One of the states that has said it will go to court is Virginia.
Mark Herring is the state's attorney general, and he is in Richmond.
Attorney General Herring, thank you very much for joining us.
The Trump administration says what it's doing will help the American economy.
It says, as you heard, the Obama era standards were going to cost consumers more per car.
MARK HERRING (D), Virginia Attorney General: No, that's nonsense.
Judy, the Trump administration, time and again, has shown an incredible capacity to follow
really bad public policy and oftentimes do it in an illegal way.
And what they have announced today is, unfortunately, another example.
Climate change is real.
And here in Virginia, we see the effects of that with more severe weather.
In Hampton Roads, for example, in Southeastern Virginia, they deal with nuisance flooding
frequently.
Even the world's largest Naval base at Norfolk faces billions of dollars in additional costs
as a result of sea level rise.
And one of the best things that we can do as a nation to help make sure that we have
clean air and a safe planet is to make sure that we maintain fuel efficiency standards.
And what the Trump administration is doing in trying to roll those back, it's going to
cost hundreds of billions of dollars more at the pump.
It's going to result in dirtier air and cost communities all across the country more money
in dealing with the cost of climate change.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Well, what about the cost argument, though, Mr. Herring?
They're saying this will add -- what the Obama era regulation would do is ultimately add
around an average of $2,300 more per vehicle.
MARK HERRING: No.
And their evidence is flimsy.
It's not supported by the data.
Even the car companies say this is a ridiculous idea.
If the Trump administration is successful in rolling these back, it's actually going
to cost Americans an estimated $1,600 a year at the pumps.
It's going to result in tens of millions of metric tons of CO2 into the atmosphere.
And what the Trump administration is doing is wrong and it's going to hurt us.
JUDY WOODRUFF: They also argue that this is a safer move because they say, under the Obama
era tougher standards, people would drive more and, therefore, there would be more car
accidents, more deaths.
MARK HERRING: And that's just not logical.
The truth is, the Obama era rule that was put into place was done in a very deliberative
manner, with a lot of input, with a lot of study.
And that evidence, the scientific evidence and data showed that those standards could
be implemented, that they could be done safely, and that it will make our air cleaner and
cost Americans less at the pumps.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Mr. Herring, Mr. Attorney General, let me ask you, though, about the -- a number
of critics have said -- even when the Obama era regulations were put in place, there were
arguments that this is really unrealistic, to try to hit 50 miles a gallon fuel efficiency
in the time frame they had set out, that that was never going to happen, that the auto manufacturers
weren't going to be able to meet that.
MARK HERRING: You know, there have been instances in the past where we have heard concerns that,
oh, well, maybe the technology won't be there, but whenever the standards have been set,
companies have been able to adjust and been able to meet the standards when they're needed.
And so, after a lot of careful thought, the rules need to be allowed to go into effect.
It will be good for Americans because they will pay less at the pumps.
The cars will be more if you fuel efficient, they will be cleaner and help meet our objectives
on climate change.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Finally, what -- you mentioned the auto manufacturers.
The Auto Manufacturers Association put out a statement today asking -- they're saying
it's going to be very difficult for them to come up with standards for two -- in other
words, two different sets of standards, one for some states, another one for the federal
government and other states.
They're asking the states to work this out with the Trump administration, to come up
with what they call a commonsense solution.
Is that possible?
MARK HERRING: Well, this is the beginning of the announcement of the proposed rule,
so it will take a period of some time, perhaps months, for the rules to go through the administrative
process.
During that time, we will be working to provide a lot of information and rationale for why
what they're trying to do is a bad idea.
So I would hope that they'd take a look at that and consider it.
And, you know, states have -- should have the right to be able to have strict fuel efficiency
standards.
But, hopefully, the Trump administration will realize what they're proposing is not a good
idea as this public process goes forward.
JUDY WOODRUFF: The Virginia attorney general, Mark Herring, thank you very much.
MARK HERRING: Thank you for having me.
JUDY WOODRUFF: We invited Republican leaders from several states to appear tonight, but
none was able to join us.
But Americans For Prosperity, which is the libertarian advocacy group backed by the conservative
billionaire Charles Koch, has been opposed to the Obama rules and applauded today's move.
Mary Kate Hopkins is the group's policy manager.
And she joins me now.
Mary Kate Hopkins, welcome.
You just heard Virginia's attorney general say what the administration is doing is bad
for the environment.
Just at a moment when climate change is becoming a greater and greater concern, the administration
is going in the wrong direction.
MARY KATE HOPKINS, Americans For Prosperity: Well, what we at AFP are concerned about,
what our activists are concerned about are really the impacts on consumers and how to
balance that with the impacts on the environment.
So we're focused on the extraordinary rate at which the CAFE standards have increased
the cost of vehicles in the United States and really priced average Americans out of
the new car market, and really to the negligible impact on the environment, as even the Obama
administration admitted when they finalized their rule.
JUDY WOODRUFF: So, your argument is that it wouldn't have a significant effect on the
environment to roll back -- in other words, to keep the efficiency standards where they
are now?
MARY KATE HOPKINS: Correct, yes.
And what they would be doing is freezing them at the 2020 level, so not rolling anything
back, simply not making it any worse.
And, yes, the analysis that accompanied the rule that was released today said that it
would have really a negligible impact on the future, maybe three one-thousandths of a degree
Celsius over the next 80 or so years in terms of global temperatures.
JUDY WOODRUFF: So all the -- we heard the attorney general refer to all the data, the
evidence that went into coming up with these regulations during the Obama presidency.
You're saying that didn't amount to anything?
MARY KATE HOPKINS: Well, it -- even under the previous administration, they said that
their entire slew of CAFE standards over the course of 15 years would only have an impact
of two-one-hundredths of a degree Celsius.
That accompanied their rule back in 2010.
JUDY WOODRUFF: What about the cost argument?
I -- we hear the argument that you started out bringing up, which is the cost of the
individual car, the average is going to is going to go up under the Obama era rules.
Attorney General Herring and others are saying that's not really the case; it's going to
be overridden by an increase, ultimately, in the cost of gasoline, and that people will
be paying more than $1,000 -- what did he say, $1,600 more a year at the pump.
MARY KATE HOPKINS: Right.
And that's an argument we have seen from supporters of this mandate.
What they're not telling you is that the underlying cost increase on vehicles is much higher.
We have seen to this point increase of about $2,300 per vehicle due to the CAFE standards
to this point.
And there are projections that put that number at 70 -- over $7,000 a vehicle, if we were
to keep those standards in place for 2025 as they're set to go now.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Let me go back to the environmental argument here.
Even if it's a small improvement in the environment, isn't it worth it, I think, would be the argument
of those on the other -- other side of this, that isn't it worth it to take some steps
to think that we're doing something -- something's being done to protecting environment for all
people?
MARY KATE HOPKINS: Right.
And the way we see it, the way our activists see it, this is a government mandate.
We have to weigh the costs and benefits.
If someone -- if we were able to see that this would have a significant benefit that
outweighs the costs, maybe that would change the conversation.
But at this point, the costs are so significant and so high and so impactful on American families,
that they truly outweigh the benefits.
And keep in mind also that our greenhouse gas emissions at the -- in the United States
are on a downward trend already.
JUDY WOODRUFF: To that point, scientists, though, are saying they see emissions overall
as being far greater than what is healthy, what is good for society.
They see the trend as going in a dangerous direction.
MARY KATE HOPKINS: Right.
And what we can say to that is, we are on a downward trajectory.
We are improving.
Things have improved over the past few decades.
We're not going to solve this problem in a day.
If we try to make our mandate so strong that it essentially stops people from driving,
that halts our economy, it keeps people from their jobs.
I guess the question is, what costs are we willing to pay?
And we think that we can find a reasonable balance between being stewards of our environment
and also allowing people to live their everyday lives, to succeed, to prosper, and to use
their vehicle to travel around as needed.
So, we'd like to strike a balance on that.
JUDY WOODRUFF: The auto manufacturers, they don't seem particularly enthusiastic about
what the Trump administration has announced.
They're saying today, we will try to work this out, but they -- they don't like the
idea of two different sets of standards.
It's clear they were already moving in the direction of trying to come up with more fuel-efficient
cars.
So when you don't have the auto manufacturers themselves on your side, what does that say?
MARY KATE HOPKINS: Well, I think that, yes, they don't want to have to change, when they
have already been preparing for a certain rule.
But there's enough lead time, with their freezing it at 2020 levels.
There's a little bit of time for these manufacturers to kind of adjust their plans.
Also, and manufacturers are talking about kind of having two different standards.
A lot of what they're referring to is whether it's the national standard or a state-based
standard, whether we allow states to create their own standards.
And so what the Trump this is also doing, along with freezing the CAFE standards, is
limiting the extent to which states can impose regulations on other states and on manufacturers.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Mary Kate Hopkins with Americans For Prosperity, thank you very much.
MARY KATE HOPKINS: Thank you.