June 12, 2003, Union of Concerned Scientists Action

Source: http://www.ucsaction.org/

The Senate energy bill, S. 14, is a damaging proposal for American consumers, public health, and the environment. We urge you to oppose this legislation.

In particular, S. 14 currently contains provisions related to automobile fuel economy that will ensure our increasing dependence on foreign oil, ensure that consumers continue to pay more at the pump, and ensure increasing levels of global warming pollution. Specifically, S.14 weakens current law by adding redundant decision criteria that the Department of Transportation (DOT) must consider before updating fuel economy standards. This language can only serve to frustrate efforts to raise standards by creating new opportunities for litigation. S.14 also extends a loophole for vehicles that can run on alternative fuel but almost never do.

We urge you to support any amendments that strike down these harmful provisions, as well as amendments that would make significant progress in reducing our dependence on foreign oil, save consumers money, and reduce global warming pollution. We urge you to support the following amendments that will most likely be proposed:

• McCain-Kerry amendment-The McCain-Kerry amendment would likely raise fuel economy standards for passenger cars and trucks to an average of 34 mpg.
• Feinstein amendment-The Feinstein amendment would require passenger trucks and cars to meet the same fuel economy standard of 27.5 mpg.
• Durbin amendment-The Durbin amendment would increase fuel economy standards for passenger cars and trucks to 40 mpg; increase fuel economy standards for pickup trucks to 27.5 mpg; and include heavier vehicles (up to 10,000 pounds) in both of these of categories.

Finally, we urge you to oppose any efforts to make the damaging language in this bill even worse, including:

• Levin amendment-In addition to the new criteria currently in S. 14, the Levin amendment is expected to add even more decision criteria for DOT to consider. These new restrictions are an attempt to frustrate DOT's ability to improve fuel economy standards. Existing criteria already require the agency to consider technological and economic feasibility, the effect of other motor vehicle standards on fuel economy, and the need of the United States to conserve energy. Furthermore, the agency already takes safety and employment impacts into account.

The Senate recently adopted an amendment that requires the president to take measures to reduce oil consumption by one million barrels a day by 2013. We urge you to help the president meet this requirement by (1) opposing the damaging fuel economy language in the underlying bill; (2) opposing amendments that would further weaken fuel economy standards; and (3) supporting amendments that truly address the national security, consumer, and environmental challenges posed by the transportation sector.

Sincerely,

Robert Henderson