I suppose this falls under the old saw of "liberals want what they want, reality be damned", but this flight of fantasy is just a bit too much, and may destroy what's left of Detroit and the economy along with it. The Detroit Free Press reports:
The White House is ramping up its discussions with automakers and elected officials regarding fuel economy standards for 2017-25, and informed the Detroit Three that the government is considering boosting those requirements to 56 miles per gallon by 2025.
Why not 75? Why not just demand mass-production of the winged Pegasus, flying ET-style bicycles, and just to be multi-cultural, some Arabian-style flying carpets? The Left wants what it wants, to paraphrase a certain perverted producer, and reality is just an intrusion upon their own warped fantasies.
Of course, since we are dealing with the Obama Administration, a certain amount of duplicity is involved:
According to three sources familiar with the matter, White House officials began meeting with several members of Michigan's congressional delegation Tuesday, but did not reveal specifics on any target number they were considering.
On Wednesday, however, mid-level administration officials held separate meetings in Washington with Detroit's automakers -- during which they floated the figure of 56 m.p.g. Leaders of the UAW also were separately briefed on the matter.
...which pissed off a certain high-powered Democrat:
On Thursday, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., unexpectedly broached the issue during a Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing -- venting his frustration with Cass Sunstein, a regulatory administrator with the Office of Management and Budget.
"My questions to Cass Sunstein on Thursday were prompted by my surprise to learn that the administration had decided to lay down a scenario for regulation of vehicle fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions after telling us just the day before that no 'decision' had been made relative to those issues," Levin said in a statement. "While the administration's statement was technically accurate that no final decision has been made, I was surprised to find that they obviously had made a 'decision' -- to suggest a numerical scenario the very next day."
The White House would not comment specifically on whether administration officials had raised the prospect of 56 m.p.g. Spokesman Matt Lehrich said "no decision has yet been made yet, but our goal remains to propose the rule this September.
"No decision has been made" means "a decision has been made" in Obama-speak, and even our jilted Democratic Senator knows that. They quite blithely lied to him, of course, knowing he would object upfront, while being well aware that he will do very little to stop them besides fume and fester.
Will this miracle by government fiat be free? Ah...no. Via Ricochet:
The fuel efficiency technology also drives the cost of vehicles upward at a rapid rate. And with this utterly soviet standard, the increase will be astronomical. A study put out by the National Research Council last year estimated that a full hybrid vehicle could cut fuel use by about 50 percent -- but that it would drive the vehicle's price up by about $9,000. That may sound like a world in which we're all taking out second mortgages to drive a Prius, but keep this in mind: even that most iconic of hybrids (average of 50 MPG) doesn’t meet the administration’s proposed standards. And focusing on the retail price also doesn’t factor in the safety risks that often accompany more fuel-efficient cars (the efficiency is often achieved in part by creating a lighter – and thus more brittle – auto body).
And speaking of safety, I'll bet you fee much safer already, knowing that your new car will no longer contain a spare tire - all in the name of "efficiency", of course:
That spare tire in your trunk may be going the way of the typewriter and transistor radio.
Automakers are selling more cars without an extra wheel to trim weight, boost gas mileage and shave a few bucks off their costs.
But last month, about 13% of the more than 1 million vehicles sold in the U.S. did not offer an extra tire as standard equipment, according to a Los Angeles Times review of vehicle specifications and sales data.
And here's the kicker:
Spare tires are not required by federal regulators because they are not considered an essential safety feature.
That's Soviet-style "efficiency", folks. "Smart Government", and the such. While Obama and Lisa Jackson laud themselves for implementing regulations inconsistent with reality, your wives, daughters, and girlfriends will be driving around without a spare tire, the most basic of automotive fixes.
Will Obama and Lisa pat themselves on the back for adding even more innocent American bodies to the trail of the dead their policies leave behind?
Maybe not, but they won't feel a shred of guilt about the death of your kid sister on the side of the road, either, because their intentions were good, don't you know....