Industry Regulation: With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility

Thanks for sticking with us. This is Part 3 of our editorial segment examining the topic of industry regulation within the automotive industry. Who it affects, how it has changed over the years, and if it’s gone too far are just a few of the questions we’ll be exploring. Click here to get caught up with Part 1 and Part 2. 

As we laid out in the previous two parts of this feature, there remains a lot of debate over the government’s growing role in industry regulation. Accountability is necessary, and often celebrated by the very people it holds to higher standards. But have federal agencies taken it too far? And when does good become good enough?

A Dog That Scares Many Rabbits Kills None

The public is currently trying to sort through all the constant field-day reporting of crime, harassment, and dishonest lobbying being exposed in Washington. And that analysis sheds a similar light on the self-defeating nature of bureaucratic policy.

“What was needed at one time, might not be needed anymore,” said Steve Wolcott, President and CEO of ProMedia, Inc. “But the government never says ‘You know what? Mission Accomplished with this division, so we’re going to disband it.’ It’s not self-policing. It doesn’t have any competitors to go up against like we do as companies, to always make sure we’re doing the best and being nimble.”

New vehicles have proven themselves to be incredibly “clean” when it comes to fuel emissions. So, does it make sense to push a bill that would effectively destroy an entire sport and its associated market, all for the sake of lowering that emissions data a fraction? SEMA President and CEO Chris Kersting has stated previously in defense of the RPM Act, that the EPA’s intention to prohibit racing modifications “would decimate small businesses that supply the products … resulting in the loss of thousands of jobs and billions in local revenue for communities.”

Similarly, the government continues to squeeze auto manufacturers to create cars with lower fuel economy. But consumer demand is growing for larger and more powerful vehicles. Many in the industry feel this shows a disregard for the free market. Especially when those bigger rigs have shown they can run quite efficiently by the standards in effect right now.

Ill-Gotten Gains Never Prosper

So yes, car emissions need to be considered as a vital part of vehicle development if we are to continue breathing clean air. But there needs to be comparably strict regulation in other domains for true progress to happen. According to the EPA, “Medium- and heavy-duty vehicles currently account for about 20% of greenhouse gas emissions and oil use in the U.S. transportation sector, but only comprise about 5% of vehicles on the road.” And it wasn’t until last year that these large work trucks saw any kind of aggressive legislation set to combat that pollution. Standards which have since been proposed for repeal by new EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt.

Additionally, if electric vehicles truly are the answer to all our emissions woes, then another equally-large elephant has just squeezed itself into the room.

“Unless you happen to live in sunshine states like Florida, California, or Arizona, you’re relying on coal-fired or gas-producing power plants to create the electricity to drive electric vehicles,” said Wolcott. “We’re still burning fossil fuels and creating greenhouse gasses, it’s just happening in a different way.”

That’s not including the energy and environmental strain required to mine and refine the metals necessary for massive battery production. Nor the questionable labor practices surrounding some of the oppressed countries who hold large deposits of these precious minerals. And while some car makers have enacted profitable battery disposal strategies, time-tested massive lithium recycling has yet to be developed— despite it being the key to securing a lasting supply.

With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility

Hybrids and EV’s show clear promise, and they definitely have a place in the auto market. And hey, maybe lawmakers are pushing the establishment of an EV infrastructure because they really believe it’s the way to a cleaner world. But when the federal government tells consumers what cars to buy, by incentivizing electric sales over traditional vehicles and fast-tracking autonomous vehicle legislation without appropriate scrutiny, who’s really winning? Public subsidies have clearly been instrumental in promoting EV popularity, but they were never meant to be permanent. Several states have already eliminated or declined to renew their state-level tax credits. And the existing federal tax incentive terminates when a car manufacturer reaches 200,000 EVs sold. After that, it decreases by percentages per calendar quarter until it’s gone. If consumers can only see an electric car as a worthy investment when the government is subsidizing the cost, then the real discussion point is centered on how effective of a method EVs can be in tackling environmental threats.

All’s Well That Ends Well

Ultimately consumers, hobbyists, industry professionals, and manufacturers have to ask themselves if the end justifies the means. If the only way to preserve the planet is to tightly regulate passenger vehicle emissions then, yes, all this red tape serves a grander purpose. And it’s worth the challenge to adapt. But they also need to consider if they’re comfortable having those rules decided by unchecked regulatory agencies that can push legislation without consulting the popular opinion of the American people.

With an electric and even self-driving vehicle revolution on the horizon, those in the auto industry stand in an unforeseen position— to truly reform the regulatory system. As industry professionals boldly take the reins in setting safety and performance requirements for rapidly-advancing automated driving technology, they can show lawmakers and the American public that through a balance of creativity and accountability, America’s love affair with the automobile can endure.