Lobbyists Influencing Policy
A common criticism of business in general is that they use lobbyists to control congress. If this is the case then how does one explain this:
The bill’s centerpiece requires automakers to increase vehicle fuel economy to an industry average of 35 miles per gallon over the next 13 years — a 40 percent increase and the first boost in the federal gas mileage requirement since 1975 when the rules were first enacted.
For years, auto companies have fought successfully any increase in the automobile mileage standard which now is 27.5 mpg for cars and 22.2 mpg for small trucks and SUVs. But an agreement forged with the help of Rep. John Dingell, D-Michigan, the longtime protector of the auto industry in Congress, cleared the way for the new requirements which have bipartisan support.
As far as industries go, automakers are one of the most powerful and yet is helpless to stop the passage of this bill. How does one explain this? My suspicion was that there is enough political support for the bill that pressure by lobbyists was ignored. Lobbyists influence on policy is minimized when people care about the legislation.
Incidentally, I’m against this legislation. Its not entirely clear why the democrats are in favor of supporting a bill that will hurt poor people. Forcing car companies to build in more technologies will result in increased cost for all cars. Personally I object because the federal government has no business telling citizens what kinds of cars they can and can’t buy.
December 13th, 2007 at 7:46 pm
Specifically, about 83% of the public support such measures, with only 9% opposing, according to http://www.net.org/fueleconomy/polling.vtml. In a democracy, it’s insane that such a huge majority is needed to get anything done, especially when the action that congress finally takes is so very toothless. So yes, 83% popular support is the amount needed to just barely deviate from the lobbyist’s demands. That’s still a problem for me.
BTW, increasing fuel efficiency helps poor people by decreasing the amount of gas they have to buy, as well as driving down gas prices (reduced demand). And the government isn’t telling people what they can and can’t buy, they’re telling american companies what they can and can’t sell.
December 14th, 2007 at 4:32 pm
“And the government isn’t telling people what they can and can’t buy, they’re telling american companies what they can and can’t sell.”
What is the difference, in practice? Can Americans buy foreign cars that fail to meet these requirements?
December 14th, 2007 at 4:56 pm
OH MY GOD. Someone other than me is refuting a commentor’s response. Have I died? Is this heaven?
December 15th, 2007 at 2:00 am
I assume that they can. Otherwise the article would have mentioned the import restrictions.
December 15th, 2007 at 2:02 am
BTW, the correct way for the government to handle this is to offer tax incentives to citizens with fuel efficient cars (like many states have doen for hybrid cars), ratehr than through regulation. Better to work with the free market than against it.
December 16th, 2007 at 7:52 pm
This silly argument about helping the poor people makes me laugh. I was under the impression that poor have a problem with upfront cash. They are poor cause they have nothing now not because they are going to be poor in the future. I guess I was wrong. Poor people have million of dollars today but will lose over the next ten years. How do they measure that?
The government forbids officials from marrying same sex couples. According to your analysis, the state is not telling citizens who they can and can’t marry. They are telling the officials marrying couples who they can and can’t marry.
Stated that way it sure softens up a blatant violation of one groups civil rights. Maybe social conservatives should approach the problem this way. Use the Darwin approved method of forcing values down other peoples throats by being indirect. Class up that anti-libertarian legislation by reducing the group explicitly effected while at the same time enjoy forcing the population to abide by your values.
Little surprised Jamie has not already given you shit for you blatant attempt at spinning.