Obama signs orders on emissions, warming
Reversing another Bush administration policy, President Obama announced this morning that he will order environmental regulators to immediately look at the request by Massachusetts and at least a dozen other states decide their own standards on auto emissions, an avenue for reducing carbon dioxide and other gases that help cause global warming.
"We must have the courage and commitment to change," Obama declared.
For decades, he said, the country has chosen delay over decisive action" and "rigid ideology has overshadowed sound science."
The country must now address dependence on foreign oil -- often controlled by unfriendly dictators -- and the real challenge of global warming, he said.
In 2007, the Bush administration denied California's request to enact tougher tailpipe emissions standards, which would force automakers to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 30 percent in new cars and light trucks by 2016.
Massachusetts and at least 12 other states -- Arizona, Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington -- have already adopted California's standards.
The administration must "work with, not against" states, he said. "The days of Washington dragging its heels is over."
Obama also ordered his Transportation Department to enact short-term rules on how automakers can improve fuel efficiency of their new models by the 2011 model year. The auto companies are supposed to make longer-term moves toward hybrid and other fuel-efficient cars under the terms of the loans that Chrysler and General Motors are receiving from the federal government.
The president said he is not trying to add a burden to the automakers, but wants to help them produce vehicles for the future.
And Obama repeated his pledge that the United States will take the lead in global cooperation and action on climate change.
Automakers have fought the stricter California standards, saying the rules should be enacted nationwide. The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers issued a statement today reiterating that stand.
"The Alliance supports a nationwide program that bridges state and federal concerns and moves all stakeholders forward, and we are ready to work with the Administration on developing a national approach," Dave McCurdy, president and CEO of the alliance, said in a statement.
The alliance also called on the Obama administration to issue specific fuel-efficiency requirements for 2011 models, so manufacturers know what they have to do.
UPDATE: Asked how Obama can ensure that the new rules won't cause more auto job cuts, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the changes should come as no surprise since Congress passed them more than a year ago.
"Changing those fuel mileage standards is certainly doable," he said.
The president wants to work with Detroit to make sure that popular fuel-efficient cars are made in America, Gibbs said.
He also argued that raising the average standard from 27.5 to 25 miles per gallon would save 2 million barrels of oil a day -- equivalent to what the US imports from the Persian Gulf.
UPDATE: Governor Deval Patrick issued a statement supporting Obama's announcement:
"With this action, President Obama has put the United States on a path toward a clean energy future. States like California and Massachusetts have tried to take action on reducing greenhouse gas emissions, while the federal government has held us back, but no more. Now, as the Supreme Court has confirmed we should do, the United States will create new jobs and produce new cars that reduce, rather than increase, the danger of global climate change."
This blogger might want to review your comment before posting it.
About Political Intelligence

News from the Washington Bureau








For the faithful who are trying to hold on to their belief in global warming while we face subzero weather, here is what you can do. Get some wool socks, warm boots, long johns and thick pants, a game warden jacket from L.L. Bean. Take off your hat, go down to the beach, stick your head in the sand, and believe!
Great news Mr. President, now on that same subject, there is this plan here in Massachusetts to build wind mills, it's called CapeWind which will create clean renewable energy, that will also reduce carbon dioxide and other gases that help cause global warming that these same Politicians here in our state have been fighting to not allow the project from ever being built. Can you please remind them that; "We must have the courage and commitment to change,"
For decades, the country has chosen delay over decisive action" and "rigid ideology has overshadowed sound science." Amen! Can't wait to see this happen so we can make a change here in the Peoples Republic of Massachusetts.
Green house emissions?? Why don't the check the eurpean autos and first look at China and Russia,. If anything should be done about emissions, let the president go there. I guess the president doesn't care about the economy, If he has his way nobaody will be able to drives cars, THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO AFFORD IT
Jay
Dr. K, how about you take your head OUT of the sand? No one said "global warming" meant that all of a sudden MA was going to turn into the Bahamas. The issue is "global" (hence the name, see?), meaning the average global temperature continues to slowly creep upwards over time. This doesn't mean that there won't be cold years, cold months, or whatever. It does mean that the temperature continues to rise. Look around you in MA - I can remember how ponds and lakes used to freeze over for the whole winter, whereas now that simply doesn't happen. The pond near my childhood home no longer even freezes over, yet I have so many memories of ice-skating on it a couple decades ago. Yes, we still have sub-zero days in MA, and no one expects that to disappear for many many years. But that doesn't mean that the average annual temperature didn't go up.
Thank you for the being the voice of reason, BobW1955. DoctorK...you are obvously not a doctor of meterological science...not that it takes more than an an elementary education to realize that we are still warming, and the recent period of relative "cold" is close to normal. I'd suggest you be the one who sticks your head in the sand.
Doctor K, you obviously have no concept what gobal warming is. It certainly is not defined GLOBALLY by assuming that if Massachusetts hasn't become the tropics then it isn't so. And you are NO doctor, I can guaranty that.
Thank you for the being the voice of reason, BobW1955. DoctorK...you are obvously not a doctor of meterological science...not that it takes more than an an elementary education to realize that we are still warming, and the recent period of relative "cold" is close to normal. I'd suggest you be the one who sticks your head in the sand.
Another great move by the genius president - different emissions standards for each state! Can you imagine the how expensive and ill-performing the vehicles manufactured in response to this regulatory nightmare will be?
At least this puts him at odds with the UAW, which should be a source of good humor.
If Detroit doesn't want to meet these standards after the billions of dollars given to them, they can back out of those markets and abandon it to someone who does want to give it a try. The jobs can move to the forward thinking companies.
I think the comment blogs on the Globe have one of the highest concentrations of flat-earth type reactionary nutjobs in the US.
While federal guidelines would be better, the auto companies could just decide to retool to these standards ( since they sure aren't going to give up on the huge California market, a market larger than many countries) and sell the cars across the country.
Time to step up to the plate after *years* of obstruction and foot dragging.
Um, global warming alarmists - the sacred 'global mean temperature' has been dropping for the past decade.
The scam is over.
We did this before in 1966, when California regulated carbon monoxide emissions and it worked wonders. It also worked for pesticides, ozone pollution, phthalates, and refrigerator standards.
The naysayers would be well served to look at the history of states' standards. This isn't a new idea, and it didn't result in a regulatory nightmare or increased costs in the past. It resulted in dramatic improvements to our vehicles (and many other technologies).
Doctor K, clearly your doctorate does not come from an accredited institution. If it did, you wouldn't be making such misinformed statements.
Hey "Pro America" genius, states having different standards doesn't mean cars need to be made with all different standards, it just means it would be in the best interest of automakers to manufacture all cars with standards to meet whatever state has the strictest standard. It's not even anything new. California has had tougher standards for a long time, and manufacturers just adapted to CA standards. And if an automaker doesn't want to adapt, they can lose out on the business, and let a different manufacturer build to those standards. It's call the free market system. And if states had been able to do this sooner, American automakers would have had to adapt earlier, instead of letting foreign automakers build these type of cars consumers want anyhow, and American autmoaker might have actually not needed a bailout.
AL5000 you can't spell garuanty so you aren't a doctor either fool
Man-made global warming is the greatest hoax in 100 years. Next they will claim that cow flatulance is to blame. Oops.
Global Warming is nothing more than an excuse for liberal politicians to push their lifestyle agendas on to the rest of us. Socialists don't hate CO2, they hate the companies that produce CO2 and would quickly find another reason to hate them if this issue proves to be false like so many in the past. Most liberals have what Peter Schweizer would call a "Do as I say, not as I do" lifestyle. I just call them hypocrites. Gore travels the globe in private jet, rides around in limos, owns a huge houseboat and an energy guzzling house. Way to convince me Al.