Bill Overview
Title: To repeal the corporate average fuel economy standards.
Description: This bill repeals the corporate average fuel economy standards, which regulate how far automobiles must travel on a gallon of fuel.
Sponsors: Rep. Perry, Scott [R-PA-10]
Target Audience
Population: Consumers of automobiles
Estimated Size: 231000000
- The repeal of corporate average fuel economy standards will directly impact consumers of automobiles, as it will affect vehicle fuel efficiency.
- Automobile manufacturers will also be impacted as they no longer have to meet fuel efficiency targets.
- The environment may be impacted due to potential increases in fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions.
- Fuel economy standards are relevant globally as car manufacturers and consumers exist worldwide.
Reasoning
- The target population for this policy includes all automobile consumers in the U.S., approximately 231 million people. Since the budget limits the potential for subsidies or compensations, the primary impact on individuals would be changes in vehicle cost and fuel expenditure.
- People with lower incomes might be more sensitive to changes in fuel efficiency as fuel costs represent a larger portion of their expenses.
- Manufacturers would benefit from reduced regulatory compliance costs, potentially impacting employment and investments in the auto industry, though these impacts might not be immediate.
- Environmental impacts could indirectly affect health and wellbeing over the long-term due to increased emissions.
Simulated Interviews
Factory worker (Texas)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Worried about potential increased fuel costs if fuel efficiency decreases.
- Relies on the truck for commuting and cannot afford a new, more fuel-efficient vehicle.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 5 |
Software engineer (California)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Believes the repeal is a step back for environmental progress.
- Worried about the increase in greenhouse gas emissions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 8 |
Automotive engineer (Michigan)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The repeal will reduce pressure on compliance, but it may disrupt ongoing projects focused on fuel efficiency.
- Concerned about long-term competitiveness of U.S. cars globally.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 7 |
Retired teacher (Florida)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Has concerns about increased living expenses.
- Wants to preserve the environment for grandchildren.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 7 |
Public transportation driver (New York)
Age: 50 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Thinks it might not impact them directly since they don't own a vehicle.
- Concerned about air quality in urban areas.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Small business owner (Colorado)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Hopeful for reduced costs of inventory as compliance costs drop.
- Might face challenges if consumer demand shifts towards more efficient vehicles abroad.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
College student (Illinois)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Indifferent as he does not own a vehicle.
- Slightly concerned about future vehicle emissions affecting climate.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Truck driver (Ohio)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Worried about potential increase in fuel costs significantly impacting business margins.
- Improved fuel efficiency helps keep operational costs down.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 6 |
Environmental scientist (Washington)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Disappointed by the policy, sees it as detrimental to environmental progress.
- Advocates for maintaining or increasing fuel efficiency standards.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 8 |
Retired (Arizona)
Age: 65 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Concerned about possible increases in fuel prices due to decreased fuel efficiency.
- Tries to minimize driving and hopes costs don’t rise.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $5000000000 (Low: $3000000000, High: $7000000000)
Year 2: $5200000000 (Low: $3200000000, High: $7200000000)
Year 3: $5400000000 (Low: $3400000000, High: $7400000000)
Year 5: $5800000000 (Low: $3600000000, High: $7800000000)
Year 10: $7000000000 (Low: $4000000000, High: $9000000000)
Year 100: $20000000000 (Low: $14000000000, High: $30000000000)
Key Considerations
- The environmental impact of increased emissions due to reduced fuel efficiency may lead to long-term economic costs.
- Potential market transition as consumers may still demand higher efficiency vehicles despite regulatory changes.
- Implications for federal and state revenues through altered fuel consumption patterns, vehicle manufacturing practices, and sales.