About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Media falsely attribute entire auto standards cost to Obama

May 20, 2009 5:24 pm ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

SUMMARY: Numerous media outlets have falsely asserted or suggested that President Obama's emissions standards proposal alone would increase the average vehicle cost by $1,300. In fact, $700 of that increase is a result of a bill signed by President Bush in 2007.

10 Comments

In reporting on President Obama's plan for tighter fuel economy and emissions standards, numerous media outlets have falsely asserted or suggested that Obama's proposal alone would increase the cost of the average car by $1,300. In fact, according to the administration, its proposal would add $600 to the price of the average car by 2016, with an additional $700 increase resulting from increased emissions requirements included in the Energy Independence and Security Act, which was signed by President Bush in 2007.

In a May 18 conference call, a senior administration official said, "The average cost per vehicle is -- of the national policies is $600 above the CAFE cost. So CAFE [Corporate Average Fuel Economy] was estimated in 2016 to have an average vehicle cost of about $700, and this national policy has an incremental cost of $600." The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, the Associated Press, and Bloomberg, among others, noted that the White House said the $1,300 increase is not solely a result of the "new" rules, but rather reflects both the changes made in the 2007 energy law and those announced on May 19 by Obama. For instance, the Post reported:

A senior administration official said on Monday that the new standards would add $600 to the price of the average car, on top of the $700 of added costs that would have resulted from more modestly increased targets permitted under the 2007 energy bill.

However, the following media figures and outlets falsely claimed or suggested that the entire $1,300 increase would be a result of Obama's proposal:

  • During the May 20 edition of National Public Radio's Morning Edition, environmental reporter Elizabeth Shogren said, "Experts say one limitation to this proposal is that it would drive up the cost of new cars by about $1,300 each, according to the White House."
  • In a May 19 article, Reuters reported:

Under the new standards, U.S. passenger vehicles and light trucks must average 35.5 miles per gallon (6.62 litres/100km) by 2016. The current law, approved by the Bush administration, requires a similar gain by 2020.

[...]

The plan was praised by automakers, environmentalists and an array of politicians, but it will mean higher price tags for consumers. The new program will add about $1,300 to the price of producing a vehicle.

Obama said car buyers would recoup the money with the lower fuel costs realized under more efficient mileage standards.

  • Sean Hannity stated during the May 19 edition of his Fox News program that "the president pushed new emissions standards for automobiles, a move that some say -- that estimates say will cost American consumers upwards of $1,300 per automobile."
  • In a May 19 entry on CBS News' Political Hotsheet blog, Steve Chaggaris stated: "President Obama will announce new fuel efficiency standards for automobiles and the first-ever national emissions limits today at the White House. ... The new rules are expected to bump up auto prices an average of $1,300 per vehicle."
  • During the May 19 edition of Fox Business Network's Cavuto, Fox Business analyst Jonathan Hoenig stated, "[I]f the president is so interested in saving everybody money, then why is this plan gonna tack, what is it, $1,300 onto the cost of every new car sold in this country?"
  • During the May 19 edition of his syndicated radio show, CNN host Lou Dobbs stated, "Today the president announced new fuel-efficiency standards -- CAFE standards -- that are estimated to cost carmakers about $1,300 per vehicle. Translation: That will cost the consumer about $1,300 a vehicle."
  • During the May 19 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, White House correspondent Ed Henry reported that Obama's proposed changes will "have major ramifications for consumers." He added that the proposed "new national fuel-efficiency standard, demand[s] that by 2016 automakers are building vehicles that average 35.5 miles per gallon" and that "White House officials say you'll pay about $1,300 more per car." Later in the broadcast, on-screen text stated, "New rules could cost $1,300 per vehicle," as host Wolf Blitzer interviewed Obama energy adviser Carol Browner.
  • During the May 19 edition of Fox Business, senior Washington correspondent Peter Barnes stated that "the new rules will force the automakers to more quickly develop more efficient gas-burning engines as well as systems, as well as accelerate production of electronic vehicles and gas-electric hybrids. But this will come at a cost, according to the administration, adding an estimated $1,300 per car to manufacture a car by 2016."
  • During the May 19 edition of CNBC's Squawk on the Street, anchor Trish Regan stated, "President Obama's new fuel-efficiency standards, front and center this morning. The standards will save billions of barrels of oil but are expected to cost consumers an extra $1,300 per vehicle by the time the plan is complete in 2016."
  • The May 19 edition of Fox Business' Money for Breakfast aired on-screen text that read, "New standards expected to add $1,300 to the cost per car." Moreover, during the show, Fox Business contributor Charles Payne stated, "[H]ow much is this gonna cost? You know, the automakers can't afford it, so that means the viewers are gonna have to pay for it. This adds 1,300 bucks now. Wow, that is a lot of money. Literally, it could be billions of dollars to get this done. I thought 2020 was too soon. To move that up to 2016 to me is nuts."
  • The May 19 edition of Fox Business Morning included on-screen text that read, "New rules could add $1300 to the price of a car," and anchor Jenna Lee stated, "[O]fficials saying the new rules will add about $1,300 to the price of a car."

From the May 20 edition of NPR's Morning Edition:

SHOGREN: Experts say one limitation to this proposal is that it would drive up the cost of new cars by about $1,300 each, according to the White House. Robert Stavins, the director of Harvard University's environmental economics program, says, as a result, people would be more likely to hold onto their old cars.

From the May 19 Reuters article:

Under the new standards, U.S. passenger vehicles and light trucks must average 35.5 miles per gallon (6.62 litres/100km) by 2016. The current law, approved by the Bush administration, requires a similar gain by 2020.

[...]

HIGHER PRICE TAGS FOR CONSUMERS

The plan was praised by automakers, environmentalists and an array of politicians, but it will mean higher price tags for consumers. The new program will add about $1,300 to the price of producing a vehicle.

Obama said car buyers would recoup the money with the lower fuel costs realized under more efficient mileage standards.

"This is a winning proposition for folks looking to buy a car," he said. "Over the life of a vehicle, the typical driver would save about $2,800 by getting better gas mileage."

The plan could cut deeply into voracious U.S. gasoline demand, dealing another blow to a refining sector hard hit by recession and bracing for more climate legislation.

From the May 19 edition of Fox News' Hannity:

HANNITY: Now then the president pushed new emissions standards for automobiles, a move that some say -- that estimates say will cost American consumers upwards of $1,300 per automobile. Now, meanwhile, Congress continues to move forward with their cap-and-trade legislation.

From the May 19 edition of Fox Business Network's Cavuto:

HOENIG: A lot of factors, you know, play into the price of oil, Neil. And, for my opinion, probably most prominently lately has been the declining dollar, of course --

NEIL CAVUTO (host): Right.

TRACY BYRNES (Fox Business correspondent): Right.

HOENIG: -- which pushes the price of all commodities higher. But I gotta tell you, I mean, if the president is so interested in saving everybody money, then why is this plan gonna tack, what is it, $1,300 onto the cost of every new car sold in this country? I mean, on a 14, $15,000 car, that's a lot of money.

BYRNES: And that's a low ball.

HOENIG: And are we addicted to oil? I suppose --

BYRNES: That's a low ball.

From the May 19 edition of United Stations Radio Networks' The Lou Dobbs Show:

DOBBS: Today the president announced new fuel-efficiency standards -- CAFE standards -- that are estimated to cost carmakers about $1,300 per vehicle. Translation: That will cost the consumer about $1,300 a vehicle. It's a move that could cost those carmakers an additional 13 to $20 billion every year.

From the May 19 edition of CNN's The Situation Room:

BLITZER: Today he outlined the plan and called it an historic turning point. Let's go to our senior White House correspondent Ed Henry -- he's got the details. Ed, a dramatic day at the White House.

HENRY: That's right, Wolf. On the campaign this president talked a lot about change, and today was an example where he actually pulled together some parties that were at loggerheads -- there were lawsuits flying around. He brought them together for some dramatic action that's gonna have major ramifications for consumers.

[begin video clip]

HENRY: The president brought together congressional leaders, governors, and automakers on a deal that marks the government's most ambitious step to cut greenhouse gas emissions ever.

OBAMA: No longer will we accept the notion that our politics are too small, our nation too divided, our people too weary of broken promises and lost opportunities to take up a historic calling.

HENRY: A strict new national fuel-efficiency standard, demanding that by 2016 automakers are building vehicles that average 35.5 miles per gallon, saving 1.8 billion barrels of oil.

OBAMA: That's more oil than we imported last year from Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Libya, and Nigeria combined.

HENRY: White House officials say you'll pay about $1,300 more per car, but the president of Toyota notes that's likely to be offset by fuel savings.

[end video clip]

[...]

emissions-sitroom

From the May 19 edition of Fox Business Network's Fox Business:

BARNES: Now the new rules will force the automakers to more quickly develop more efficient gas-burning engines as well as systems, as well as accelerate production of electronic vehicles and gas-electric hybrids. But this will come at a cost, according to the administration, adding an estimated $1,300 per car to manufacture a car by 2016. But the administration says that this cost, at least for consumers, will probably be a wash, given that they will be now having to use lower amounts of fuel to drive their cars.

From the May 19 edition of CNBC's Squawk on the Street:

REGAN: President Obama's new fuel-efficiency standards, front and center this morning. The standards will save billions of barrels of oil but are expected to cost consumers an extra $1,300 per vehicle by the time the plan is complete in 2016.

From the May 19 edition of Fox Business Network's Money for Breakfast:

foxbiz

[...]

PAYNE: You know what? Last year the Ford F-150 still sold a lot more than a Prius and will continue to, so there you go. Also, how much is this gonna cost? You know, the automakers can't afford it, so that means the viewers are gonna have to pay for it. This adds 1,300 bucks now. Wow, that is a lot of money. Literally, it could be billions of dollars to get this done. I thought 2020 was too soon. To move that up to 2016 to me is nuts.

From the May 19 edition of Fox Business Morning:

foxbiz2

LEE: The Obama administration and automakers agreeing to new fuel-efficiency standards. The average fuel economy for cars and trucks will have to be 35.5 million -- million -- miles per gallon by 2016, moving up that target date by about four years. The tab will be picked up at least in part by consumers; officials saying the new rules will add about $1,300 to the price of a car.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by terrapin53 (May 20, 2009 6:33 pm ET)
         
      IN 2015 I will worry about 2016. I am just glad to hear the challenge to improve the mpg and emissions.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by my4cents (May 20, 2009 9:10 pm ET)
         
      Thanks MMFA. This is new information to me.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by my4cents (May 20, 2009 9:56 pm ET)
           
        If this is in fact true, may be Bush was not so bad after all.
        I speak/write not knowing the full facts but, if he signed something into law that, though increasing the price of a car, helped the environment, he was not an entire failure.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by LuvLuLu (May 20, 2009 11:39 pm ET)
           
        Not only are they lying about the $1300, if you listen to (and believe) Rush, you'd be even more outraged.

        His latest talking point? That not only will you pay the $1300 extra, but contrary to what the Obama Administration says, you won't make that up with better fuel economy which leads to filling up your gas tank less often. Why not? Because if fuel mileage goes up, the Feds will need to increase the gas tax to get more revenue, so that increased gas tax will eat up all those potential savings.

        What a tool he is.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by fantagor (May 21, 2009 2:41 am ET)
          1  
          What Rush neglects to consider is that the loss of gas tax revenues will be made up by a thriving economy and a tax code that prohibits corporation from getting rich but paying no taxes. In fact, if we repatriated just a sliver of those hidden gains, the government could forgive taxing us at the pump. Another example of how conservatism's corporate favoritism is far more expensive, wasteful and elitist than all the liberal socialist programs one can dream up in an afternoon.

          Randy
          Report Abuse
    • Author by fantagor (May 21, 2009 2:35 am ET)
      1  
      Is that $1300 in today's dollars or 2016 dollars? Is it at all possible that the increased cost is just as easily attributed to inflation? Lastly, what are the projected savings on cars that use less gas in terms of direct costs (filling up) and indirect cost (the reduction in health care costs due to cleaner air)? Nobody ever addresses the issue from that perspective. The same is true of cap and trade. All we hear is how our energy costs will increase, yet we never hear how our collective health will increase thus producing a marked decline in health care costs related to breathing polluted air.

      Randy
      Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (May 21, 2009 11:37 am ET)
        1  
        We also never hear about the fact that these "costs" actually mean MORE JOBS for the people who will develop the technology, starting with me and my fellow engineers, and moving onto all the starups and factories taht will manuftaure it. Sure there's a cost to GM, but the economic condition overall will improve, more than enough to cover the cost increase. It's mindless, needless fearmonger. I'm IN the auto industry, and I applaud this legislation. In fact it's about 20 years too late in coming!
        Report Abuse
    • Author by IowaDem (May 21, 2009 9:03 am ET)
      2  
      What is also left out of this conversation is the Economic theory called "Economies of Scale". If ALL cars are held to this stricter standard, then the cost of making these changes will be spread across the entire auto industry. Over time, the parts and labor needed (due to the learning curve) for these changes will decrease. The fact is, that there is a good chance that this $1300 number will be $0 by the time 2016 rolls around.

      Another economic theory that reinforces this is supply and demand. If indeed ALL cars cost $1300 more (although I don't see how the Prius or other Hybrids would be affected) then the auto industry would indeed suffer HUGE losses as the demand at those prices would severely drive down demand. The auto industry will do everything they can (capitalism is supposedly good for this kind of thing) to make their higher gas milage cars remain competitively priced.

      In other words, this figure is meaningless and useless unless you are simply trying to SCARE people into resisting change. Even if the change is in EVERYONE's best interest.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by NiceguyEddie (May 21, 2009 9:11 am ET)
         
      Where does HOENIG think you can buy a car for $15,000? You know what? Those 4-cylindar econo-boxes [almost all of which are over $20K now anyway] already get about 35 MPG. So it won't take much to squeeze out another 4 MPG. Most likely? They'll make the engine a smidge smaller and thus CHEAPER. So if he's really crying ov ther cost of the chevy Aveo or the Honda Civic. he (1) has no idea what he's talking about and (2) apparently hasn't been in the market for one recently.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by fantagor (May 21, 2009 2:53 pm ET)
        1  
        Yep, every time technology makes something smaller it's automatically crappier. Like computers. I sure miss the days of those huge cabinets filled with reel-to-reel tape, all so you could divide a five digit number by a two digit number. I know my laptop can do millions of calculations a second, but so what? Give me large and clunky any day. That should be the GOP's new slogan:

        The GOP - Large and Clunky, Just Like Mom Used to Make

        Too enigmatic? Well, that would be one the GOP's column.

        Randy
        Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.