPA is Fueling Nonsense | The Conservative Papers

    7. Pingback: The EPA is Fueling Nonsense | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

    8. Pingback: Tales of the Red Tape: The EPA is Fueling Nonsense « PA Pundits – International

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×