[Pages H117-H118]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                CALIFORNIA RESTRICTIONS ON GAS VEHICLES

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
California (Mr. LaMalfa) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. LaMALFA. Madam Speaker, this morning I highlight a piece of 
legislation I intend to cosponsor that is sponsored by the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Joyce), my good colleague. It is known as the 
Preserving Choice in Vehicle Purchases Act.
  The bill aims to prevent the U.S. EPA from issuing Clean Air Act 
waivers that would enable State-level bans or restrictions on gas and 
diesel vehicles. This bill would ensure that Americans can select 
vehicles based on their individual needs and financial situations 
without undue government interference.
  My home State of California is once again leading on the wrong 
things. The agency called the California Air Resources Board is 
intending to ban the sale of gas and diesel-powered cars, trucks, and 
SUVs by 2035, only 10 model years from now.
  Now, who the heck is CARB, especially since this has far-reaching 
effects across the rest of the country? There are six or seven other 
States that are seeking to emulate what CARB is doing.
  This regulation seeks to force a transition to electric vehicles 
regardless of their affordability, availability, or practicality for 
many residents and families. The Biden administration EPA has granted 
the necessary waiver very recently at the end of this era, allowing 
CARB to enforce this mandate at the State of California level, which 
sets a precedent that can lead to similar bans in other States across 
the country. Believe me, it will happen. Several other States are 
already looking at this.
  You end up with the manufacturers having to produce two different 
types of vehicles for this State or that State, making them more 
expensive, and heaven knows the difficulty that is producing electric 
vehicles anyway.
  Rural Americans and rural Californians face long commutes and rely 
heavily on reliable, affordable vehicles. I represent a very rural 
area. There are people who are afraid to take electric vehicles very 
far with the inability to know if they can charge them and make it 
back.
  The mandate poses significant financial challenges, as EVs remain 
more expensive than their gas- and diesel-powered counterparts. They 
have more expensive tires, and they are harder to get parts for, among 
other things.
  There is a very, very limited charging infrastructure. The fact that 
the Biden administration has put aside billions for charging stations 
and only built about seven or eight in the whole country over the last 
3 years shows that it is very impractical.
  EVs are an unviable option for many. The mandate would not only 
increase the cost of living for individuals and families but reduce 
transportation options for many rural residents and even urban 
residents that maybe have a car that is already paid for that they 
would soon see they wouldn't have the ability to keep. Additionally, 
part of the mandate is quietly eliminating fueling stations, making 
fuel more expensive, and making fuel harder to produce. In my home 
State of California and the country, when they ban the pipeline coming 
from Canada, it makes fuel harder to get. It is coming from all edges. 
Taxing people out of this is part of their goal.
  Of course, the power grid of my home State, California, is already 
struggling to deliver electricity to meet existing energy demands, with 
the currently frequent blackouts and energy shortages. We have these 
blackouts in my part of the State, and we are starting to see them in 
southern California with the unfortunate massive suffering going on due 
to the wildfires. They have to preemptively shut off the power to 
particular areas if they think the wind is going to blow too hard and 
cause foliage to blow off trees, shrubs, and whatever onto the power 
lines and cause an outage or a blackout and, therefore, a fire along 
with it, as has happened many times in my district.

  Mandating this shift to electric vehicles would place additional 
strain on the grid, leading to more outages and much higher energy 
costs. California has not demonstrated the capacity to expand the grid 
infrastructure. Indeed, they are tearing down dams in my district--and 
they have their eye on more--that make clean, CO<inf>2</inf>-free 
hydroelectric power. The grid gets even tighter due to this. This 
raises serious concerns about the feasibility of this mandate, yet they 
force it forward.
  The practicality of converting to all these electric vehicles, as 
well as the appliances that California, Biden, and others are trying to 
do with electric stoves, water heaters, and all that, means where are 
the materials and the minerals going to come from to produce these 
electric appliances and vehicles.
  We can't mine as it is. On average, it takes 29 years to build a 
copper mine in this country. Are we going to import it all? Are we 
going to have poor kids and slave labor in other countries continue to 
supply us so we can be pristine?
  CARB's members are not actually directly accountable to the public. 
The resources board is appointed by the Governor. They don't have to 
answer to anybody, and they frequently don't. We have a direct threat 
to consumer choice.
  Indeed, this is what Governor Newsom wants us to have, fires that 
burn out our vehicles. We need to have him stand aside and let 
President Trump lead the way on allowing us to have our vehicles.

[[Page H118]]

  

                          ____________________