House votes to overturn California clean truck rules
The House on Wednesday voted to axe California's clean truck rules — defying Congress's own internal watchdog in doing so.
The House voted to nix the Biden administration's approval of the California rules, which aim to cut pollution and planet-warming emissions from trucks, using a using a tool known as the Congressional Review Act (CRA).
One of the truck rules the House voted to overturn explicitly seeks to make more trucks electric, while the other seeks to limit emissions of nitrogen oxides, which can form smog and also contribute to asthma and respiratory infections.
The measures passed 231-191 and 225-196.
Thirteen Democrats voted with Republicans for the resolution on the first vote, and 10 did the same on the second vote. Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.) was the only Republican to vote with Democrats against the measures.
The CRA allows Congress, with just a simple majority in both chambers and presidential approval, to reverse recent regulations, evading the Senate filibuster's 60-vote threshold. It's sometimes used at the start of a new administration to eliminate regulations put forward by the previous one.
However, the votes come in defiance of the Government Accountability Office — a nonpartisan congressional watchdog that sometimes issues legal opinions.
That office has determined that because the Environmental Protection Agency's approval came in the form of a waiver rather than a rule, it is not subject to the CRA.
By holding the votes anyway, House Republicans are demonstrating they are willing to carry out their agenda regardless of whether the nonpartisan arbiter deems them legal.
Rachel Weintraub, executive director of the Coalition for Sensible Safeguards, a group that supports environmental and other regulations, described the decision to defy the Government Accountability Office (GAO) as a violation of congressional norms.
'The system has been in place since [the] CRA was established,' she said. 'The unprecedented nature of ignoring the GAO …is profound.'
Republicans, meanwhile, celebrated the vote.
'The Biden Administration left behind comply-or-die Green New Deal mandates that threaten to crush our trucking industry and drive up costs for hardworking Americans,' said Rep. John James (R-Mich.), who sponsored one of the resolutions, in a written statement.
Senate Republicans, who also want to go after California's rules, are facing a similar challenge. The Senate parliamentarian, a rules authority for the upper chamber, has also said the waivers allowing the rules to go forward are not subject to the CRA.
Senate Republicans have signaled they could seek to defy the parliamentarian but have not yet said definitively whether they actually plan to do so.
If they do, they could be setting up a legal and procedural kerfuffle — especially as the parliamentarian also sets the rules for what provisions can go into a high-stakes budget package that also evades the filibuster.
Sean H. Donahue, an environmental lawyer with the firm Donahue, Goldberg & Herzog, said a legal challenge could be expected if the resolution is ultimately signed into law.
'We'd be in uncharted territory, but I think you'd have an illegal action … I would expect that there would be pushback,' said Donahue, not to be confused with a Trump EPA appointee of the same name.
The House was initially slated to also vote to axe California's phaseout of gas-powered cars, but postponed that vote until Thursday.
California is allowed to set its own vehicle pollution rules — with the approval from the EPA — because of a clause in the Clean Air Act that comes in response to historic smog problems in Los Angeles. That provision allows the EPA to waive laws that typically preempt states from setting regulations that go beyond the scope of those set at the federal level.
More than 10 percent of the U.S. population lives in California, giving it a significant share of the auto and trucking markets. And its rules are also adopted by some other states, making them even more impactful.
—Updated at 7:04 p.m. EDT
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
21 minutes ago
- USA Today
4 Social Security changes Washington could make to prevent benefit cuts
4 Social Security changes Washington could make to prevent benefit cuts Show Caption Hide Caption Biden criticizes Trump administration's handling of Social Security Social Security overhaul sparks criticism from Biden over service disruptions, layoffs and automation as Trump defends changes as efficiency. Straight Arrow News Social Security is an important source of income for millions of Americans, but the program has a serious financial problem. Costs have increased faster than revenues in recent years because the aging population is growing more quickly than the working population. As a result, the trust fund, the financial account that pays benefits, is on track to be depleted within a decade. Specifically, the Congressional Budget Office estimates the trust fund will be exhausted in 2034. That would eliminate one source of revenue (i.e., interest earned on trust fund reserves), and the remaining tax revenues would only cover 77% of scheduled payments. That means a 23% benefit cut would be necessary in 2035. Fortunately, the lawmakers in Washington have several years to find a better solution. Here are four Social Security changes that could prevent deep, across-the-board benefit cuts. 1. Apply the Social Security payroll tax to income above $400,000 Social Security is primarily funded by a dedicated payroll tax, which takes 6.2% of wages from workers and employers. But some income is exempt from the payroll tax. Specifically, the maximum taxable earnings limit is $176,100 in 2025. Income above that threshold is not taxed by Social Security. Importantly, the Social Security program is projected to run a $23 trillion deficit over the next 75 years as it's strained by shifting demographics. But the deficit could be slashed by applying the payroll tax to more income. For instance, including income above $400,000 would eliminate 60% of the 75-year funding shortfall, says the University of Maryland. 2. Gradually increase the Social Security payroll tax rate to 6.5% over six years Under current law, the Social Security payroll tax rate is 6.2% for workers and their employers. But gradually raising that figure would eliminate a portion of the long-term deficit. For example, increasing thetax rate by 0.05% annually over a six-year period would eliminate 15% of the 75-year funding shortfall, according to the University of Maryland. Now that I've discussed two possible changes, let's step back and look at the big picture. There are basically three ways to resolve Social Security's financial problems: (1) increase revenue, (2) reduce costs or (3) some combination of the first two options. The changes discussed so far would increase revenue, but the next two changes would cut benefits. However, they are more subtle cuts than the 23% across-the-board reduction that would follow trust fund depletion. 3. Gradually increase full retirement age to 68 by 2033 Workers are eligible for retirement benefits at age 62, but they are not entitled to their full benefit — also called the primary insurance amount (PIA) — until full retirement age (FRA). Anyone that claims before full retirement age receives a smaller payout, meaning they get less than 100% of their PIA. FRA is currently defined as 67 years old for workers born in 1960 or later, but raising the figure would reduce the long-term deficit. For instance, increasing FRA to 68 years old by 2033, meaning it would apply to workers born in 1965 or later, would eliminate 15% of the 75-year funding shortfall, according to the University of Maryland. 4. Reduce benefits for retired workers with income in the top 20% Social Security benefits are determined as percentages of two bend points. Specifically, income from the 35 highest-paid years of work is adjusted for inflation and converted to a monthly figure called the average indexed monthly earnings (AIME) amount. The AIME is then run through a formula that uses two bend points to determine the PIA for each worker. Modifying the second (highest) bend point would eliminate a portion of the long-term deficit by reducing benefits for high earners. For instance, the University of Maryland estimates that reducing benefits for individuals with income in the top 20% could reduce the 75-year funding deficit by 11%. Here's the big picture: The four changes I've discussed would eliminate 101% of Social Security's $23 trillion funding shortfall, which would prevent across-the-board benefit cuts in 2035. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. The Motley Fool is a USA TODAY content partner offering financial news, analysis and commentary designed to help people take control of their financial lives. Its content is produced independently of USA TODAY. The $23,760 Social Security bonus most retirees completely overlook Offer from the Motley Fool: If you're like most Americans, you're a few years (or more) behind on your retirement savings. But a handful of little-known "Social Security secrets"could help ensure a boost in your retirement income. One easy trick could pay you as much as $23,760 more... each year! Once you learn how to maximize your Social Security benefits, we think you could retire confidently with the peace of mind we're all after. JoinStock Advisorto learn more about these strategies. View the "Social Security secrets" »
The Hill
25 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump deploys National Guard to Los Angeles amid ICE raid protests
President Trump deployed 2,000 National Guardsmen to Los Angeles on Saturday as protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) rattle the city. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the move is a result of 'violent mobs' attacking 'Federal Law Enforcement Agents carrying out basic deportation operations' in recent days. 'These operations are essential to halting and reversing the invasion of illegal criminals into the United States. In the wake of this violence, California's feckless Democrat leaders have completely abdicated their responsibility to protect their citizens. That is why President Trump has signed a Presidential Memorandum deploying 2,000 National Guardsmen to address the lawlessness that has been allowed to fester,' she wrote. Trump said California Democrats Gov. Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass were to blame for the unrest that began as a result of ICE raids. Los Angeles police have not responded to rowdy demonstrations where protestors have vandalized cars and property, according to administration officials. LAPD confirmed they were not involved. 'If Governor Gavin Newscum, of California, and Mayor Karen Bass, of Los Angeles, can't do their jobs, which everyone knows they can't, then the Federal Government will step in and solve the problem, RIOTS & LOOTERS, the way it should be solved!!!' Trump wrote in a Saturday Truth Social post. However, Newsom said the federal response is 'inflammatory' and said deploying soldiers 'will erode public trust.' 'LA authorities are able to access law enforcement assistance at a moment's notice,' Newsom wrote in a Saturday X post. 'We are in close coordination with the city and county, and there is currently no unmet need,' he added. A group of over 800 assembled to address their outrage following Friday's raids. Officials from the Department of Homeland Security said demonstrations have spread across the country, leading to several arrests in Los Angeles County and 5 in New York City this week, according to NewsNation reporting. 'Outside a federal law enforcement building in New York City, more than 150 rioters erupted to interfere with ICE's immigration enforcement operations,' DHS wrote on X. 'Thankfully, unlike in Los Angeles, the local police department quickly responded to the riots. So far, NYPD [New York Police Department] has made five arrests,' the post read, adding that those who touch law enforcement officers will be prosecuted. NewsNation is owned by Nexstar Media Group, which also owns The Hill. Updated at 9:32 p.m. EDT.
New York Post
27 minutes ago
- New York Post
Right-wing Colombian presidential candidate, senator shot during campaign rally
Colombian Senator Miguel Uribe was shot in Bogota on Saturday, according to the government and his party, and local media reported that he was in a local hospital in serious condition. The 39-year-old senator, who is running for the presidency in 2026, is a member of the opposition conservative Democratic Center party founded by former Colombian President Alvaro Uribe. The two men are not related. Senator Miguel Uribe looks on after the Senate voted against the government labor reform referendum promoted by Colombia's President Gustavo Petro in Bogota on May 14, 2025. AFP via Getty Images According to a party statement condemning the attack, the senator was hosting a campaign event in a public park in the Fontibon neighborhood in the capital on Saturday when 'armed subjects shot him in the back.' The party described the attack as serious, but did not disclose further details on Uribe's condition. Colombia's Defense Minister Pedro Sanchez said a suspect had been arrested in the shooting and that authorities were investigating whether others were involved. Sanchez said he had visited the hospital where Uribe was being treated. Police officers cordon off the area where Colombian Senator Miguel Uribe Turbay of the opposition Democratic Center party, was shot during a campaign event, in Bogota, Colombia, June 7, 2025. REUTERS Colombia's presidency issued a statement saying the government 'categorically and forcefully' rejected the violent attack, and called for a thorough investigation into the events that took place. Uribe is from a prominent family in Colombia, with links to the country's Liberal Party. His father was a businessman and union leader. His mother, journalist Diana Turbay, was kidnapped in 1990 by an armed group under the command of the late cartel leader Pablo Escobar. She was killed during a rescue operation.
