Connecticut has mirrored California’s passenger vehicle emissions standards since 1994 and is one of 17 states that has adopted the Golden State’s vehicle regulations, which are stricter than the ones the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has set.
Today, California’s goal to ban new gasoline-powered vehicles by 2035 has left Connecticut reconsidering continuing to follow the state’s efforts, Bryce Chinault, Director of External Affairs at Yankee Institute recently wrote for The Wall Street Journal.
Connecticut officially outsourced its emissions standards policy making in 2004, but even then, some lawmakers were concerned about yielding the state’s regulatory independence. Democratic state Rep. J. Brendan Sharkey noted during a February 2004 hearing with then-Attorney General Richard Blumenthal that, “(California is) essentially the dog and (Connecticut is) we’re the tail and we have to wag to their commands.”
Blumenthal assured lawmakers that the state wouldn’t be “bound by every change” California made, but Connecticut has been for nearly two decades, according to Chinault.
California’s hold over Connecticut’s emissions policies started to loosen a bit in 2022, however. That was the year California announced its Advanced Clean Cars II program that required every passenger vehicle sold in the state had to produce zero emissions by 2035. Last summer, the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) adopted the program and moved to transition the state’s entire transportation sector to electric vehicles (EVs) on the same timeline.
The rules also stated that 35 percent of all new cars in Connecticut would have to be electric beginning in 2026 and sales requirement rates will increase every year until 2035.
DEEP’s efforts to push the proposed regulation in to law has been met with pushback, however. The organization reportedly underestimated how much the state would lose from decreased gasoline taxes, per an independent review by the nonpartisan Office of Fiscal Accountability. Additionally, of the 4,000 comments DEEP received about the new regulation, most were opposed by a 3 to 1 margin, according to a Yankee Institute analysis.
RG Strategies, a Democratic polling firm, also found that almost 60 percent of Connecticut voters opposed the proposed ban on gas-powered vehicles.
Connecticut’s 14-member bipartisan Legislative Regulation Review Committee planned to vote against the mandate, but Governor Ned Lamont opted to withdraw it himself on November 30.
The state appears open to transitioning to electric vehicles, but at a less aggressive pace than California has set, the Connecticut Mirror reports. For example, House Speaker Matt Ritter (D-Hartford) said one possibility is follow New Mexico and Colorado, which have endorsed moving to zero-emission vehicles, but also want to assess their states’ progress before developing the needed EV infrastructure.
“This might give people comfort,” Ritter said.
Following the EPA’s proposed federal emission standards is another potentially more appealing option for the state. The EPA would require that 67 percent of new light-duty vehicles and 25 percent of new heavy-duty trucks sold in the U.S. would be EVs or otherwise have zero-emission powered engines by 2032.
“This is what we’ve been saying right along: The EPA regulations are just more realistic,” Rep. Nicole Klarides-Ditria (R-Seymour) told The Connecticut Mirror. “We all want to move (towards zero emissions vehicles), but (California’s goal of 100 percent by 2023) too aggressive.”
Why states may be hesitant about EV mandates
While EVs are deemed more eco-friendly, Chinault noted that mandates aren’t necessarily cost-free. Electric vehicles often need more materials to be manufactured than traditional cars. EVs are also heavier, which can add more cost on and burden on roads and bridges.
“Policy makers across the country have convinced themselves that electric vehicles are the future—that there’s a market for these cars and trucks, Chinault wrote. “If that’s the case, why are we mandating these regulations instead of letting the market work?
It is unclear what the future holds for an EV mandate in Connecticut. California has had the regulatory wheel so long; Connecticut may no longer remember the rules of the road. But when lawmakers return to Hartford next month, they have a chance to slip back into the driver’s seat.”
Comments