Technology & Science
Trump Slashes 2031 CAFE Target to 34.5 mpg
On 3 Dec 2025 the White House opened a 45-day comment period on a rule that would cut the U.S. fleet-wide fuel-economy requirement for model-year 2031 vehicles from 50.4 mpg to 34.5 mpg, dismantling the Biden-era standard.
Focusing Facts
- NHTSA projects automakers would save over $35 billion in compliance technology between 2027-2031, while drivers could pay up to $185 billion more for gasoline through 2050.
- Congressional Republicans pre-emptively set the civil penalty for missing CAFE targets to $0 in July 2025, effectively removing enforcement teeth.
- The proposal bars electric-vehicle credits from CAFE calculations, severing coordination with EPA tailpipe rules and ending inter-company credit trading.
Context
The tug-of-war over mileage rules echoes Ronald Reagan’s 1981 freeze of Carter-era energy standards after the 1973-74 oil shock had birthed CAFE in 1975. Each pendulum swing—Obama’s 2012 54.5 mpg goal, Trump-1’s 2020 rollback, Biden’s 2024 reinstatement, and now Trump-2’s reversal—signals that U.S. auto policy is being set by election cycles rather than long-term energy strategy. Global peers are moving the opposite direction (EU’s 2035 zero-emission mandate, China’s NEV quota), so America risks ceding technological leadership even as Detroit enjoys near-term profit on large trucks. Over a century horizon, the episode highlights a recurring pattern: short-term consumer-price politics outweighing resource and climate planning, much like the 1920s preference for cheap gasoline that later magnified the 1970s crisis. Whether this rollback endures will depend less on engineering feasibility than on how durable U.S. political institutions prove against four-year policy whiplash.
Perspectives
Right leaning media
e.g., The Western Journal, The Western Journal headline echoed by sympathetic local outlets — Portrays Trump’s rollback as a common-sense victory that frees Americans from an implicit electric-vehicle mandate, lowers sticker prices and restores lawful, achievable standards for gasoline cars. Echoes Trump’s political talking points, highlights industry praise, and dismisses or omits quantified climate and fuel-cost harms, reflecting ideological alignment with conservative politics and auto-industry interests.
Left-leaning or climate-focused outlets
e.g., Al Jazeera Online, LAist, BBC, KUOW-FM — Warn that weakening fuel-economy rules will accelerate global-warming emissions, raise long-term fuel bills and endanger public health, reversing hard-won climate progress. Stresses environmental and consumer-savings harms, while skimming over automakers’ compliance difficulties or short-term affordability arguments, mirroring advocacy-group framing.
Capitol-hill and industry-centric press/local Detroit auto coverage
e.g., Roll Call, Detroit Free Press — Frames the proposal as a regulatory ‘reset’ that aligns standards with market realities, offers automakers stability and could make vehicles more affordable for consumers. Relies heavily on statements from automakers and supportive lawmakers, understating projected fuel-cost increases and environmental repercussions that critics cite.