Since our last update (April 21), we have seen some important developments regarding Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolutions. So far, three resolutions have become law and four more have cleared both chambers. Although we have not received any information that these will be sent to the president’s desk in the coming days, we continue to monitor their status as they could soon be on the move.
The most consequential development is the announcement that House Republicans will press ahead and vote on three resolutions that target waivers granted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to the state of California to develop vehicle emissions guidelines. The implications of this move are profound, both for its potential impact on emissions from the transportation sector and for the precedent it will be setting regarding the role of the CRA in undoing policies that fall outside the scope of the law.
California’s vehicle emissions standards and the Clean Air Act
The Clean Air Act’s special exemption for California (included in Section 117 of the law) provides the state the authority to set stricter standards for tailpipe emissions and allows other states to adopt California’s limits. Despite this provision, California still needs to request a waiver from the EPA whenever it seeks to make new rules for vehicle exhaust or change existing rules on the books. Since 1968 (when the federal government granted the first waiver), the state has received dozens of these exemptions.
So far, 17 states have adopted the state’s previous emissions rules. This means that California’s impact extends well beyond its borders. In a very real sense, rules from California can accelerate low-emission and electric vehicle adoption and associated cost and emissions reductions at the national level.
These benefits make the adoption of California’s standards critical for decarbonizing the transportation sector, especially with the current presidential administration committed to erasing every trace of climate policy developed during the Biden years. Unfortunately, California’s rules — and its ability to set its own standards — are currently under threat from the CRA.
CRA resolutions and California’s clean car rules
Despite clear disqualifying opinions from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the Senate parliamentarian, Republican lawmakers in the House are moving forward with CRA resolutions for California’s Advanced Clean Cars II, Advanced Clean Trucks, and low nitrogen oxides standards. Senate Republicans have yet to decide if they are going to vote on the companion CRA resolutions that have been introduced in the Senate.
House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, who plans the floor schedule, has three CRA resolutions on the docket for this week, targeting California waivers:
- H.J.Res.87: Providing congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to ‘‘California State Motor Vehicle and Engine Pollution Control Standards; Heavy-Duty Vehicle and Engine Emission Warranty and Maintenance Provisions; Advanced Clean Trucks; Zero Emission Airport Shuttle; Zero-Emission Power Train Certification; Waiver of Preemption; Notice of Decision.’’ (Sponsored by Rep. James / Energy and Commerce Committee)
- H.J.Res.88: Providing congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to ‘‘California State Motor Vehicle and Engine Pollution Control Standards; Advanced Clean Cars II; Waiver of Preemption; Notice of Decision.’’ (Sponsored by Rep. Joyce / Energy and Commerce Committee)
- H.J.Res.89: Providing congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to ‘‘California State Motor Vehicle and Engine and Nonroad Engine Pollution Control Standards; The ‘Omnibus’ Low NOX Regulation; Waiver of Preemption; Notice of Decision.’’ (Sponsored by Rep. Obernolte / Energy and Commerce Committee)
Additionally, there are two more resolutions on the docket that target endangered species and public lands management rules:
- H.J.Res.60: Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the National Park Service relating to ‘‘Glen Canyon National Recreation Area: Motor Vehicles.’’ (Sponsored by Rep. Maloy / Natural Resources Committee)
- H.J.Res.78: Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service relating to ‘‘Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Species Status for the San Francisco Bay-Delta Distinct Population Segment of the Longfin Smelt.’’ (Sponsored by Rep. LaMalfa / Natural Resources Committee)
Final reminder: Building a People’s Regulatory Agenda
As we mentioned in our last update, the Center for Progressive Reform and the Coalition for Sensible Safeguards will host a webinar on Building a People’s Regulatory Agenda Through Rulemaking Petitions this Thursday, May 1. The webinar will explore the strategic value of a coordinated public campaign to leverage the federal Administrative Procedure Act’s (APA) rulemaking petition process to respond to the Trump administration’s attacks on our system of regulatory safeguards. Please RSVP or sign up to receive a recording of the webinar here. Our panelists include:
- Sharon Block, Center for Progressive Reform Member Scholar and Board Member; Professor of Practice and Executive Director of the Center for Labor and a Just Economy, Harvard Law School; and former Acting Administrator, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs during the Biden administration
- Sid Shapiro, Center for Progressive Reform Member Scholar and Board Chair, and Fletcher Chair in Administrative Law, Wake Forest University School of Law
- Daniel Walters, Center for Progressive Reform Member Scholar and Associate Professor of Law, Texas A&M University School of Law
- James Goodwin, Policy Director, Center for Progressive Reform (Moderator)
