The end of California’s grip on US EV policy is nearly over!
Trump Smartly Employs the Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act allows Congress to nullify rules taken in the final 60 days of a prior administration.
Trump is using the CRA to kill California’s ability to set EV standards for the Nation.
Many Democrats are howling, but 35 House Democrats support Trump.
What Is the CRA?
The Congressional Review Act (CRA) is a tool that Congress may use to pass legislation overturning a rule issued by a federal agency. When Congress passes a law, it often grants rulemaking authority to federal agencies to implement provisions of the law. That delegation of rulemaking authority, and the rules issued by federal agencies under this authority, is a crucial component of the policymaking process.
The CRA was enacted in 1996 as part of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. Under the CRA, before a rule can take effect, an agency must submit the rule to Congress and the Government Accountability Office (GAO).
Upon receipt of the rule by Congress, Members of Congress have a specified time period during which to submit and take action on a joint resolution of disapproval overturning the rule. If both houses pass the joint resolution, it is sent to the President for signature or veto. If the President were to veto the joint resolution, Congress could vote to override the veto. Enactment of the joint resolution would take the rule out of effect or prevent it from going into effect, and the agency would be prohibited from issuing a rule that is “substantially the same” without further authorization from Congress.
The best part of the CRA is that it only requires a simple majority in Congress and is thus filibuster-proof in the Senate.
The Politics of EVs Have Changed
I am pleased to report The Politics of EVs Have Changed
On Thursday the House voted in strong bipartisan fashion to overturn the EV mandate the Biden Administration let California impose on the rest of America.
The vote was 246-164 for a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to repeal the waiver that the Environmental Protection Agency granted California for its EV mandate. The waiver provision was written to let California address smog. But Sacramento Democrats lobbied the Biden EPA to let it apply to carbon emissions.
The mandate is ludicrously impossible to meet. It says zero-emissions vehicles would have to account for 43% of an auto maker’s sales by 2027 in California and the dozen other states that have signed up for its rules. It rises to 68% by 2030.
The House vote is especially striking because of the 35 Democratic ayes. That included three of six Democrats from Michigan, three of five from Ohio, four of 12 from Texas, and even two from the High Climate Church of California (Luis Correa and George Whitesides). Let’s hope they’re not excommunicated by Pope Gavin (Newsom) I.
Democrats Howl Republicans Flouting the Rules
The American Prospect comments How Republicans Are Flouting the Rules of the Congressional Review Act
The CRA was passed in 1996 to empower congressional oversight of federal rulemaking, and is currently being used by Republicans to overturn Biden-era rules on the environment, banking, and more. Once a federal regulation is overturned by a CRA resolution of disapproval and receives the president’s signature, it is gone for good: The rule becomes null and void, and the government is prohibited from publishing any “substantially similar” rule in the future. What’s more, the CRA bars judicial review, giving Congress the final word in a rule’s overturning.
On February 14, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administrator Lee Zeldin asked Congress to review waivers issued by Biden’s EPA, suggesting to congressional Republicans that they should be the subject of a CRA resolution of disapproval. The waivers allow California to set its own pollution standards for certain vehicles under the Clean Air Act (CAA) without being preempted by the EPA’s national standards.
“Republicans may regret setting this precedent for expanding the CRA,” he added.
At the end of the day, despite that leverage that Democrats could take advantage of—if they have enough courage to do so—moving forward with this resolution of disapproval would be a dangerous overreach. If Republicans choose not to abide by the CRA’s definition of a rule, there’s nothing stopping them from also sidestepping the law’s 60-day time limit or its one-rule-at-a-time provision.
That would give Congress even more power than the CRA already allows, putting all types of federal rulemaking at risk.
Economic and EV Madness
It is preposterous that California can set EPA and EV standards for the nation. But here we are.
This started with the 1967 Clean Air Act when Congress made an exception for California due to its history of air pollution problems.
Since then, the EPA made rules that took on a life of their own. It has since morphed into zero-emissions standards such that vehicles would have to account for 43% of an auto maker’s sales by 2027 in California.
Ten states latched on to this madness.
Republicans in Congress Use Obscure Law to Roll Back Biden-Era Regulations
Instead of praising the end of economic madness, the New York Times moans Republicans in Congress Use Obscure Law to Roll Back Biden-Era Regulations
In recent weeks, the G.O.P. has pushed through a flurry of legislation to cancel regulations on matters large and small, from oversight of firms that emit toxic pollutants to energy efficiency requirements for walk-in freezers and water heaters.
To do so, they are employing a little-known 1996 law, the Congressional Review Act, that allows lawmakers to reverse recently adopted federal regulations with a simple majority vote in both chambers. It is a strategy they used in 2017 during Mr. Trump’s first term and are leaning on again as they work to find ways to steer around Democratic opposition and make the most of their governing trifecta of the House, the Senate and the White House.
But this time, Republicans are testing the limits of the law in a way that could vastly expand its use and undermine the filibuster, the Senate rule that effectively requires 60 votes to move forward with any major legislation.
Because resolutions of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act need only a majority vote, they are some of the only legislation that can avoid a filibuster in the Senate. This allows them to circumvent the partisan gridlock that stands in the way of most significant bills. [Sounds Great to Me]
Now Republicans are trying to go much further with the law, including using it to effectively attack state regulations blessed by the federal government. The House this week passed three disapproval resolutions that would eliminate California’s strict air pollution standards for trucks and cars by rejecting waivers from the Environmental Protection Agency that allowed them to take effect.
The move would also permanently prevent federal regulators from writing a similar rule in the future. Both the Government Accountability Office and the Senate parliamentarian, who is in charge of enforcing the chamber’s rules, have said that the E.P.A. waivers do not constitute federal regulations and thus are not subject to the Congressional Review Act.
The pressure now falls on Senator John Thune, Republican of South Dakota and the majority leader, to decide whether he will proceed with the measures anyway, sidestepping the parliamentarian in a move that would undermine the filibuster.
Democrats argue that Republicans’ efforts to kill the E.P.A. waivers amount to illegal overreach on states’ rights. They say the drive could inadvertently subject a plethora of executive actions, such as leasing rights for oil and gas fields as well as waivers for state Medicaid programs, to congressional review.
Either way, experts warned that Republicans may come to regret reading the statute so broadly. Michael Thorning, the director of the Structural Democracy Project at the Bipartisan Policy Center, a nonprofit think tank, said doing so could hand Democrats a powerful tool to undo regulations that they dislike when they one day return to power.
When President Joseph R. Biden Jr. entered office in 2021, congressional Democrats took a cue from Republicans and reinstated Obama-era caps on methane emissions that the Trump administration spent years working to overturn through executive action.
Hoot of the Month
Democrats spend 4 years moaning about the need to kill the filibuster in order to pack the courts with Democrats, change the number of Supreme Court Justices, and pass God only knows what environmental madness.
These hypocrites now oppose using the CRA for what it was intended for, ending inane regulations.
Allowing California to set preposterous environmental stands for the nation, enforced by EPA rules was among the worst.
And just like that, Democrats suddenly want the filibuster to prevent changing inane rules and regulations.
Hypocrites on Both Sides
On March 14, 2025, I commented Hoot of the Day: House Republicans Suddenly Like Clean Energy Tax Breaks
21 House Republicans now like Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act incentives.
Pack of Republican Now Support
- No Medicaid rollbacks
- More food assistance
- Expansion of Inflation Reduction Act provisions to capture methane
- Reinstatement of State and Local Tax deduction (primary benefit big blue states)
All the Republicans want more military spending, and Trump Promises $1 trillion in Defense Spending for Next Year
And people think Trump will cut the budget.
Thank god! Maybe they can also go after all the appliance nonsense like electric stoves that cycle off and on that you cant hardly cook on. Morons. I dont want the place with chinas air quality but the epa needs their knees kicked in.
“It is preposterous that California can set EPA and EV standards for the nation.”
Just wait till China says that it’s preposterous that the USA can set standards for the beautiful Chinese cars, and American regulations should be amended accordingly.
The Chinese are smiling.
This was so far your best article this week. TO THE POINT, and it summarizes the ludicrous aspects of this ridiculous law. Your piece easily slays the absurdity of the goal which is altogether not feasible by any stretch.
All that Cal and the BIDEN CRIMINALS will have left is to negotiate a LATER DAY which they will attempt to push on America at the EARLIEST POSSIBLE FUTURE DATE which really means likely at least 50 more years.
We have: 1) NO INFRASTRUCTURE (power). 2) Unworkable EV cars which now are costing MORE money than anyone imagined to complete a charge-up. 3) EV’s cost us at least as much environmentally as Gas Munchers. 4) EV’s easily catch on fire and kill people. 5) EV batteries do not last nearly as long as a Gas Muncher (we owned a Hybrid & the EV Battery died and we were quoted $11,000 to replace it, which ended up that we got nothing for the car on Trade in.
That was IT for us. NEVER AGAIN will we accept an EV as our primary mode of transport.
In a nutshell: EV’s ARE A SCAM!
A lot of material in this rant, to be sure.
If you don’t like EVs, don’t buy one. Enjoy your life as an American that has lots and lots of market choices and availability.
But there’s no need to spread lies.
Expensive? My electric utility company charges me $5 to charge up (by 60% capacity) my EV to be able to travel at least 180 miles (ever more if I’m driving only in the city with regenerative braking). That’s an all-in price (no future oil changes, no belt changes, etc.). And that’s if I don’t use my own solar cells to charge it.
My new EV has a 100,000 mile guarantee on its drivetrain (motors) and battery. Sorry you made a personal bad decision to buy a used hybrid without a warranty, but quit crying. Most EVs now have the same warranty as ICEs.
Could keep going with your list, but I know you won’t listen so…
Aww, you made me feel badly about lying. I did not know better. I took the word from a friend who was complaining about EV charging Station costs which are really increasing.
There were two features that I did like: 1) Acceleration was awesome. 2) No fuel consumption for short trips.
“took the word from a friend” really says it all in six words
Dude, own your life, don’t rent it out to others
Rando, I took direct evidence from a friend, where I was visiting. He and his wife just took a 4500 mile trip in the USA, paying for refills.
Wanna guess what it costed? AND, his car MSRP was 3 times higher than my model from the Same Manufacturer for a Battery that has an 8-year Warranty. EV’s do not save any money, but as I said: they LAUNCH with great power and I like the quiet, no-fuel consumption for around-town trips to the Grocery or to school.
Californication. Good tune. Accurate song title.
Until we have far higher capacity and faster charging I am out of the EV car scene.
Don’t get me wrong, I love driving some of the high performance EV versions for spirited drives and geeeeeezzzzz are they fast and stealth.
Sooooooo, when the solid state batteries and high speed charging networks get built out, I’ll be in line. Until then? Hydrocarbon burning noise makers for me!
I just love the sound of a V8 or a V12 at seven grand!
The very next question springs to mind: WHEN will we have those batteries?
If any of us knew for sure we’d be multi millionaires from investing in the right stocks at the right time.
Realistically I’d imagine 1-2 decades before they are in mass production in EV’s.
That is a good guestimate. I will be dead.
by the way the zeekr x starts at 18,000 https://www.zeekr.eu/models/x
Go out and buy one and then let us know how it goes. It is easy to guess what will happen to you.
easy to predict the future? You must be richer than Elon
meanwhile The US Chamber of Commerce is pushing the Trump administration to implement tariff exclusions for small businesses in order to “stave off a recession https://www.cnbc.com/2025/05/01/trump-tariffs-recession-chamber-of-commerce.html
Personally, I’m not affected or bothered by this vote or use of the CRA – as I don’t live in California and don’t plan to any time soon.
But, Mish, I don’t understand your use of the phrases or logic of “US EV policy” or “California’s ability to set EV standards for the Nation”.
This is the state of California restricting the future sales of certain automobiles within its borders to its own citizens. If someone doesn’t like that rule, they can leave the state or fight it. Good for them.
But how does that dictate the “EV standards for the Nation”? Just because the CA market is so big that auto makers will listen to it? How will you be affected in Utah? They can’t take away your own choice of your 4 Runner
It has been widely discussed that since California’s very large auto market & influence on other states, auto manufacturers would prefer to have a single emissions status in the U.S. It’s very expensive for mfgs. to have two different emissions regulations.
Of course, individual automakers may have preferences for what they produce (or maybe those – all? – that make EVs would love the guaranteed sales of the new vehicles), but customers make the final decision, right?
But one state – even a big one – not kowtowing to automakers’ production preferences is not the same as creating a “US EV policy”. Those automakers can still sell ICEs to every other state and still in California as well.
Again, how is that creating a national policy?
Eyes and ears closed, mouth open. A simple life. In my school days, we learned to read before writing. Life was tough back then.
Agree, Hubris. California is only 13% of the national population and their state GDP is roughly the same percentage of the national GDP. On the other hand, other blue states sometimes follow CA’s lead on policies.
Simple: it was CREATED due to negligence. BidenCO simply was too lazy, which was what they were all about anyway (LAZY GREED), and simply adopted it because they were all smoking the good shit.
Washington State (actually just Seattle, but they have the numbers to run roughshod over everyone else) has law on the books to do what California does. I believe Portland (same problem) also follows where CA leads.
You are correct. The entire LEFT COAST adopted it. Then, of course, they discovered that GAS TAXES dumped to an extent and now they are going to METER EV’s to make sure that EV owners pay their “fair share.” That seems counter-intuitive until you realize that GREED and AVARICE are part of the pattern of those greedy pricks called Democrats and Republicans. THEY ALL GET THEIR CUTS of the LOOT from THEIR WORK. The work is the be: LOBBIED and then get their cuts. This is how it works with the MIC.
Absolutely, if you’re a leader, lots of times people voluntarily follow.
That’s not the same as being in charge of national policies (by definition, that’s Congress)
Come on: do some more reading. It is ALL over the Internet that Cal lead the absurd standards and set unrealistic goals and then the rest of the BidenCO crowd adopted it because of course they are LAZY mentally and wanted their CUT of the EV action. Even Musk got HIS cut!
As is often the case, your rants on this are all over the place.
Yes, I have read, not sure others have, but I’ll summarize again:
Biden & Congress let CA makes its own citizen car purchase rules for the future (for previously passed environmental reasons);
Yes, some other states followed with similar policies because they liked them;
If left intact, automakers would have to adjust production to sell those particular vehicles in those particular states OR have fewer overall sales;
NO national policy regarding the legislatively mandated number of zero-emission EVs was passed by Congress or EO’d by Biden.
Requiring front air bags in all new production cars was mandated as a national policy by Congress previously.
I understand a lot of people don’t like such rules; good for you. But CA mandating EV rules for its citizens and borders is NOT a national policy. At least be intellectually honest
Primary example of where this happened: Low lead law for plumbing parts. CA and NH I believe passed the LLL’s in circa 2014. Manufactures of plumbing parts scrambled to produce the new products to comply. Most manufactures did not want to carry dual inventory so basically forced everyone to buy the new more expensive products and adopt the new standards. This paved the way for Obama to pass a federal law for the new standards.
This law was also a scam in itself. The amount of lead in our water system was negligible at best and manufactures found ways to manipulate the system with no real change in materials.
Food “assistance” is the reason food prices are skyrocketing. Everyone in the country would be able to afford food, if a select subset weren’t receving “assistance” that gets spent indiscriminately without any regard whatsoever for price. The state of California alone doles out more than $15 billion on food “assistance”.
I have to wonder how many of the decisions attributed to Biden were actually made by the team who surrounded him as his mental acuity declined?
Did they take the opportunity to advance their own progressive agendas while Biden AND his VP Harris were mentally AWOL
Do you really think CEOs and the POTUS come up with all policy ideas on their own? That’s why they have department heads and other officials to sift through ideas and propose the best policy solutions. That they bring their own prejudices and inclinations to the process is why it is important to pick the correct people for the jobs. People that are experts in the subject matter.
Actually POTUS has got to be an easy job just look at our last two Presidents, that should tell everything you need to know.
They were not AWOL. They were brainless at the start and simply deployed their saliva to make decisions. Their Saliva likely was tainted with diseases which included the inability to think.
Probably most. That’s what happens when you have a weak president.
In Biden’s case it was even worse because he owed a huge political debt to the far left woke/green for their support when the party decided to push aside Bernie (who was easily winning the nomination) for Biden.
Giving California that much power to bypass Congress regarding in setting national laws is arguably unconstitutional. Agencies in the executive branch should have no power to write regulations, only carry out laws.
Maybe the rest of the world’s flood of affordable Chinese EVs will ease the pressure on the USA for its holding onto fossil fuels, in terms of global oil demand and even environmental quality?
bwahahahaha!
We’ll just allocate more subsidies to the petroleum industry.
GOOD.
EVs will take over naturally, like cars from horse carriages.
Simply, there is a growing demand for self-driving, and no one is really planning to put self-driving into ICE vehicles. The relationship is symbiotic.
Cars replaced horse carriages VERY quickly. In under 20 years and the reason it probably took that long was because manufacturing hadn’t perfected the assembly line.
In the same manner, streaming obliterated Blue-Ray/HD DVDs in less than 10 years.
In both cases one tech was vastly superior to the old one and was replaced as fast as possible. ICE vs EV isn’t near as clear cut. EV’s are still not yet superior despite being around for over 100 years (or even 15 years if you just want to consider the time Tesla started selling). It’s likely we are still 1-2 decades away from EV’s being superior to ICE vehicles for all cases (cold weather, towing, refill time etc). That’s why there has to be mandates and subsidies (something you didn’t see for Streaming vs DVD or Cars vs Horses).
There’s an army of seniors who don’t want to drive, but have to. The same seniors don’t like to sit in an electronic gizmo that talks back to them.
At last America woke up from this nightmare from California Dreaming.
Big thumbs up. Thanks for reporting this.
What difference does it make if I burn the hydrocarbon in my engine, or in the generator that creates the electricity to charge my EV? Very little.
Therefore, unless we build more nuke plants and dams—something Liberals are against—EVs are a net waste.
California does not even have the electrical generation capacity to charge the EVs they want us to switch to.🙄
I propose a giant fleet of stationary bikes with generators to be ridden by fat people.
Well if you live in California it actually matters a LOT where you burn that hydrocarbon. Burn it along the coast and you get smog because the air can’t rise over the mountains. Burn it inland on the other side of the mountains and transmit the power to the coast and you can avoid the smog.
But it’s much more expensive to generate power inland and send it back to the coasts. CA already has some of the highest electric costs in the country. And no, we are not going to build dams that kill the fish. In fact, we have been tearing down dams to restore the natural water flow for some time.
We have so many politicians with their hands in the till that no one can get an explanation as to why things are as expensive as they are and never, ever decline in price.
OIl has declined more than $15/bbl over the last couple of months. Out gas prices have hardly budged. Premium at Costco the other day was $4.89/gal.
Another example: We have something like TWENTY SEVEN (27!) different transit organizations in the 9 county SF Bay Area, all jockeying to build or deploy or control transit options from highways to trains to buses to scooters to whatever moves at the public’s expense. All are unelected political patronage jobs. All get in the way of the others and so very little is coordinated. No one ever suggests consolidating them.
There is much more of this crap across all levels of government here. Take a look at the website Calmatters.org if interested.
Wienerschnitzel in San Jose sells 5 chili dogs for $8.99. You have to save where you can.
Did you get the coupon from a Pepto Bismol package?
Is it that much more expensive to build power plants in the central valley and ship power back to the coast? Not sure Cali has built many plants in the last 2 decades (for green reasons of course) and the reason electricity prices are so high is taxes combined with fact Cali imports a lot of power from other states.
On the other hand I lived in the Bay Area (Walnut Creek) from 03-05 so I know all about the disjointed transit systems between those various cities/towns etc. At least in those days Bart functioned well enough to get to As/Raiders games and into San Fran for Giants games / tourist visits.
Hey, CA tried to strip felony age limits on procuring child prostitutes. Nice place. Yeah, we should all do what those nut jobs in the CA legislature want. No thanks.
The same legislator – Scott Wiener – wanted to lower the penalty for knowingly giving someone AIDS. https://img.ifunny.co/images/41ebf080155d01f19144677d513011c465a4cffb409da6baebc89ae09a427601_1.jpg
Wiener puts his W. where he shouldn’t and is all for child sex grooming. So he is a star in CA politics.
The dems voted against Ilan. Trump systemic change is too fast for them. The dems sent their clowns to the circus.
China’s already over 40%. So really, only ludicrous for us backwards 3rd world types.
China burns more than half of the world’s coal and is still building more coal fired power plants.
Short sighted not to embrace and support EVs. To bad Mish and others don’t believe in pure capitalism wherein a company must consider all of the economic costs. Non smoking lung cancer is sky rocketing, childhood asthma is off the charts and climate change intensified weather is costing billions. And yet, Trump has made EVs unpopular because he can’t see further than one week down the road.
Meanwhile, China is fully embracing EVs.
I am guessing Mish has never driven an EV and has range anxiety.
Climate change intensified weather? Madame, pls turn off main stream media.
You are confusing socialism and capitalism. In a Mish world, EVs will happen when they can compete economically. I imagine, that Mish would consider the $15000 EV, and I believe a lot of folks here would consider one at that price. As for range anxiety, considering where he lives, that is an issue. 😄
Byd announced 1500km range ( practically ?1200km ) and 5 min charge for 500km.
Price is very competitive to ICE ( eg. Toyota 15000$ EV in China ). Sorry, ICE. Your time is over.
China is also building a lot of coal plants. Last year, they began construction of 94.5 gigawatts of coal capacity, the most since 2015. If there’s going to be a lot of lung cancer, it’s going to be in China. They are burning coal to power EV’s. You tree huggers approve of that?
I have an open bet. If Trump cuts total spending by a penny I have to wear a MAGA hat for a week. I’m not concerned.
“Either way, experts warned that Republicans may come to regret reading the statute so broadly. Michael Thorning, the director of the Structural Democracy Project at the Bipartisan Policy Center, a nonprofit think tank, said doing so could hand Democrats a powerful tool to undo regulations that they dislike when they one day return to power.”
All this means is we’ll get double downs on woke crazy next time around when dems take congress and executive branch. Bonus woke crazy if they manage to pack the court. It’s the same show, different circus.
It’s time to leave the crazies tents.
If we get a weak Democrat president like Biden was then we definitely will. A stronger president will not bow down to the woke crazies.
But most definitely the Democrats will use this to undo some of the things Trump puts into place or even older stuff put into place decades ago.
Increasingly the country is becoming less governable over time more and more people move to one extreme or the other.
Looking at the last Canadian elections since both Liberals and Conservatives gained seats at the expense of the other parties whether Canada is moving to a two-party system? What are your thoughts please?
Not sure how relevant my thoughts are given I haven’t lived full time in Canada since 95.
The NDP party was essentially wiped out I believe because it lost it’s way. It used to be the party of labor (ie union workers, blue collar workers etc) but transformed itself into the green/social justice/woke party. That probably turned a lot of former voters off along with the decision to blindly keep Turdeau in power. So they had it coming.
The Block party in Quebec isn’t going away because it’s essentially the French party.
In essence this election was about Trump and that meant there were only 2 parties to vote for so of course they gained seats at the expense of the others.
Quebec is an outer and will always be. They will in all likelihood act as the kingmaker in Canadian politics even more I believe. Thanks for the input.
People are more easily manipulated today than 30 years ago. Cable news helped to separate people from the shared information and now social media accelerated that effort by 50x.
The people most delusional are ironically the most confident they are correct. They are the ones that question nothing. The Democratic party has morphed from a political party to a fundraising apparatus and now it’s a church, with unique liturgy that the woke mob must bless lest you get outcast.
You could write similar about the Republicans and their diety Trump.
Or maybe dem voters get a spine/nutsack/brain/common sense and vote in better people. But that would require admitting they’ve been conned by a congo line of carnival barkers for the last 10 years, and they’re too full of themselves to admit any wrong doing. So good luck with that!!