Live now to Andrew Wheeler and transportation secretary eland chow talked about the Trump Administration sent it to stop california from setting stricter fuel economy standards. Live coverage. In bringing together all of the components to complete this important step on behalf of the present for the american people. She is understood since this process began in 2017 the enormous benefits for consumers and especially the safety. I know she is in the engagement shortly following this across town so please join me in welcoming secretary chao. Secretary. [applause] hey, good morning. Thank you all so much for being here. Administrator Andrew Wheeler and are so pleased to announce a major step forward in President Trumps plan to help ensure that more americans have access to safer, more affordable, and cleaner new cars that meet their families needs. To what half years ago President Trump focused autoworkers in michigan and said we would review and revise the last administration unattainable fuel economy regulations. Those rules were making cars more expensive, and impeding safety, because consumers were being priced out of newark, safer vehicles. Our team of experts have been jointly working together conducting a long, thoughtful, and detailed review of these rules. And todays action is an important down payment on the president commitment. The one National Program that we are announcing today will ensure that there is one, and only one, set of National Fuel economy standards as Congress Mandated and intended. No state has the authority to opt out of the nations rules, and no state has a right to impose its policies on everybody else in our whole country. To do otherwise harms consumers, and damages the american economy. It should be noted that this rule only applies to fuel economy. It will not affect californias ability to refocus its efforts on fighting the worst air pollution in the country and comply with existing regulations. In the coming weeks we will also be publishing a seven part of the safe vehicle rule which will set new National Standards, fuel economy standards, pure and while the second part is not yet finalized, i can say that the updated standards will be reasonable. And for the sake of the american worker, the whole entire workforce, let me say that overcame. And for the sake of american workers, american car buyers and the economy, the rule will not force automakers to spend billions of dollars developing cars that consumers do not want to buy or drive. The new standards will help make new vehicles more affordable, and will ensure that the American Consumer still has a variety of choices when selecting vehicles that best suits their families needs. The new standards will save our country billions of dollars. They will strengthen our domestic Manufacturing Base by adding millions of new car sales. And, of course, supporting good paying american jobs. And most importantly, because newer cars are safer, the standards will save thousands of lives and prevent tens of thousands of serious injuries. So with todays one National Program rule, the administration is standing up for all americans, their needs, and their right to choose. We will not let political agendas in a single state be forced upon the other 49. And we will always put safety first. Thanks so much. [applause] thank you very much, secretary chao. It is now my privilege to introduce the administrator of the Environmental Protection agency, administrator Andrew Wheeler. Tanks to his leadership, epa is delivering on President Trumps the jinnah to grow the economy and improve lives while at the same time protecting the environment and human health. Todays action is the latest in a in a long line of very important regulatory reforms at epa and they know he will continue to keep me and my team very busy. Please join in welcoming administrator Andrew Wheeler. [applause] thank you. To thank your whole team. Thank you, secretary chao. What to thank your whole team in particular our teams together worked long and hard over the last months to get this proposal where it is and what you thank you and for the professionalism of your staff and everything weve done together. President trump promised the American Public that his administration would address and fix the current fuel economy and Greenhouse Gas emission standards. Today were delivering on a critical element of the president s commitment. Epa and dot are issuing a final action that will establish one set of National Fuel economy standards. Let me be clear. Our goal from the beginning was a 50 state solution. I met with carb three time since taking the lead at epa over a year ago. But despite our best effort efe could not reach a solution. We embraced federalism and the role of states but federalism does not mean that one state can dictate standards for the entire country. To borrow from jeff landry, cafe does not stand for california assumes federal empowerment. So we are moving forward with one National Fuel economy standard. We believe the law is clear. No state has the authority to opt out of National Fuel economy standards, and no state has the authority to set its own fuel economy standards that impact human safety, environment, and commerce for the rest of the country. One National Standard will provide muchneeded certainty to the automotive industry, and it sets the stage for President Trumps ultimate objective, a final safe rule that will save lives and strengthen the economy by reducing the price of new vehicles and helping more americans purchase newer, cleaner, safer cars and trucks. This is good for Public Safety, good for the economy, and good for the environment. Heres how todays action works. Under the Energy Policy conservation act, dot sets cafe standards. It expressly provides federal government regulates fuel economy, not the states. Sensors a direct scientific link between a course Greenhouse Gas emissions and fuel economy, dot is determining permit preempts state and zero Emission Vehicle programs. Thats one basis on which epa intends to draw the waiver for californias state programs. Separate and apart from that, epa is withdrawing the waiver based on our interpretation and application of one of the criteria for denying a waiver. Does the state meet its standards to meet court compelling and extraordinary conditions . Understood in its origin in context, the California Waiver Authority exists because california has uniquely bad problems with smog forming pollutants. Theres a direct and tight link between one california cars and their emissions of criteria pollutants, two, the local concentration of those emissions, three, the impacts have on california due to the states extraordinary perfect storm of features like population, traffic, temperature, wind, ocean currents, typography. But for Greenhouse Gases, the type and direct link isnt there. California cars have no closer link to california climate impacts than two cars on the road in japan or anywhere else in the world. And californias climate impacts are not extraordinarily distinct from those felt in other states in the same way that it smog impacts our spirit it makes sense congress carved up Waiver Authority for california to address each unique local problems. It does not make sense to use that authority to try to address national and global issues like Greenhouse Gas emissions. Its time to put californias waiver back in its box, the boxed congress always intended it to stay in. Californias unique, extraordinary criteria air pollutant issues. Todays action does not impact a number of other california programs, including its low Emission VehicleProgram Designed to address harmful ozone and other forms of air pollution. This will allow the state to focus on addressing its better quality problems and finally achieving compliance with epas National Ambient air quality standards. California has the worst air quality in the united states. It has 82 34 Million People living in areas that do not meet the nox standards. Thats more than twice as many people as any other state in the country. We hope that the state will focus on these issues rather than trying to set fuel economy standards for the entire country. Todays action also clears the way for our final safe rule. Our proposed safe rule reflects what we believe its the right approach to National Fuel economy standards. Write for Public Safety in the environment. I will give four reasons why. First first, revising the standards to reduce the price of new vehicles. The average Sticker Price of a new vehicle reached 39,500 in the first half of this year. This is simply out of reach for Many American families. The current trajectory of the standards is one of the factors driving costs higher. In order to comply with the obama standards, automakers need to sell many more electric vehicles. By some counts they will need to produce lineups that are 50 electric or more over the next seven years. However, electric vehicles cost 12,000 more to make than the average vehicle, according to mckinsey analysis. Those costs are passed on to the consumers which is one reason why electric vehicles are still, despite billions of dollars in subsidies, less than 2 of new vehicle sales. But one way for automakers to meet the standards is to lower the price of electric vehicles and raise the price of other more popular vehicles such as suvs and trucks. In other words, American Families were paying more for suvs and trucks so that automakers can sell cds at a cheaper price. Its one thing for the American Public to directly subsidize electric vehicles through tax incentives. Its another thing to use the nations vehicle emission standards to prop up a product that has minimal impact on the environment and only the wealthy can afford. Of the roughly 57,000 households that receive the tax credit in 2016, nearly 80 made over 100,000. If these people want to buy an ev, what if they or if they can afford one without asking loganville income americans to help pay for it. Compared to keeping the 20 theh standards in place, the preferred option in our safe proposal would reduce the price of new vehicles by thousands of dollars. Which leads directly to my second point, revising the standards and reducing the price of new vehicles will save lives. Research shows that passengers were more likely to be killed in older vehicles compared to newer ones. According to nhtsa study, drir of the vehicle eight to 11 years old, the vehicle, not the dri, still 20 more likely to be fatally injured then the driver of a vehicle that was three years old or less. And a driver of the vehicle that is 12 or 14 years old is 32 more likely to die in an accident and if a driver of the vehicle that was 1517 years 17 years old is 50 more likely be into. Reducing the price of new vehicles we will help americans purchase newer and safer cars and trucks. We estimate our proposed revised standards to the safe rule could save thousands of lives. Third, we revising the standards in america will have negligible impact on the environment compared to the current standards. There are jew important facts the public needs to know. First, even even the most stringent vehicle standards imaginable was what only a minl impact on Global Temperatures. According to the obama administrations 2012 analysis, even a a much more stringent version of the rules than the one they eventually finalize wouldve only lowered Global Temperatures by two, 100 degrees celsius by 2100. Its important to put things in context it were talking about changes in the hundreds of the degree celsius by 2100. Heres the second fact. Most automakers cannot comply with the trajectory of the current standards. For model year 2016 domestic passenger Vehicle Manufacturers paid more than 77 million for noncompliance and in model year 2017 only three large manufacturers complied based on the Technology Levels of the vehicles alone. Most cars manufactured used bank credit along with Technology Improvements to maintain compliant. The most recent dot david on credits, in the shortfall between the fleet and the cafe compliance suggests this figure may rise dramatically due to the increasing stringency of the obama standards. For example, the total shortfall in cafe credits for model year 2018 is the equivalent of almost 1. 3 lien dollars, more than ten times higher than the equivalent shortfall for model year 2011, which was just over 100 million. This begs the question, why keep the standards that automakers can only comply with through credits and paying fees . We believe that changes are needed in the safe proposal set forth, argue, of what changes are appropriate. And because ill remove certain credits and fees, are stated to have negligible impact on the private compared to the current standards. Fourth and finally, revising the standards will help more americans purchase newer, cleaner, and safer cars. The average age of vehicles on the road today is a record high 12 12 years. In 1990 the average age was eight years. Either consumers cannot afford the price of new vehicles or theyre not interested in purchasing certain types of new vehicles. Either way, the lack of fleet turnover creates a host of problems the most important of which is passenger safety. By revising the standards we will reduce the price of new vehicles, and as prices fall, President Trumps vision becomes reality. More americans will be able to purchase newer, cleaner, and safer vehicles, vehicles they actually want to buy. The president knows that accelerating fleet turnover is good for the Auto Industry, good for consumers, good for Public Safety and its good for the environment. Thank you for your time today, for your attention, and thank you for joining us today. [applause] thank you very much, administrator wheeler. I would also now like to take this opportunity to invite congressman from the First District of california, for your remarks. Thank you. [applause] thank you very much. Im delighted to be a today for this subject matter especially. In my real life im a farmer in Northern California and am very in touch with our constituents on what the automotive needs are and what were really talk about the bottom line here is auto choice people in this country still like to have choices and when i saw this obama era mandate coming down the line a few years ago and thinking how realistic is it by the year 2025 all automobiles in the fleet would have to average 55 miles per gallon . I can think of what a 55mile per gallon vehicle looks like right now, especially for the need for the average buyer. Is that a mom who need to get her kids to school and often to other chores or a dad or people just my want of a vehicle with rubin because that some guys my size come right . I think what really saying is this administration, i want to be very thankful to secretary chao, administrator wheeler, on listening to the people in this situation. California air Resources Board for my constituents plead with me and my state legislative colleagues to say can have some relief from their latest dream they have each month for each six months on the new mandate. I have legislation to make, for example, less costly to buy fullsized trucks for people to use in agriculture. If you got it, a truck product. We want to update trucks, burn a little cleaner come a little better but theres a punitive tax, a federal tax on top of all the rest of the tax for buying a new truck to update with. We want to incentivize it, give people what they need and have affordability for. Same thing with automobiles. Administrator wheeler really get out of the park from where i was sitting, that this comes down to subsidizing other people into these electric vehicles. We know standing alone electric vehicles do not pay, and electricity comes from somewhere. It doesnt just magically happen nearby. I have a lot of power lines running from my district from hydroelectric plants and other plants many miles to my rice fields to go to the urban areas so people can feel good about themselves pointing in the electric car. Reality is, the better we can make our gasoline powered vehicles more efficient and the tailpipe is still clean on all these cars, no matter what thr size, so were really talk about chasing co2 numbers. So the reality is that our manufactures are making better cars than ever on efficiency, on aerodynamics and cars that we like to drive. Im a car enthusiast myself, and one of the manufacturers is not very happy with cutting a deal with california going behind the back of the administration was looking out for Consumer Choice in this country. So at this point i hope we can keep going straight ahead and i will support the efforts of administrator wheeler and ep. I never thought i would say that a lot. And secretary chao. And right home in my own district would put at a 54,000acre forest fire. You want to talk with air quality course year after year and the thousands of acres of forest burn in the west. I realize its a different building down the street with a force service and theyre working on making things better. And also this migratory emissions that come from other areas that affect our state, too. So forcing us into our little cage in a little tiny cars is not going to change the situation for my constituents, for californians answer to the state of california and California AirResources Board dictatorial policies going towards the rest of the 50 states there can again, my plead for relief from carbon to say lets put reasonable regulations back in place from carbon. I hope this administration doesnt give up on fighting carbon. Thats all california seems to do, fight us in congress and this administration. Everyday the makeup of new lawsuit to come after us so would you try to make jobs happen in this country, not in china come all these things have to be manufactured somewhere else to make these electric cars go. What do we not mining majors in this country we need for batteries, for this hightech apparatus we need across the board . Instead we expect other countries to supply the manufacturing, the raw materials. We are on the right track because we can do a better more efficiently even more economically sound but in this country than anywhere in the world if we are allowed to do it. Again my thanks to administrator wheeler, assistant administrator, and secretary chao. And everybody in the show here today that is being part of this to give us our choices back for our constituents for what they need, not what they need in sacramento. Thank you. [applause] thank you very much for your remarks, congressman lamalfa. That concludes our press event this morning. We remain available to answer any questions you might have. Thank you all very much for joining us this morning. [applause] [inaudible] does anyone have a question . Administrator wheeler, california has chris knight. So california has gotten four automakers to say they will support the rule. How many automakers have you got. Was there still went to see what the final safe numbers look like. Of course with talking to all the auto manufacturers including the four that signed that agreement although i dont believe theres an agreement thats been made public that the actual scientific i think its more in theory but we are of course sent a letter to california last week to ask what the Legal Authority is for this agreement so were looking into that aspect. We expect at the end of the day when we release the second half of the safe proposal standards that all the automakers will take a look at and see that it is feasible, the right thing to do an expert everybody will support it. And hopefully california will put politics aside and supported as well. For administrator wheeler, President Trump said last night that epa will be issuing some sort of notice of violation against San Francisco over something about Water Pollution and homelessness. Can you tell us anything more about that . I cant comment on potential enforcement actions. Could you give us an update on the conversations you having with the white house and the usda about the renewable fuel standard and the waiver issue thats going on. Will continue to have a very good conversation. Thank you. Next question. Administrator wheeler, over here. Twopart question. One, can you say definitively now whether the safe rule will not be the preferred option, whether it will increase the standards of some of whether it half or 1 . Can also address revoking the waiver now as a separate rule, what does it do to the legal strategy . Do think that speeds up the administrations corporate view of this issue and you think its feasible you can see the Supreme Court take action or consider this before the end of the first of . Im going to defer to my general counsel on the second half, but dasher now a country over the the first half of the question. [inaudible] we are looking at all the options right now. Weve not made a final decision yet on what the standards will be. I think im on record saying the final will not look exactly the same with that we propose to pick we received a lot of comments from a lot of people doing the comet period for the safe proposal and we take those comments very seriously. Take a look at what it will mean for the program and what makes the best since i can to for the President Trumps objective of having cleaner, safer cars for the American Public that the American Public wants to purchase. Matt leopold, ep general counsel. This is an issue we propose to take action on, and were eager to get the opportunity of this reviewed in the courts and were writing to defend our interpretation of the waiver withdrawal along with department of transportations preemption theory and were very confident that the courts will review that favorably. Thanks to steve bradbury, acting deputy secretary of transportation in general counsel. The legal issues that are dressed in todays we like to call the one National Program rule, part one of the safe vehicles roll, the preemption issues, and the waiver revocation are separable from the standards that will be addressed in the rest of the state vehicle rules later this fall. And these are very, very important. This is a very important first step in achieving one National Program. And these legal issues really are the key to achieving what the Auto Industry and the entire automobile sector has long asked for, which is certainty and clarity on what will those one National Standards be, and how assured can we be that we will not have to build cars to meet multiple different standards across the country. And so thats what this issue addresses in todays rule, and the fact that were pulling it out of the larger safe vehicles roll and doing it first, we ready to go on these determinations. This rule will be separately will be able to be challenged in court on its own come if california so wishes, for example, and we can get, we can accelerate the timetable for giving a definitive final judgment from the courts as to the fact that we believe its very clear Congress Mandated federal law should control in this area. Once we get those final determination in court on these focused legal issues, we would get that certainty for the auto sector and for the entire nation. So its very important to come we think, to take the first step. Thanks. We have time for one more question. Russian for administrator wheeler your i think i understood the first part where you were saying the standards change would have a negligible environmental impact. I thought he heard you say it would also be good for environment. Could you clarify how that happens . Sure. Older cars pollute more than newer cars. The average age of the court did it on the road is 12 years. It to be eight years. I decreasing the cost of the cars come with little increase purchase a new car skidding older cars off the road. So newer cars will be be replacing them and those new cars are better for environment, better for Public Safety and thats what the American Public wants to purchase. Thank you very much. I had to go to a house science hearing. Thank you. [applause] thank you for joining us today, and have a great morni. [inaudible conversations] car manufacturing in the city is very, very important to us. That industry is one of the backbones of lansing. With three things in lansing where it Michigan State university, the state capital and with automobile manufacturing. Those three component have kept lansing a very successful town. Cspan cities tour is on the road exploring the american story. This week and we take you to lansing, michigan, without of our Comcast Cable partners. Known for its automotive history, lansing has been michigans capital city since 1847. So lansing was picked as a cuppercaseletter because it was kind of offered up as a compromise location. And will learn about the auto Company Founded in lansing. The company was title as an acronym, it emerged in 1994 and state are pretty much close to this location and a bright at different formats through 1975. Watch cspan cities tour of lansing, michigan, as we take in its history and literary scene this saturday at noon eastern on cspan2s booktv and sunday at two p. M. On American History tv on cspan3. Working with our cable affiliates as we explore the american story. Next, a House Gun Violence Task force hearing from witnesses about the impact of guns in device. The effect on their community and what legislative steps could