Higher fuel economy standards threaten drivers, small business

"You can't regulate consumer behavior."

That bit of common sense, uttered by Sen. Frank Murkowski, R-Alaska, at a Senate hearing this week, has become lost in the race in Congress to impose higher average fuel economy standards on light trucks, sports utility vehicles and vans.

Millions of people who own small businesses are carefully watching as Congress attempts to defy common sense. Small businesses and the self-employed are the largest group of consumers of those vehicles. We buy a quarter of them.

Light trucks, SUVs and minivans are essential for the very survival of farmers, contractors, plumbers, florists and a host of other professions. We use them to haul lumber, drywall, pipes, refrigerators, flowers and other bulky or heavy supplies.

We also use these vehicles to transport people. In many cases, four-wheel drive vehicles are vital to do jobs in harsh weather without compromising the safety of the driver, or occupants of the vehicle.

Congress initially set corporate average fuel economy standards (CAFE) for cars during the energy crisis in the 1970s.

A lower standard was set for small trucks, which exempted vehicles weighing more than 8,500 pounds. An overly rigorous standard, such as the current 27.5-mpg now being demanded for SUVs and minivans, could have severely damaged small businesses and throttled the American economy.

So why is common sense being neglected today?

Some say we can have the best of both worlds if mandated by government. A congressionally mandated National Academy of Sciences study on mileage standards has suggested that higher standards at some level could be set without doing much damage to the auto industry, or the economy in general. Congress, though, forgot to ask the panel what the consequences might be for small businesses.

The study does acknowledge that the changes will not come without costs to consumers, and potentially the safety of passengers on the highway. After all, it has already been proven that increased CAFE standards have had unintended consequences -- including deadly ones.

One consequence was the flood of smaller cars on the nation's highways. Another was to force regular car buyers to flock to light trucks, SUVs and minivans as station wagons and bigger vehicles bit the dust.

Lighter, smaller cars might serve singles or young married couples without kids, but not the average family. It is little wonder that consumers turned to minivans and SUVs.

How else were they to haul around the kids, run errands, and take comfortable, affordable vacations?

A more tragic consequence has been tens of thousands of highway deaths.

As the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety notes, "Small/light vehicles have less structure and size to absorb crash energy, so more injurious forces can reach their occupants in crashes."

The institute found that people in small cars were twice as likely to die in crashes as those in large ones, and those in lighter trucks and SUVs are twice as likely to be killed in crashes as those in heavier ones.

To put this into perspective, USA Today's automotive writer James Healy reported in July 1999, "Big cars have shrunk to less-safe sizes and small cars have poured on roads.

As a result, 46,000 people have died in crashes they would have survived in bigger, heavier cars" since CAFE was imposed.

What has the nation gotten in return for the inconvenience, cost and carnage?

Not what Congress had originally intended, which was to decrease dependence on foreign oil and force conservation.

Reader Comments

• More News Headlines
• Popular News Stories