#EXCLUSIVE: Biden pick to head National Highway Traffic Safety Administration faces GOP roadblock

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and the other Republicans on the Senate Commerce Committee are taking aim at President Biden’s pick to head the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration over fuel-efficiency standards, a sign that another Biden nominee could be in serious trouble. 

Two high-profile Biden nominees have already failed to get past the Commerce Committee — Gigi Sohn, Biden’s pick to serve on the Federal Communications Committee, and Phillip Washington, the president’s choice to head the Federal Aviation Administration.  

Now another Biden nominee, Ann Carlson, the acting administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), is headed for a Republican buzzsaw in the Commerce Committee. 

All 13 Republicans on the panel have signed a letter raising concerns over Carlson’s track record at the agency. They fear she’s going to follow the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and set strict fuel economy standards intended to push Americans into buying electric vehicles (EVs). 

“Based on your record, we are deeply concerned that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) will follow the EPA’s lead and propose similarly radical vehicle fuel economy standards that run contrary to the law, diminish vehicle choice, impose higher costs on American families, and undermine our national and energy security all while benefitting China,” the Republican senators wrote in a letter to Carlson dated May 1. 

Biden nominated her on Feb. 13 to serve as the administrator of the agency, which has authority over setting motor vehicle safety and fuel economy standards. The committee received the nomination on March 27.  

A year ago, NHTSA announced new fuel efficiency standards for passenger cars and light trucks model years 2024 to 2026, requiring 8 percent higher fuel efficiency in 2024 and 2025 and 10 percent higher fuel efficiency in 2026. The announcement reversed former President Trump’s less stringent rules.  

Carlson served as the agency’s chief counsel at the time.  

Senate Republicans are gearing up for a fight over Carlson’s nomination after the EPA this month called for major reductions in vehicle emissions through 2032.  

The Commerce Committee has become a difficult venue for Biden’s nominees because three members who sit on the Democratic side of the dais — Sens. Jon Tester (D-Mont.), Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.) and Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) — face tough reelection battles next year.  

Tester and Rosen have announced their plans to run for reelection while Sinema hasn’t made any public decision yet.  

These lawmakers will come under pressure to oppose Carlson.  

The GOP senators noted in their letter that West Virginia and Montana have joined other states in a lawsuit alleging that NHTSA “exceeded its statutory authority” in issuing new fuel economy standards for model years 2024 through 2026.  

“As chief counsel, you had a responsibility to ensure that NHTSA’s proposed regulations complied with the law. However, you instead took actions that were consistent with your long career as an environmentalist without traffic safety experience,” the Republican senators wrote to Carlson.  

“In fact, as you told colleagues, the Biden administration recruited you to join NHTSA explicitly to advance its ‘whole of government’ climate change agenda,” they said.

Biden’s goal is to substantially increase the number of electric and hybrid vehicles on the road by 2030 and Republican lawmakers say this is an overreach of executive authority.  

Reuters reported that Biden’s goal is for 50 percent of new vehicles to be electric or plug-in hybrids by the end of the decade.  

“There is nothing in federal law that authorizes NHTSA to set fuel economy standards that effectively mandate the production of EVs in order to force gas-powered vehicles out of existence,” the Republican senators wrote to Carlson.  

They argue that dramatically raising fuel efficiency standards essentially creates a mandate for automakers to produce more electric vehicles and would violate the Supreme Court’s “major questions doctrine as articulated in West Virginia v. EPA” because the regulations would have “vast economic and political significance.” 

“NHTSA not only lacks such “clear congressional authorization,” it is specifically prohibited by federal law from considering the fuel economy of EVs when setting fuel-economy standards. Yet that is precisely what NHTSA did last year,” the senators wrote.  

NHTSA stated in its final Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency Rule released April 1 of last year that it “does not consider the fuel economy of electric vehicles in setting CAFE standards, consistent with Congress’ direction.” 

It noted in the rule that “using electric vehicles to meet the standards is a compliance option that many automakers are pursuing.”  

The Republican senators warned Carlson that higher fuel efficiency standards will push up the costs for middle class and lower-income Americans who buy cars and trucks. 

“A de facto EV mandate from NHTSA would not only be contrary to law, it would limit consumers’ vehicle choices and impose higher costs on American families at a time of crushing inflation,” they wrote. 

The lawmakers pointed out that in March the average price of an electric vehicle was $61,800 or about $16,200 more than the average price of internal-combustion vehicles.  

They said “other significant” consumer costs associated with electric vehicles need to be taken into account such as higher insurance costs, “lengthy charging times,” limited charging stations and shorter driving ranges compared to gas-powered vehicles.  

“As automakers are forced to produce more EVs, the supply of affordable new and used gas-powered vehicles will shrink at a time when demand for them is likely to increase. The result will be higher prices for gas-powered vehicles, placing a substantial burden on middle class and lower income Americans,” the senators wrote.  

NHTSA, however, argued in its final fuel economy rule last year that its stricter standard could reduce the average fuel outlays of model-year 2029 vehicles by about $1,387 over the lifetimes of those vehicles.  

Factoring in what it calls the “social cost of greenhouse gases,” the highway traffic safety agency calculated that last year’s rule will provide at least $16 billion in aggregate net monetized benefits to society.  

The Republican senators counter that higher fuel economy standards will impact “national and energy security” because, they assert, the United States is “heavily dependent on China for many of the minerals and other materials needed to produce EV batteries.” 

“We strongly urge NHTSA to reject the EPA’s attempt at central planning and not proceed with a wholesale remake of the auto sector,” they wrote. “NHTSA must not write radical regulations that are contrary to the law, harmful to American families, and undermine our national and energy security while benefitting China.”