05.20.25

Senate Republicans Will Affirm Congressional Authority and End the Biden Administration’s EV Mandate

Continuing its Work Undoing Democrats’ Costly Energy Policies, the Senate Is Set to Ax California’s Rules Prohibiting the Future Sale of Gas-Powered Vehicles

“California’s extreme EV mandate imposes unrealistic and stringent requirements, fails to meet the Clean Air Act’s requirements for a waiver, forces the hand of American consumers, and makes our country more reliant on China for critical minerals. The American people have made it clear that they want consumer choice, not an EV mandate.” – Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.)

THE CALIFORNIA EMISSIONS WAIVERS WERE MADE POSSIBLE BY THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION, HAVE NATIONWIDE EFFECTS, AND MAKE THE U.S. CAR INDUSTRY RELIANT ON CHINA. ELIMINATING THEM IS COMMONSENSE POLICY.

“As we saw under the Biden administration, what happens in California doesn’t stay in California. Their emissions regulation will cripple the truck manufacturing industry nationwide, overloading companies and truckers with expensive, heavy-handed requirements. This inevitably leads to increased prices for families across the nation.” – Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.)

“This waiver imposes significant compliance costs estimated at upwards of $20,000 per truck making it more difficult for small fleets and independent operators to invest in new equipment. Moreover, this creates a competitive disadvantage for manufacturers and fleets by forcing stricter standards to apply unequally across the country. We cannot allow California’s costly and extreme Green New Deal agenda to bankrupt families and eliminate consumer choice for hundreds of millions of American families.” – Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.)

  • In April, Sens. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), and Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) introduced three Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolutions “to repeal California’s electric vehicle (EV) waivers prohibiting the sale of new gas-powered light-duty vehicles by 2035.” (Sen. Capito: Capito, Fischer unveil resolutions to nix California EV waivers – 4/8/25; Sen. Mullin: Mullin, Capito, Fischer, Introduce Resolutions to Repeal California’s Extreme EV Mandate – 4/9/25)
  • As “one of the last steps that the administration has taken to enact major climate policies before the end of President Biden’s term,” the administration “granted [states] permission to ban the sale of new gasoline-powered cars by 2035, one of the most ambitious climate policies in the United States and beyond.” (The New York Times: E.P.A. Allows California to Ban Sales of New Gas-Powered Cars by 2035 – 12/18/24)
  • “California’s policy requires that 35 percent of new passenger cars and light trucks sold in the state be either zero-emission, plug-in hybrid or hydrogen-powered models by 2026. Those requirements climb to 68 percent in 2030, and 100 percent in 2035, after which no gas-powered vehicles could be sold in the state.” (The New York Times: House Votes to Block California’s Plan to Ban New Gas-Powered Cars – 5/1/25)
  • Seventeen states and the District of Columbia have since followed California in adopting these emission standards rules under the waivers granted by the Biden administration. (California Air Resources Board: States that have Adopted California's Vehicle Regulations – accessed 5/20/25)
  • “Officials at the American Trucking Associations said Wednesday they are ‘adamantly opposed’ to what they call ‘unattainable’ regulations. ‘This destructive rule sets wildly unrealistic targets and timelines that are already creating confusion on the West Coast and threaten to cause severe disruptions to our supply chain nationwide… To protect our supply chain and achieve the cleaner future that we all want, EPA should reject this waiver.’” (Fox News: Dozens of states urge EPA to deny California waiver making out-of-state trucks comply with electric mandate – 9/18/24)

THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE IMPROPERLY INTERVENED ON THIS ISSUE. MOVING FORWARD TO REPEAL THE WAIVER RULES IS ABOUT CONGRESS RECLAIMING ITS AUTHORITY FROM THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH AND UNELECTED BUREAUCRATS.

“[F]or the first time ever, the Government Accountability Office has decided to insert itself into the process and affirmatively declare that an agency rule submitted to Congress as a rule is not a rule. It’s an extraordinary deviation from precedent for an agency that should be defending Congress’ power instead of constraining it. And frankly, Mr. President, I think we need to act to ensure that this intrusion into the Congressional Review Act process doesn’t become a habit, and that the Senate doesn’t end up transferring its decision-making power on CRA resolutions to the Government Accountability Office.” – Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.)

“Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin submitted the waivers to Congress as rules earlier this year. Historically an agency’s declaration that its action is a rule has never been questioned. Yet in an unprecedented move, the Government Accountability Office opined that California’s action isn’t a rule and therefore not subject to the Congressional Review Act. Thankfully the bureaucrats at the GAO can’t dictate the actions of the U.S. Senate or the will of the voters.” – Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso (R-Wyo.)

  • At the request of Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), the GAO made “observations” regarding the Environmental Protection Agency’s decision to “transmit three such waivers to Congress for potential review and disapproval under the Congressional Review Act (CRA).” (U.S. Government Accountability Office: Observations Regarding the Environmental Protection Agency's Submission of Notices of Decision on Clean Air Act Preemption Waivers as Rules Under the Congressional Review Act – 3/6/25; The Federalist: Op-ed: No, The Senate Shouldn’t Let Even More Unaccountable Bureaucrats Decide What The Law Says – 4/4/25)
  • “GAO’s authority is to — at the request of Congress — evaluate executive actions that were never sent and rule on whether they would be rules had they been sent. The role of GAO is not to second-guess transmitted rules.” (The Federalist: Op-ed: No, The Senate Shouldn’t Let Even More Unaccountable Bureaucrats Decide What The Law Says – 4/4/25)
  • The GAO itself acknowledged “this request presents a different situation” from GAO’s “regular practice.” (U.S. Government Accountability Office: Observations Regarding the Environmental Protection Agency's Submission of Notices of Decision on Clean Air Act Preemption Waivers as Rules Under the Congressional Review Act – 3/6/25)
  • In an April House Budget Committee hearing, Gene Dodaro, the head of GAO, admitted that there’s “no other example” of GAO telling “Congress that a rule submitted by the Executive Branch for congressional review is ineligible for review under the CRA.” (U.S. House Budget Committee: Budget Hearing – Government Accountability Office, Congressional Budget Office, and the United States Government Publishing Office – 3/9/25)

THE GAO HAS A HISTORY OF RULING ON POLITICAL GROUNDS: ITS TRACK RECORD “MAKES CLEAR THAT THERE ARE TWO SETS OF RULES”

  • Many of the GAO’s recent decisions have been politically one-sided:
    • In 2021, the GAO said “the Biden administration’s decision to freeze construction of a border wall between the United States and Mexico did not violate the law,” despite the funds having been appropriated by Congress for that very purpose. (Government Executive: GAO Says Biden’s Freeze on Border Wall Construction Didn’t Violate Budget Law – 6/15/21; CBS News: Biden's border wall funding freeze was legal, congressional investigators rule – 6/15/21)
    • Meanwhile, the GAO in 2019 claimed the Trump administration violated the law when it froze Defense Department funds allocated for Ukraine, despite the fact that the funds were ultimately made available to Ukraine “before the Sept. 30 deadline for obligating funds.” (Government Executive: GAO Says Biden’s Freeze on Border Wall Construction Didn’t Violate Budget Law – 6/15/21; The Wall Street Journal: Op-ed: Trump Receives Another Postcard from the Swamp – 1/16/20)
    • At the time in 2021, “Sens. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., vice chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, and Shelly Moore Capito, R-W.Va., ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security Appropriations Committee, said the decision ‘makes clear that there are two sets of rules when it comes to executing funds appropriated by Congress: one for Democrat administrations and one for Republican administrations.’” (Government Executive: GAO Says Biden’s Freeze on Border Wall Construction Didn’t Violate Budget Law – 6/15/21)

REPUBLICANS HAVE BEEN WORKING TO ROLL BACK THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION’S RECORD-BREAKING REGULATORY AGENDA, WHICH IMPOSED $1.8 TRILLION IN COMPLIANCE COSTS. THE CALIFORNIA WAIVERS ARE NO DIFFERENT.

“Congress has used a legislative procedure known as the Congressional Review Act for nearly three decades to prevent bad regulations from taking effect. Members of Congress have submitted more than 50 such resolutions in 2025 alone—many implementing President Trump’s cost-cutting economic agenda… Because of [California’s] market share, its emission standards would become de facto national ones.” – Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Mike Lee (R-Utah)

  • During President Biden’s time in office, his administration’s regulatory costs “added up to more than $1.8 trillion – far exceeding any preceding administration on record,” leading to the creation of 356 million new hours of paperwork compliance. (American Action Forum: The Biden Regulatory Record – 1/29/25)
  • The Biden administration issued more economically significant rules “than any of the past six administrations managed to accomplish in the entire four years of their first term.” (The Wall Street Journal: The Regulatory State Is In Flux Like Never Before, and Businesses Are Hating It – 9/3/24)