As goes California, so goes Washington. At least in the realm of vehicle-emissions standards.
That’s why Congress’ move to revoke a waiver for California under the federal Clean Air Act last month also jerked back Washington’s ability to mandate the sale of electric and hybrid cars by next decade.
In 2022, Washington lawmakers adopted a set of regulations, based on California’s, to phase out the sale of gas-powered cars by 2035 (and to transition away from gas-powered commercial vehicles). When Congress attacked the foundation of California’s policy, it pulled the rug out from under Washington as well.
Now the future of these electric vehicle mandates is uncertain.
Republican lawmakers carried the measure revoking the waiver in both the House and Senate, but Washington’s Democratic Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez crossed party lines with several others to vote alongside Republican Reps. Dan Newhouse and Michael Baumgartner, from the east side of the state, revoking the waiver.
The vote undercuts Washington’s ability to reduce planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions from the country’s single largest source: Transportation. The end result, experts say, is a slower transition away from gasoline-powered cars and toward electric and hybrid ones.
Eyes are now turning to the courts, adding to the long list of Trump-era policies mired in the legal process.
How did we get here?
In 2020, California announced its plan to phase out gas-powered cars. This regulation would peak in 2035 with the state requiring that all cars sold in the state be electric or hybrid. Medium- and heavy-duty vehicles (like semitrucks) still reliant on gas would have another decade before they could no longer be sold.
California was the first state to enact this type of electric vehicle mandate. It’s had the authority to set stricter clean air standards than the federal government since 1967 but needs waivers from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in order to enforce them. Other state legislatures can adopt California’s stronger regulations as well, with their policies set on the foundation of those waivers.
But California’s electric vehicle mandate set off something of a political battle between Donald Trump and Joe Biden’s presidential administrations. The Democrat allowed for the waiver while the Republican didn’t.
Washington state followed in California’s footsteps in 2022, requiring that all new cars sold here be either electric or plug-in hybrid by 2035 (with lighter requirements for heavier-duty vehicles).
In all, sixteen other states, alongside Washington, D.C., adopted some form of California’s zero-emission vehicle standards and so their fates are tied to its waiver.
Maybe you can see where this is going. With each state basing its regulations on California’s and all of them dependent on that federal waiver, the federal government has a good deal of leverage in the matter.
So when Congress carried out President Trump’s wishes last month by revoking the waiver (and several others), the effects cascaded down the chain, crashing efforts across the nation to phase out gas-powered cars in the years ahead.
What’s the reaction so far?
Congress has never before revoked one of California’s waivers. So why now?
As soon as he moved back into the White House, Trump declared war on policies related to climate change, often calling it a scam or hoax. The revocation of California’s waiver is just one piece of a broader effort from the president and his allies to dismantle scientific efforts conflicting with their political worldview. It’s also another example of a growing effort to stop states from enacting policies that differ from Trump’s.
“They don’t really care about states’ rights,” said state Rep. Joe Fitzgibbon, D-Burien, chair of the House Environment and Energy Committee. “That’s a total smoke screen.”
Republicans in Congress who voted to revoke the waiver said they wanted to support consumer choices rather than backing a mandate for electric vehicles.
In a statement, Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson called the move “brazenly out of step with the law, science, and public will.”
Ferguson promised to keep Washington moving forward on “building a healthier, cleaner future,” the statement said.
Others, however, felt differently. Sheri Call, president and CEO of the Washington Trucking Associations, said she was thrilled the waiver was revoked.
While Washington’s requirements for electric medium- and heavy-duty vehicles were substantially lower than passenger cars (the state required 40% EV sales by 2035 in that category), they were still unattainable, Call said. Switching to an electric car for a daily commute is one thing. But it’s something entirely different for a long-haul truck moving thousands of pounds of merchandise across the country with sparse charging infrastructure, she said.
“What they’re asking us to do is absolutely impossible,” Call said.
The trucking industry isn’t opposed to decarbonizing, Call said. But it needs more time and more options. She called on Ferguson to help her industry further and ease the transition.
Electric vehicle sales are generally growing across the automobile industry, even as Republicans in Congress target federal subsidies to make them more affordable and Trump doubles down on planet-warming fossil fuels. More than a fifth of the vehicles sold in Washington last year were plug-in hybrids or fully electric.
Requirements in California, Washington and other states for clean vehicles were aimed at speeding up that transition. Without that federal waiver, though, they can no longer require vehicle sales to move toward electric and hybrid options.
In the big picture, this means automakers lose some of their incentive to build more electric vehicles, said Matthew Metz, founder and executive director of Coltura, a Seattle-based nonprofit in favor of EV mandates.
“Left to their own devices, automakers want to build big, gas-guzzling SUVs,” Metz said. “That’s their moneymaking sweet spot.”
Why mandate electric cars in the first place?
The idea is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in an attempt to mitigate the worst effects of climate change. At the same time, vehicle emissions cloud the air in cities, exacerbating heart and lung diseases, among other things.
Washington has taken major steps in recent years toward cutting greenhouse gas emissions across the board. The Clean Energy Transformation Act pushes utilities away from natural gas and coal in favor of renewables. The Climate Commitment Act requires top industrial polluters to pay for their emissions and reduce their output over the coming decades.
But transportation produces the most pollution in the state, about 40% of all emissions, said Joe Nguyen, director of the Washington State Department of Commerce.
To that end, state lawmakers adopted a first slate of clean-vehicle standards in 2021, requiring that a fraction of the cars sold in Washington be electric or hybrid by 2025.
The next year, lawmakers strengthened the regulations (based on the California standards), escalating that percentage each year until it reaches 100% in 2035. The regulation also requires commercial vans and trucks to move toward electric and hybrid options but doesn’t call for a full ban of gas-powered vehicle sales in those categories.
To be clear, these regulations apply to vehicle sellers, not individual consumers.
Transportation can be a particularly charged issue with regard to climate regulations. People are sensitive to volatile gas prices. Electric and hybrid vehicles can be expensive and difficult to find. And public transit alternatives can often prove unreliable or inaccessible.
At the same time, the sector has a lot of emission-cutting potential and options for lawmakers to offer subsidies or other transportation alternatives.
Where do we go from here?
Congress’ decision to revoke California’s waiver doesn’t bring Washington’s efforts to a screeching halt, Nguyen said, but it does hamper its efforts. Without an electric vehicle mandate, the state can continue to encourage the transition with things like rebates or expanding charging stations.
Fitzgibbon added that more access to public transportation or even reducing car tab fees for electric vehicles would also help. They’ll explore other options to speed up the shift away from gas.
“We’re not going to take this lying down,” Fitzgibbon said.
State lawmakers also planned for the possibility of losing the waiver.
Washington’s Clean Fuel Standard, passed in 2021, required fuel providers to cut the carbon intensity of their product 20% by 2038. Lawmakers increased that to a 45% reduction this year and built in a back door, Fitzgibbon said.
Should the electric vehicle mandate fall, the state Department of Ecology can increase the clean fuel standard to 55% in the years ahead, Fitzgibbon said.
If one regulation gets weaker, the other grows stronger, he said.
Losing the waiver isn’t a foregone conclusion, though. Trump hasn’t yet signed the bill, though he appears likely to do so in the coming days or weeks. Dispute is growing over whether Congress had the authority to revoke the document in the first place.
Federal legislators took the vote using the Congressional Review Act, meant to allow incoming administrations to revoke regulations enacted by the previous administration. The question is whether this type of waiver counts as a regulation.
Officials with the U.S. Government Accountability Office said in March that these types of waivers are not up for consideration under the Congressional Review Act.
California officials announced last month that they plan to sue the federal government over the matter and Fitzgibbon said he expects Washington (and other states) will join that lawsuit once it’s filed.
