Just when you thought California had run out of things to regulate, Sacramento apparently looked down at your car and said, “What about the tires?”
Yes, the tires.
California has become the first state in America to approve energy-efficiency standards for replacement tires. Beginning in 2029, most replacement tires for passenger cars and light-duty trucks will have to meet new rolling-resistance requirements. Those requirements get even tougher in 2033.
SENATE MOVES TO UNSHACKLE AMERICA’S DRIVERS FROM CALIFORNIA’S ‘CLIMATE ZEALOTS’
At some point, Californians have to ask themselves a simple question: How much government is too much government?
To be fair, California has some impressive numbers supporting its case.
THINK YOUR STATE IS EXPENSIVE? NEW DATA REVEALS WHERE AMERICANS FACE THE HIGHEST COST-OF-LIVING
The California Energy Commission estimates Phase 1 will add only about $6 to the cost of a set of tires while saving drivers approximately $85. How well did that work out on EVs and the real cost of gas savings relative to the price of the car? Phase 2 is projected to add about $26 per set while producing $179 in gasoline savings over the tires’ life. That’s a whopping $40 a year in savings. Don’t spend it all in one place if it is actually true.
The state estimates the first phase could pay for itself in just three to four months and the second in roughly seven months.
TRUMP ADMIN AXES ‘GREEN NEW SCAM’ APPLIANCE RULES AS EUROPE BAKES IN BRUTAL HEAT
California also projects the regulations will eventually save drivers nearly $1 billion annually in gasoline and electricity costs while reducing carbon emissions by approximately 2 million metric tons per year, which is the equivalent of taking roughly 400,000 gasoline-powered cars off the road.
Those sound like terrific numbers.
DAVID MARCUS: WHY I’LL TAKE MY CLUNKER OVER ANY NEW CAR WITH A GOVERNMENT KILL SWITCH
So here’s my question to California: If the economics is really that compelling, why does Sacramento have to mandate it? Show consumers the numbers. Put an efficiency rating on every tire.
Tell someone Tire A costs $26 more but could save $179 in gasoline. Then let the person reaching into their own wallet decide whether Tire A or Tire B is right for them.
That’s called consumer choice.
California increasingly seems to call that a problem. And not everyone agrees with the state’s rosy projections.
Goodyear has warned that roughly 70% of replacement tires currently sold could fail to meet the standards by 2033. The tire manufacturer has raised concerns about higher upfront costs and fewer choices for consumers. The final regulation does include exemptions for certain specialty tires, including some competition, off-road and winter-performance tires.
But that’s exactly why this debate is bigger than four pieces of rubber. It’s about the cumulative cost and cumulative reach of government regulation. One regulation might cost you $6. Another costs $50. Another adds $500.
THE SURPRISING HIDDEN COST QUIETLY ADDING NEARLY $132K TO NEW HOME PRICES REVEALED
Every new rule arrives with a government study explaining why the cost is small, and the benefit is large. But consumers don’t pay for regulations one at a time. They pay for all of them at the same time.
California families already deal with extraordinarily expensive housing, electricity and gasoline. And here’s the word politicians everywhere suddenly love, which is affordability. Everybody wants to make life more affordable.
NEWSOM TARGETS MAJOR AFFORDABILITY SQUEEZE IN ‘STRIKING’ CONVERGENCE WITH TRUMP
Yet California’s solution frequently seems to involve another mandate telling businesses what they must sell and consumers what they should buy.
There’s an easier solution.
Give consumers information and let them decide. Since when did we become so inept that we can’t make a basic consumer decision? Government absolutely has a role in establishing safety standards, preventing fraud and making sure consumers know what they’re buying.
But there’s a difference between protecting consumers and making economic decisions for them. If a more efficient tire saves me $179, tell me. I’ll probably buy it.
But if I prefer another tire because of price, performance, durability or another feature that’s important to me, why shouldn’t that decision belong to me? That’s the real question California should answer.
Today it’s your replacement tires. Tomorrow it’ll be something else.
Because once government decides consumers can’t be trusted to choose the four pieces of rubber underneath their car, where exactly does that philosophy end?
California says these regulations will save drivers money. Maybe they’re right. But there’s another cost that’s much harder to put into a government spreadsheet.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
Choice.
And California seems increasingly willing to make yours for you.
