Ending California's EPA power-grab will jump-start American auto and RV manufacturing
President Donald Trump and Republicans in the House and Senate on Thursday finally ended California's outsized authority to dictate national emissions standards for new cars, trucks, RVs and engines.
This win is another step toward rebuilding American manufacturing strength.
The EPA, under President Joe Biden, granted California exemption waivers to the Clean Air Act, handing California the keys to set their own extreme emissions regulations – including the requirement that nearly all vehicles sold in the state must be electric by 2035.
Knowing that the people's representatives in Congress would reject their most extreme policies, the Biden administration had to rely on these workarounds to push their Green New Scam agenda.
Biden's Clean Air Act waiver allowed other states to follow California's lead, creating a patchwork of misguided rules. More than a dozen states and D.C. follow California's standards, drastically changing the dynamics of America's critical auto and RV manufacturing industry without Congress having a say.
In practice, this means California effectively set the standards for the automotive industry, and most Americans have been forced to live under a regulatory framework that none of our representatives ever voted on.
This ends now. Rep. Yakym, R-Ind., along with House Republicans, took action to end this power grab, passing three disapproval resolutions under the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to repeal the EPA waivers. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., shepherded these three measures through the Senate, which today earned President Trump's signature.
Republicans across the country knew there was no time to waste. Beginning this year, California's Advanced Clean Trucks regulations would have started requiring new heavy-duty vehicles, such as trucks and RVs, to be zero-emission. This regulation threatened the RV supply chain by limiting the availability of chassis for motor homes.
Eleven states and D.C. adopted this mandate, which impacts 25% of the heavy-duty vehicle market in the United States, essentially making it the new national standard.
The stakes couldn't be higher for the Hoosier State, especially Indiana's Second District, home to Rep. Yakym and the RV Capital of the World, where nearly 90% of America's RVs are built. This industry directly supports more than 60,000 Hoosier jobs, pays over $4.3 billion in wages, and generates a total economic output of $22 billion across the state.
RV production is also critical to many other states which is why 13 Democrats joined Republicans in the bipartisan, commonsense vote against the Biden EPA's RV waiver.
Reversing California's emissions power grab is essential to RV, automotive and engine manufacturing industries in the state of Indiana and across America.
The Clean Air Act was never intended to effectively give one state the power to dictate emissions standards for entire industries across the country. Congress prohibited states from establishing separate vehicle and engine regulations except under "compelling and extraordinary conditions" that apply specifically to that state.
We've seen this before. As a U.S. senator, Gov. Braun used the Congressional Review Act to stop Biden's vaccine mandate for private businesses, a fight that ended with the Supreme Court striking it down. The CRA exists for moments like this, an expedited option to rein in the executive branch, reverse unnecessary red tape and prohibit substantially similar EPA actions in the future.
Hardworking Hoosiers shouldn't have to bear the weight of federal overreach. National rules should be set by the people's elected representatives, not by unelected regulators or one state's agenda.
Ending this EPA-California backroom deal will protect American jobs, unlock our full manufacturing potential, and ensure the shift to electric vehicles is driven by innovation and consumer choice, not bureaucrats in Washington or Los Angeles.
We applaud Republicans in the House and Senate and President Trump for taking a strong stand against the previous administration's Green New Deal overreach. The result will be stronger American manufacturing of cars, trucks, RVs and engines.
Rep. Rudy Yakym, a Republican, represents Indiana's 2nd Congressional District.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Cynthia Lummis Proposes Artificial Intelligence Bill, Requiring AI Firms to Disclose Technicals
Senator Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) has introduced the Responsible Innovation and Safe Expertise (RISE) Act of 2025, a legislative proposal designed to clarify liability frameworks for artificial intelligence (AI) used by professionals. The bill could bring transparency from AI developers – stoping short of requiring models to be open source. In a press release, Lummis said the RISE Act would mean that professionals, such as physicians, attorneys, engineers, and financial advisors, remain legally responsible for the advice they provide, even when it is informed by AI systems. At the time, AI developers who create the systems can only shield themselves from civil liability when things go awry if they publicly release model cards. The proposed bill defines model cards as detailed technical documents that disclose an AI system's training data sources, intended use cases, performance metrics, known limitations, and potential failure modes. All this is intended to help help professionals assess whether the tool is appropriate for their work. "Wyoming values both innovation and accountability; the RISE Act creates predictable standards that encourage safer AI development while preserving professional autonomy,' Lummis said in a press release. 'This legislation doesn't create blanket immunity for AI," Lummis continued. However, the immunity granted under this Act has clear boundaries. The legislation excludes protection for developers in instances of recklessness, willful misconduct, fraud, knowing misrepresentation, or when actions fall outside the defined scope of professional usage. Additionally, developers face a duty of ongoing accountability under the RISE Act. AI documentation and specifications must be updated within 30 days of deploying new versions or discovering significant failure modes, reinforcing continuous transparency obligations. The RISE Act, as it's written now, stops short of mandating that AI models become fully open source. Developers can withhold proprietary information, but only if the redacted material isn't related to safety, and each omission is accompanied by a written justification explaining the trade secret exemption. In a prior interview with CoinDesk, Simon Kim, the CEO of Hashed, one of Korea's leading VC funds, spoke about the danger of centralized, closed-source AI that's effectively a black box. "OpenAI is not open, and it is controlled by very few people, so it's quite dangerous. Making this type of [closed source] foundational model is similar to making a 'god', but we don't know how it works," Kim said at the time.
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Chart: Hundreds of gigawatts of clean energy at risk with GOP bill
See more from Canary Media's "Chart of the week' column. Amid rising power bills and surging energy demand, Republicans in Congress are set to undermine the country's primary source of new electricity — clean energy. The 'Big Beautiful Bill' passed in May by House Republicans and now being considered by the Senate would rapidly phase out key clean-energy tax credits, casting uncertainty over more than 600 gigawatts' worth of solar, battery, and wind projects slated to come online in 2028 or later, according to new analysis from research firm Cleanview. To be fair, the 600-GW figure is based on what's currently in the interconnection queue, and a good number of those projects won't get built regardless of the fate of the tax credits. (Projects often drop out of the queue for all kinds of reasons.) But if the bill kneecaps even a fraction of what's anticipated, it will have serious consequences for the U.S. energy system. For context, the entirety of the U.S. had a generating capacity of around 1,200 gigawatts at the end of 2023. The current version of the legislation would rapidly phase out federal tax credits that encourage clean energy development. As it stands, developers would be eligible for the tax credit only if their projects begin construction within 60 days of the bill's passage and if they come online before the end of 2028. That puts the 318 GW worth of projects planned to be completed in 2029 and later at explicit risk of losing their tax-credit eligibility. It also jeopardizes 2028 projects that either can't break ground with just two months' notice or which might hit snags that push their completion into 2029. That doesn't necessarily mean those projects would be cancelled, but it would scramble their economics, which were calculated under an entirely different set of policy assumptions. It's near certain that some would fall through. Many more would be delayed as developers hash out new financial terms — read: higher power prices that will be passed onto consumers. A slowdown in clean energy construction is the exact opposite of what the moment demands. These days, when a new energy project is built in the U.S., more than nine times out of 10 it is a solar, battery, or wind installation. That's not an exaggeration. In 2024, solar, batteries, and wind made up 93% of new energy resources. The year before that, it was 94%. Meanwhile, construction of new large-scale fossil-gas power plants is constrained by turbine shortages that are unlikely to ease in the near term. At the same time, electricity demand is surging and expected to climb even higher in coming years as the development of AI sets off a race to construct power-hungry data centers. If congressional Republicans pass a bill that stifles solar, batteries, and wind, study after study predicts the same outcome: higher energy bills — and more planet-warming emissions.
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Ohio anti-hunger advocates urge U.S. Senators to reject SNAP changes
The Mid-Ohio Food Collective. (Photo by Nick Evans, Ohio Capital Journal.) Ohioans on the front-line fighting hunger are urging the state's U.S. Senators to change the budget reconciliation package passed by the U.S. House of Representatives. The bill makes dramatic changes to the food stamps program, known as SNAP, placing a substantial new burden on states. It comes at a moment when food banks and pantries say they're stretched to the breaking point. 'We're the richest nation on earth,' Grace Church pastor and Mid-Ohio Food Collective Board Member Michael Young said Thursday. 'This issue of feeding people should not be this difficult or this hard,' he continued, '(There) should not be many decisions to make when we're talking about putting food on people's table — it is a moral obligation.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX The congressional Republican spending plan — President Trump's 'big beautiful bill' — would make significant changes to how we pay for the country's primary food assistance program. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program has always been fully funded by the federal government, with states pitching in to cover half of administrative costs. Ohio participants received $3.55 billion in benefits during the 2023 federal fiscal year. Now, Republicans in Congress want to shift some of that cost to states for the first time in the program's history. In the U.S. House, lawmakers proposed states pick up 15%-25% of the total. The U.S. Senate walked that back, but still wants many states to pitch in, tying it to how accurately a state determines eligibility and benefit amounts, called error rates. Under the U.S. Senate plan, those with error rates below 6% would pay nothing, while states with error rates above 10% would pay for 15% of their food assistance benefits. Ohio food banks are serving more people than ever, budget would maintain funding at 2019 levels According to the Food Research and Access Center, Ohio's 2023 error rate would put it in the bucket of states paying for 5% of their SNAP benefits. Back of the envelope math, that would put Ohio on the hook for about $178 million. In addition to covering a portion of benefits, the proposal asks states to cover three quarters of administrative costs and imposes more stringent work requirements. If the current state budget process offers any indication those figures are a nonstarter. During the last budget cycle Ohio lawmakers gave food banks an extra $7.5 million on top of the $24.5 million base appropriation they've received since 2019. But this year, lawmakers zeroed out that supplemental funding, arguing it was always meant to be a one-time thing. Food banks argued they're getting more traffic than ever, and argued at the very least, lawmakers should give them a $5 million increase to account for inflation. Lawmakers didn't budge. In Grove City on Thursday, representatives from Ohio's food assistance network warned the state simply can't absorb the SNAP reductions Congress is considering. Standing in front of wall of glass wall looking out on their warehouse, Mid-Ohio Food Collective President and CEO Matt Habash, bragged they have 'three football fields of storage' and serve people in need 'from Marysville clear to the Ohio River.' 'But as impressive as Mid-Ohio Food Bank is,' he said, 'It's never been our community's best our biggest weapon against hunger. That, my friends, is SNAP.' Habash argued the program is the 'first line of defense' against hunger and a 'lifeline' to low-income seniors, children, and people with disabilities. He warned pushing benefit costs onto states would 'end SNAP as we know it.' 'This cost shift would force impossible decisions by our state leaders to raise taxes or cut essential services all while hunger increases,' he said. 'These cuts will do the most harm to the most vulnerable neighbors.' 'The meals that go missing,' he added, 'will be far more than our hunger relief network could ever possibly provide.' Habash urged Ohioans to contact the state's Republican U.S. Sens. Bernie Moreno and Jon Husted. The Ohio Capital Journal contacted both senator's offices for comment about the SNAP plan. Neither responded. Jamie Trout, executive director of Eastside Community Ministry in Zanesville, heads up the biggest food pantry in Muskingum County. Over the last three years, she explained, they've seen visitors triple, while the cost of groceries has spiked. 'To try to wrap my mind around the amount of people that will be coming for our services if the SNAP benefits are cut,' she said, 'I just don't see how we would sustain that.' Ohio Association of Foodbanks Executive Director Joree Novotny added that SNAP benefits wind up helping the local economy as well as hungry families. Food assistance dollars get spent at local grocery stores and farmers markets. In economic downturns, that cash influx provides a backstop for some businesses. 'The state of Ohio cannot absorb hundreds of millions of dollars in new spending,' she said of the cost sharing plan. '(Ohio) would either have to increase taxes to raise revenue, cut other essential services, or risk losing billions of dollars every year in economic activity that supports Ohio retailers, agribusinesses and neighbors.' She called the plan 'unsustainable' and 'unrealistic,' and urged Ohio's congressional delegation to reject those provisions. 'A hungry child cannot learn, a hungry worker cannot earn, and a hungry senior is not healthy,' she said. Follow Ohio Capital Journal Reporter Nick Evans on X or on Bluesky. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
