Joe Barton: “I said mild opposition because it is exactly what it is. I chair the committee of jurisdiction that would have this…”

“I said mild opposition because it is exactly what it is. I chair the committee of jurisdiction that would have this amendment, and we have been working with the Congresswoman from Connecticut to try to perfect her amendment. She has been very gracious to come up to me on the floor, and then her staff and committee staff have been working, and we really thought that earlier in the week or late last week we had an amendment that everybody could agree to. For various reasons, that was not agreed to, so we have the situation today. At the close of this debate, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Rogers), a member of the committee of jurisdiction, is going to offer a perfecting amendment to the Johnson amendment. I am going to support that at the appropriate time. We support the goal of the Johnson amendment. She is trying to get consumers fair and accurate information when they go into a showroom or are thinking about purchasing a new vehicle. She states, and I agree, that the consumer has a right to know what the fuel economy is of that particular vehicle; and under current law, the way the tests are conducted, there is some discrepancy, as she has pointed out in her statement in support of her amendment. Having said that, there are those that have reviewed her amendment and think that it could be a backdoor approach to CAFE standard increases. We just had the debate on the Boehlert-Markey amendment.…”