How many divisions does the Supreme Court have to adapt what Stalin said about the Pope? That seems to be the implied slog of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who ignored a recent High Court ruling on Thursday with a proposed rule requiring states to reduce CO2 emissions on highways — that is, gas-powered ones. Remove vehicles.
Now the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) wants to take this abuse of power on the road. It cites a vague provision in federal law that authorizes it to set national “performance” targets for the national highway system. The law defines these goals as safety, infrastructure condition, congestion reduction, system reliability, freight and economic vitality, environmental sustainability and reduced project delivery delays.
The FHWA says this “environmental sustainability” language allows it to regulate CO2 emissions. Mr. Buttigieg needs vocabulary lessons. Climate and environment are different, even if leftists face them.
While increasing CO2 emissions over time affect the climate, these effects are global. Federal highway performance standards aim to protect the local environment from conventional vehicle pollutants such as NOx or highway construction. Bridging this inconvenient gap, the FHWA announced that its “proposed GHG measure will help the United States face the rapidly growing climate crisis.”
The climate finish of the Biden administration has always justified its illegal regulatory tools. The FHWA claims states will have flexibility in setting CO2 reduction targets but declares in the same breath that they must align with the administration’s goals to reduce emissions. In other words, states have the flexibility as long as they do so at the behest of the administration. If they don’t, they risk losing federal highway funding. This is forced federalism.
It is also not clear how the states will comply with this rule. Unlike conventional vehicle pollutants, CO2 cannot be easily measured by air quality monitors. Should states ban gas-guzzling and heavy-duty trucks off the road, such as vehicles that fail smog checks? Will they have to measure truck tailpipe CO2 emissions at highway weigh stations?
Possibly. The proposed rule also says that states will be required to “establish decreasing targets for tailpipe CO2 emissions reduction” on the national highway system. The DOT appears to help states regulate vehicular greenhouse gas emissions, which states have been explicitly prohibited under federal law.
Obama and Biden’s Environmental Protection Agency let California implement its own emissions standards and electric-vehicle mandate. Now progressives complain that most EV sales take place in California and coastal states that heavily subsidize them. The DOT rule appears to be intended to force other states to subsidize EVs or to penalize drivers of gas-powered cars.
Even progressives should doubt that Mr. Buttigieg has the power they are claiming. As evidence, his Build Back Better Bill paid the FHWA to write a rule “States need to set performance targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions” and “establish an incentive structure to reward states that demonstrate the most significant progress” and “results” for those that do not. Huh.
If the bill had passed, Mr Buttigieg would have had at least one clear Congressional authority. Instead, he is doing what the court criticized as “an unaltered power in a long-standing statute representing a ‘transformative extension'”. Court West Virginia The decision sets a guardrail to prevent regulators from going off the constitutional road.
Mr. Buttigieg is going rough on the separation of powers in the Constitution. But at least the judges have now given the lower courts the authority to stop them, and hope they do.
Copyright © 2022 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All rights reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8
opinion | Pete Buttigieg’s Climate Toll Road
Transport Secretary Pete Buttigieg
photo:
Keith Birmingham / The Associated Press
How many divisions does the Supreme Court have to adapt what Stalin said about the Pope? That seems to be the implied slog of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who ignored a recent High Court ruling on Thursday with a proposed rule requiring states to reduce CO2 emissions on highways — that is, gas-powered ones. Remove vehicles.
In West Virginia vs United States. EPA, the Court ruled that regulatory agencies cannot implement costly new rules without explicit direction from Congress. The Fed had interpreted an obscure corner of the Clean Air Act to impose costly climate regulations on power plants.
Now the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) wants to take this abuse of power on the road. It cites a vague provision in federal law that authorizes it to set national “performance” targets for the national highway system. The law defines these goals as safety, infrastructure condition, congestion reduction, system reliability, freight and economic vitality, environmental sustainability and reduced project delivery delays.
The FHWA says this “environmental sustainability” language allows it to regulate CO2 emissions. Mr. Buttigieg needs vocabulary lessons. Climate and environment are different, even if leftists face them.
While increasing CO2 emissions over time affect the climate, these effects are global. Federal highway performance standards aim to protect the local environment from conventional vehicle pollutants such as NOx or highway construction. Bridging this inconvenient gap, the FHWA announced that its “proposed GHG measure will help the United States face the rapidly growing climate crisis.”
The climate finish of the Biden administration has always justified its illegal regulatory tools. The FHWA claims states will have flexibility in setting CO2 reduction targets but declares in the same breath that they must align with the administration’s goals to reduce emissions. In other words, states have the flexibility as long as they do so at the behest of the administration. If they don’t, they risk losing federal highway funding. This is forced federalism.
It is also not clear how the states will comply with this rule. Unlike conventional vehicle pollutants, CO2 cannot be easily measured by air quality monitors. Should states ban gas-guzzling and heavy-duty trucks off the road, such as vehicles that fail smog checks? Will they have to measure truck tailpipe CO2 emissions at highway weigh stations?
Possibly. The proposed rule also says that states will be required to “establish decreasing targets for tailpipe CO2 emissions reduction” on the national highway system. The DOT appears to help states regulate vehicular greenhouse gas emissions, which states have been explicitly prohibited under federal law.
Obama and Biden’s Environmental Protection Agency let California implement its own emissions standards and electric-vehicle mandate. Now progressives complain that most EV sales take place in California and coastal states that heavily subsidize them. The DOT rule appears to be intended to force other states to subsidize EVs or to penalize drivers of gas-powered cars.
Even progressives should doubt that Mr. Buttigieg has the power they are claiming. As evidence, his Build Back Better Bill paid the FHWA to write a rule “States need to set performance targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions” and “establish an incentive structure to reward states that demonstrate the most significant progress” and “results” for those that do not. Huh.
If the bill had passed, Mr Buttigieg would have had at least one clear Congressional authority. Instead, he is doing what the court criticized as “an unaltered power in a long-standing statute representing a ‘transformative extension'”. Court West Virginia The decision sets a guardrail to prevent regulators from going off the constitutional road.
Mr. Buttigieg is going rough on the separation of powers in the Constitution. But at least the judges have now given the lower courts the authority to stop them, and hope they do.
Copyright © 2022 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All rights reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8
Appeared in the print edition, July 11, 2022.