On the recordJanuary 31, 2012
I thank the gentleman for yielding and bringing this to our attention. It's a critical matter facing our country. It has a direct impact on job creation, and I regret the way it's headed. That impact is adverse. And so we rise tonight, I believe all of us do, in defense of the folks who would be most directly impacted by it, the folks who are producing our cars, the folks who are selling and servicing our cars and the related industries. I come to this body, and I know we all do, regardless of political affiliation, with the idea that we are first Americans. And I always try to find where do we agree. I start out tonight thinking we surely agree that it's a good idea for fuel economy standards and performance to increase over time. We share that with our colleagues on the other side. Yet that is also regrettably the point of demarcation because there is a sharp contrast, I believe, between where the administration is headed with this. This is yet a third level of regulation on an industry that is already highly regulated. The Department of Transportation, the State of California itself, and now, and I believe unwisely so, the administration is allowing, in fact, encouraging the EPA to inject itself into this. There are multiple flaws in this path that I believe the administration is on through the EPA. {time} 2020 I just want to touch on one, Judge. Because as you noted, I've had the privilege of being in this great industry for a long time.…





