Choice in Automobile Retail Sales Act of 2023

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WALBERG. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of my bill, H.R. 4468, the Choice in Automobile Retail Sales Act, or the CARS Act.

In April, the Biden administration's EPA opposed a rule setting light- and medium-duty tailpipe emissions standards so stringently that the EPA expects the proposal would force two-thirds of new light- and medium-duty vehicles sold in 2032 to be electric.

There is no hiding that the proposed rule is an electric vehicle mandate. Not only does this EV mandate display breathtaking government overreach into the auto industry, but it is also unaffordable, unattainable, and unrealistic for American consumers.

EVs are $13,000 more expensive than the average, gas-fueled vehicle. Repairs to an EV cost $2,300 more on average, leading to higher insurance costs, over $500 annually.

The proposed standards are also unattainable. Our grid cannot handle the power load that is required, plus most of the country lacks the charging infrastructure needed for the mandate.

We also don't have access to all the critical minerals to produce the vehicles or the capacity to refine those minerals for use in batteries. China controls most critical mineral mines, processing, and manufacturing for EVs. China has 78 percent of the world's cell manufacturing capacity for EV batteries.

Have we already forgotten the disastrous realities of overreliance on China for our supply chain? I have yet to hear a constituent say we need our supply chains to be more reliant on China.

Opponents of the CARS Act argue that EVs are growing in popularity and prices are dropping. If that is the case, why is the mandate necessary? Just last week, nearly 4,000 car dealers sent a letter to the administration pleading with them to pump the brakes on the proposed rule, citing lack of demand.

The range of EVs is another concern. Currently, one charge couldn't even get me across my district. EVs have almost 80 percent more issues and are less reliable than other vehicles.

Let me be clear: I am not against EVs. I am against EV mandates. A single EV battery requires the mining of hundreds of thousands of pounds of minerals. Those minerals are then refined using energy from China's coal plants. Ironically, an EV mandate is not a silver bullet to reduce global emissions.

Sadly, the biggest loser for this mandate may be the American autoworker, since significantly less labor is required to assemble EVs. The future of those working at engine plants, like the one in my district, are now in peril, too. The administration should side with consumers and innovators, not pick winners and losers.

EVs will play a significant role in the future of the industry, but so should hybrids and other solutions as they become more functional, reliable, affordable, and chosen by the consumer.

Madam Speaker, let's allow consumers to have access to affordable and reliable cars, encourage American innovation, and set us up to prevail over China.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source