Do you think U.S. lawmakers should take California’s lead and end sales of new gas powered vehicles by 2035?

With the issue of climate change growing daily, nations all over the world are examining their options when it comes to reducing the volume of their atmosphere damaging emissions..

Our Thoughts

With the issue of climate change growing daily, nations all over the world are examining their options when it comes to reducing the volume of their atmosphere damaging emissions. America’s love of gas guzzling, high power vehicles will mean that tackling that part of the climate puzzle will always be a tricky proposition. The vast size of the US coupled with an aging and tired public transport network has meant that private road-going vehicles have remained massively important for decades. While some nations around the world have been making great strides with alternate forms of public transport, the majority of US administrations have simply let things be.

The state of California has for some time been an outlier regarding green-leaning transport policy. They set stricter vehicle emissions standards way back in 1990 and the standards have been strengthened throughout history to this day. One element of the ZEV ( Zero Emission Vehicle ) program was to force all car manufacturers, who sold cars in the state, to sell at least one electric vehicle. Over time, a number of other states have adopted California’s standards. A side effect of this adoption has meant that, overall, manufacturers have ended up producing greener cars for the whole world, rather than just California. Why make a “less-green” car if you are making a “greener” car for California?

The most recent addition to the ZEV program was to stipulate that “by 2035, all new cars and passenger trucks sold in California be zero-emission vehicles”. Should this, or future administrations, attempt to implement this policy nationwide?


52% Voted:  3,184 Votes:  YES

48% Voted: 2,940 Votes: NO

6,124 Respondents

SurveyBeta Conclusion

A very close result that we expect follows very much along party lines. On the one side, more left-leaning, democrat supporting respondents would be expected to vote “YES” here for a few reasons. They tend to be more believing in the man-made climate change narrative and are looking for ways to slow the heating of the planet. Also, they are more likely to agree that government intervention in this matter is warranted and we shouldn’t simply let the market naturally adjust sales figures of new cars.

Right-leaning supporters of the Republican Party have always eyed California’s maverick transportation policies with suspicion. Trump even succeeded, during his tenure in the White House, to hamstring some California\’s state policies with policies of his own that have since been rescinded. In some ways this question contains within it many of the average Republican’s pet hates. They generally believe that the climate threat is overblown and exaggerated. They believe that the Government should resist meddling with markets and just let them work out supply and demand.

Realistically, with the currently locked state of the Senate and the upcoming midterms not looking great for the Democrats, this sort of legislation looks highly unlikely to even see the light of day any time soon. However, 2035 is a great deal of time away in political times. And, a great deal of time away in terms of some of the extreme weather effects we are seeing around the world currently. In time, if the public perceives a greater number of droughts, wildfires and floods will the dial start to move towards the “YES” vote here?

Scroll to Top