Tag Archives: Government

NHTSA Opens Investigation into Tesla Gaming Software

Patton plays games driving Model 3
Journalist Vince Patton demonstrates its possible to play video games while driving his Tesla Model 3.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) it is investigating 580,000 Tesla vehicles sold since 2017 that allow those seated up front to play games on the infotainment touchscreen while the vehicle is in motion.

The investigation stems from a complaint filed with agency earlier this month by Vince Patton, a retired journalist from Portland, Oregon.

The formal safety investigation, which was announced Wednesday, covers 2017-2022 Tesla Model 3, S, X, and Y vehicles. NHTSA opened the investigation “based on reports that Tesla gameplay functionality, which is visible on the front center touchscreen from the driver’s seat, is enabled even when the vehicle is being driven.”

Tesla made the software more dangerous

The 2021 Tesla Model S gets an all-new interior, a yoke-style steering wheel and the updated software being investigated by NHTSA.

The feature, known as “Passenger Play,” increases the risk of a crash. Since December 2020, the feature can be used while driving. Prior to that, it could only be used when the vehicle was in Park. The agency said that it is evaluating aspects of the feature, including how frequently it’s used and when.

NHTSA is concerned about distracted driving, an increasing risk as automakers bring increased online connectivity to infotainment touchscreens. Distracted driving caused 3,142 deaths in 2019, all of them preventable. 

While Passenger Play does have a warning stating the game is meant solely for passengers. Although it asks for confirmation that the player is a passenger and not the driver, there is nothing preventing the driver from playing while driving.

Other Tesla safety issues

Consumer Reports criticized the performance of Tesla’s latest version of Autopilot.

It’s not NHTSA’s only Tesla safety investigation, nor Tesla’s only safety issue.

In August, the agency opened a formal safety investigation of 765,000 Teslas equipped with its Autopilot driver-assistance system after 11 crashes involving parked emergency vehicles killed one person and injured 17. The inquiry covers 2014-2021 Models S, X, Y and 3. 

In October, Tesla had to roll back full self-driving, or FSD, with Musk revealing that the company is “seeing some issues with 10.3, so rolling back to 10.2 temporarily.” 

And in November, Tesla issued a recall for 11,704 vehicles sold in the U.S. since 2017. The recall covers Model S, X, 3 and Y vehicles and came about as a result of an over-the-air firmware update of the automaker’s “Full Self-Driving Beta,” its advanced driver assistance system.

The company identified a software communication error that could cause the forward-collision warning or automatic emergency brake system to falsely activate, possibly leading to a rear-end collision.

Other OEM infotainment issues

2022 Mercedes EQS 580 4Matic black daytime
The new Mercedes-Benz EQS was recalled after it was found that its MBUX system allowed television and internet to be displayed while driving

Other automakers are far more concerned over distracted driving than Tesla. On November 29, Mercedes-Benz recalled 227 vehicles in the U.S. after the company discovered that its MBUX infotainment system allowed television and internet to be displayed while driving.

The recall affected 2021 Mercedes-Benz S580, 2022 EQS450, EQS580, and S500 models. Mercedes-Benz has already corrected the problem, and no deaths or injuries seem to have resulted from the problem.

Musk pays billions to satisfy tax bill

In other Tesla news, Reuters is reporting that Tesla CEO Elon Musk sold 10% of his own company stock, 13.5 million shares, 8.06 million of which were sold to pay taxes. The billionaire said he is paying more than $11 billion in taxes this year. 

Tesla CEO Elon Musk
Tesla CEO Elon Musk slammed California over its tax policy.

“California used to be the land of opportunity and now it is … becoming more so the land of sort of overregulation, overlitigation, overtaxation,” Musk told Reuters, adding his combined federal and state tax rate tops 50 percent.

The tax bill may explain why Musk recently relocated Tesla’s headquarters to Austin, Texas from Palo Alto, California.

But taxes aren’t Musk’s only concern.

The company has submitted all the documentation required to get its factory approved near Berlin, Germany. Approval of Tesla’s newest manufacturing facility has been delayed by environmental concerns and red tape due to Tesla’s decision to add a battery factory to the site. That has delayed the approval process. It remains unclear when the new plant is expected to open.

Its official; Tesla HQ to move to Texas, Musk confirms. Find out why

Its official; Tesla HQ to move to Texas, Musk confirms. Find out why
- image 1023808

Its official; Tesla HQ to move to Texas, Musk confirms. Find out why
- image 1023808

He made the announcement while addressing a gathering at the Austin facility where construction is still currently ongoing

So, after spending nearly two decades in Los Angeles, Tesla’s CEO himself relocated to Austin last year. The billionaire entrepreneur had justified his personal move with the need to be closer to the two projects that were then occupying most of his time; the development of rockets by SpaceX, and the construction of Tesla’s new facility near Austin.

Addressing a gathering in front of the factory on the outskirts of the city, Musk said “We are pleased to announce that we are moving our headquarters to Austin,”

This is a symbolic move, however, it doesn’t mean that Tesla is leaving the West Coast altogether. “To be clear, we will continue to expand our operations in California,” said Musk.

Its official; Tesla HQ to move to Texas, Musk confirms. Find out why
- image 1023809

Its official; Tesla HQ to move to Texas, Musk confirms. Find out why
- image 1023809


Some of the primary reasons for moving to Texas according to Musk include, the cost of living in Texas is lower for employees. According to experts, tax levies in Texas are projected to be far lower than in the golden state.

But, the entrepreneur noted, “you can’t expand forever in the San Francisco Bay Area, where density is high, the cost of living is high and traffic is often difficult. Whereas in Austin, the factory is located five minutes from the airport and fifteen minutes from downtown”.

But it’s not just Tesla that is making the move to Texas, other tech giants like HP & Oracle have also followed suit. Texas has been working hard in recent years to attract businesses with several tax incentives. With its highly rated universities and rich cultural life, Austin is certainly attracting a lot of attention. Here’s CNBC on why has Texas now become an attractive place for tech companies.

Its official; Tesla HQ to move to Texas, Musk confirms. Find out why
- image 1023814

Its official; Tesla HQ to move to Texas, Musk confirms. Find out why
- image 1023814

After this announcement, Musk later turned his attention to Business which according to the Billionaire CEO, is doing rather well

Musk later turned his attention to business, which he said was good for the company. Tesla announced in early October that it had delivered a record number of vehicles in the third quarter, against the backdrop of a market plagued by a shortage of semiconductors. The automaker is known for delivering a considerable number of vehicles, come the end of the quarter in order to impress investors with strong three-month figures.

Its official; Tesla HQ to move to Texas, Musk confirms. Find out why
- image 1023812

Its official; Tesla HQ to move to Texas, Musk confirms. Find out why
- image 1023812

Apart from the Austin factory, Europe’s very first Tesla plant, Giga Berlin in Germany. While Tesla HQ will move to Austin, the company will continue to have a strong presence in California. Swipe Up to Read More

In addition to the Texas factory, Tesla is constructing the first-ever European plant in Grünheide, near Berlin in Germany. It is projected that up to 12,000 people would work there and will produce up to 500,000 electric vehicles each year.

You can watch the entire presentation by Tesla below

Source: Youtube

Twist: NHTSA Tesla Autopilot Probe Now Includes Other Automakers

<img data-attachment-id="1770456" data-permalink="https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2021/08/study-suggests-evs-cost-more-to-service/electriccarschargingstationcloseupphoto-vehiclerechargeablebatteriescharing/" data-orig-file="http://lntransportation.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/twist-nhtsa-tesla-autopilot-probe-now-includes-other-automakers-5.jpg" data-orig-size="1000,667" data-comments-opened="1" data-image-meta="{"aperture":"0","credit":"Shutterstock","camera":"","caption":"","created_timestamp":"0","copyright":"Copyright (c) 2016 Virrage Images\/Shutterstock. No use without permission.","focal_length":"0","iso":"0","shutter_speed":"0","title":"Electric,Cars,Charging,Station,Closeup,Photo.,Vehicle,Rechargeable,Batteries,Charing.","orientation":"0"}" data-image-title="EV charging tesla superchargers tesla charging station EVs" data-image-description="

Virrage Images/Shutterstock

” data-medium-file=”http://lntransportation.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/twist-nhtsa-tesla-autopilot-probe-now-includes-other-automakers-2.jpg” data-large-file=”http://lntransportation.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/twist-nhtsa-tesla-autopilot-probe-now-includes-other-automakers.jpg” class=”aligncenter size-large wp-image-1770456″ src=”http://lntransportation.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/twist-nhtsa-tesla-autopilot-probe-now-includes-other-automakers.jpg” alt width=”610″ height=”407″ srcset=”http://lntransportation.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/twist-nhtsa-tesla-autopilot-probe-now-includes-other-automakers.jpg 610w, http://lntransportation.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/twist-nhtsa-tesla-autopilot-probe-now-includes-other-automakers-1.jpg 75w, http://lntransportation.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/twist-nhtsa-tesla-autopilot-probe-now-includes-other-automakers-2.jpg 450w, http://lntransportation.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/twist-nhtsa-tesla-autopilot-probe-now-includes-other-automakers-3.jpg 768w, http://lntransportation.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/twist-nhtsa-tesla-autopilot-probe-now-includes-other-automakers-4.jpg 120w, http://lntransportation.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/twist-nhtsa-tesla-autopilot-probe-now-includes-other-automakers-5.jpg 1000w” sizes=”(max-width: 610px) 100vw, 610px”>

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has been doing a deep dive into Tesla’s Autopilot to determine if 765,000 vehicles from the 2014 model year onward are fit to be on the road. We’ve covered it on numerous occasions, with your author often making a plea for regulators not to harp on one company when the entire industry has been slinging advanced driving aids and distracting infotainment displays for years.

Apparently someone at the NHTSA either heard the blathering, or was at least of a similar mind, because the organization has expanded its investigation to include roughly a dozen other automakers.

On Monday, letters were issued to major manufacturers — reportedly including BMW, Honda, Toyota, and Ford Motor Co. — requesting a “comparative analysis amongst production vehicles equipped with the ability to control both steering and braking/accelerating simultaneously under some circumstances.”

Bloomberg was the first to learn of the regulatory notices and stated that they included comprehensive documentation on how driver-assistance features work for each company, as well as how they know when and if a system was engaged in the event of an accident. Since the Tesla probe originally started by investigating vehicle crashes in the presence of rescue and law-enforcement vehicles, the NHTSA also wants to know how various systems handle their presence. Automakers were asked by regulators to respond no later than November 17th, 2021.

This is probably something the Department of Transportation should have been looking into years earlier, rather than allowing the industry to implement features that debatably went onto the market unproven. Now we’re in a situation where driving aids have become the norm and regulators are just starting to get serious about looking into some of the resulting complications. But it’s difficult to say what’s right when regulations often have unintended consequences and rarely seem to take the larger picture into account.

It’s not difficult to imagine a scenario where the NHTSA wants all manufacturers to network all vehicles with emergency responders to prevent future incidents where an automobile goes haywire near some flashing lights and road flares. While that would almost assuredly result in a technical violation of the Fourth Amendment, counties lacking such protections have already implemented traffic enforcement centers (e.g. China) that track networked vehicles in real time and individual automakers have data hubs on U.S. soil doing roughly the same thing.

But that’s just one possible scenario.

Regulators could just as easily attempt to establish a set of rules relating to how, when, and where these systems can be operated. A certification and testing protocol could also be implemented to ensure their effectiveness or automakers might be forbade from implementing certain functions entirely. Nobody but bureaucrats hold any love for red tape, and it’s bound to result costly recall campaigns. However doing nothing might leave millions of vehicles on the road with potentially hazardous safety and convenience packages and I haven’t the faintest idea whether that’s going to be the best or absolute worst solution to this problem. There are several issues here begging to be addressed (safety, privacy, a lack of standardization, increased costs, manufacturing complexities, etc.) but so many regulatory actions turn out to be counter productive that it makes one hesitant to endorse anything.

As pickles go, this one is taking up the whole damn jar — thanks partially to regulators dragging their feet and out-of-touch legislators having next to no idea how any of these systems worked. Rather than examining things seriously six or seven years ago and attempting to establish a competent regulatory framework that could be updated as new technologies cropped up, the government now has to play catchup and plot a course of action while it’s still learning how these systems function.

[Image: Virrage Images/Shutterstock]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.

Vaccine Mandates Being Considered By Auto Industry, UAW

<img data-attachment-id="1773672" data-permalink="https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2021/09/vaccine-mandates-being-considered-by-auto-industry-uaw/covid-19vaccinationrecordcardsissuedbycdcunitedstatescenters/" data-orig-file="http://lntransportation.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/vaccine-mandates-being-considered-by-auto-industry-uaw-5.jpg" data-orig-size="1000,667" data-comments-opened="1" data-image-meta="{"aperture":"0","credit":"Shutterstock","camera":"","caption":"","created_timestamp":"0","copyright":"Copyright (c) 2021 Michael Vi\/Shutterstock. No use without permission.","focal_length":"0","iso":"0","shutter_speed":"0","title":"Covid-19,Vaccination,Record,Cards,Issued,By,Cdc,(united,States,Centers","orientation":"1"}" data-image-title="Covid-19,Vaccination,Record,Cards,Issued,By,Cdc,(united,States,Centers" data-image-description="

Michael Vi/Shutterstock

” data-medium-file=”http://lntransportation.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/vaccine-mandates-being-considered-by-auto-industry-uaw-2.jpg” data-large-file=”http://lntransportation.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/vaccine-mandates-being-considered-by-auto-industry-uaw.jpg” class=”aligncenter size-large wp-image-1773672″ src=”http://lntransportation.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/vaccine-mandates-being-considered-by-auto-industry-uaw.jpg” alt width=”610″ height=”407″ srcset=”http://lntransportation.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/vaccine-mandates-being-considered-by-auto-industry-uaw.jpg 610w, http://lntransportation.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/vaccine-mandates-being-considered-by-auto-industry-uaw-1.jpg 75w, http://lntransportation.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/vaccine-mandates-being-considered-by-auto-industry-uaw-2.jpg 450w, http://lntransportation.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/vaccine-mandates-being-considered-by-auto-industry-uaw-3.jpg 768w, http://lntransportation.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/vaccine-mandates-being-considered-by-auto-industry-uaw-4.jpg 120w, http://lntransportation.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/vaccine-mandates-being-considered-by-auto-industry-uaw-5.jpg 1000w” sizes=”(max-width: 610px) 100vw, 610px”>

With the Biden administration having announced that it would start requiring companies to vaccinate employees, automakers and UAW are finding themselves in a sticky situation. Unions had previously said they wanted to hold off on endorsing or opposing mandatory vaccinations until after they discussed things with the industry and their own members. Considering Joe Biden said he wouldn’t make vaccines mandatory less than 10 months ago, employers are getting caught with their pants around the proverbial ankles.

Automakers had previously been surveying white-collar workers to see what they wanted to do while upping on-site COVID restrictions, but operating under the impression that any hard decisions were likely a long way off and left entirely to their discretion. Now the Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration is planning a new standard that requires all employers with 100 (or more) employees to guarantee their workforce is fully vaccinated or require any unvaccinated workers to produce a negative test result on a minimum weekly basis. 

Employers that fail to implement the stated requirements could face fines of nearly $14,000 per violation, according to the White House, with penalties also doubling for those who refuse to wear masks during interstate travel. Those are potentially steep fees when you’re employees number in the thousands. Union officials have said they’re considering the matter without committing to more than absolutely necessary — though the UAW officially opposed vaccine requirements in the past.

From UAW President Ray Curry:

“The UAW has and continues to strongly encourage all members and their families to be vaccinated unless there is specific health or religious concerns. We know that this is the best way to protect our members, coworkers and their families.

We are reviewing the details of yesterday’s announcements and the impact on our members and our over 700 employer contracts.

In the meantime, we continue our member commitment to practice safety in every one of our worksites by following protocols including masks, sanitizing and reporting any exposure or symptoms of the virus. At the UAW we all understand that fighting this pandemic and protecting our families is key to our survival.”

Assuming the union ultimately decides to endorse the vaccine decree, it’s likely going to be fracturing its membership. While I am hardly against vaccinations, I strongly support informed consent and speaking candidly about this has resulted in autoworkers frequently confessing they’re similarly opposed to forced vaccinations. Many have said they would immediately quit their jobs, matching a recent Washington Post poll claiming 70 percent of unvaccinated workers would simply abandon their positions if vaccine mandates are instituted. It’s my assumption that the industry will have a sudden, catastrophic staffing shortage were it to move forward with the Biden plan.

Automakers have been similarly noncommittal, with manufacturers (including Ford, GM, Stellantis, Honda, and Toyota) stating they encourage staff to get vaccinated and want to adhere to all government-issued health protocols. But they typically steer clear of addressing the Biden plan directly, possibly indicating some hesitancy. That said, it hasn’t even been a full day since the vaccine mandate was announced and their HR and legal departments are probably wringing their hands as they ponder upon what’s to be done and the fallout it might create.

Every statement automakers have been willing to make thus far can be paraphrased into “hold on … we’ve got to think about this,” followed by a paragraph about how they believe in vaccinations and want to adhere to recommendations coming from the relevant health experts. Conversely, very little has been said about the rights or preferences of their employees.

I’m not going to beat around this bush. The entire premise of these mandates seems insane to me, bordering on wicked. As an American, I always thought the whole premise of the country was predicated upon the shared belief that personal liberties and freedom of choice trump everything else. But that doesn’t seem to be what’s coming down from the top anymore. The rhetoric being used by Joe Biden is egregiously confrontational, including statements like “we’ve been patient, but our patience is wearing thin” as he made sweeping assertions about how the unvaccinated are stifling national unity and progress. He also confusingly stated that vaccinated workers need to be “protected” from the unvaccinated.

Assuming vaccines are effective, shouldn’t it be the other way round? What exactly are we shielding people from when new strains continue to manifest, can still be spread amongst the vaccinated, and the shots we currently have are targeting older COVID variants that have lost steam?

The economic and social stress this is likely to place upon the industry and country as a whole will be nothing short of monumental. Protests have been erupting across the globe all summer. Truckers have started organizing in numerous countries and have refused to deliver to areas imposing strict COVID rules, exacerbating food shortages in urban areas. In the United States, the same was true for cities that opted to defund police departments. Now they’re starting to talk about strikes focused on vaccine and mask mandates while they’re already experiencing a severe shortage of drivers. Imagine if that spills over to an automotive sector that’s already been beleaguered by the semiconductor shortage, their suppliers, and every other industry you rely on.

[Image: Michael Vi/Shutterstock]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.

Senate Infrastructure Bill Seeks to Make Breathalyzers, Interior Cameras Mandatory

<img data-attachment-id="1571136" data-permalink="https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2017/05/nafta-in-90-days/us-capitol/" data-orig-file="https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/us-capitol–e1495132939737.jpg" data-orig-size="2000,1333" data-comments-opened="1" data-image-meta="{"aperture":"0","credit":"","camera":"","caption":"","created_timestamp":"0","copyright":"","focal_length":"0","iso":"0","shutter_speed":"0","title":"","orientation":"0"}" data-image-title="us-capitol" data-image-description="

Architect of the Capitol/AOC.gov
Public Domain

” data-medium-file=”https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/us-capitol–450×300.jpg” data-large-file=”http://lntransportation.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/senate-infrastructure-bill-seeks-to-make-breathalyzers-interior-cameras-mandatory.jpg” class=”aligncenter size-large wp-image-1571136″ src=”http://lntransportation.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/senate-infrastructure-bill-seeks-to-make-breathalyzers-interior-cameras-mandatory.jpg” alt=”us-capitol, public domain” width=”610″ height=”407″>

The U.S. Senate is currently considering a $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill that’s primarily targeting the ailing highway system, with tens of billions left over to spend on advancing the nation’s EV charging infrastructure and incorporating more eco-friendly modes of public transportation. But there’s also some really kooky shit that you need to be made aware of before this passes into law.

Along with new regulations that would mandate the inclusion of collision detection systems and automatic emergency braking, where the car calls your bluff and applies the wheel-stoppers independently of your actions, provisions have been made that would also require some kind of in-car breathalyzer. The stated aim is to reduce incidents of drunk driving. However, the proposed system may also include driver-monitoring cameras, totally undermining any nobility the cause might otherwise have had.

Complaining about regulatory overreach is kind of my beat and the last few years have kept me truly busy. But this is on a whole other level as the nanny state runs amok — and we’re just getting started.

While incidents of drunk driving have come down over the decades, it remains a legitimate problem. We also saw 2020 deliver some of the worst crash rates in U.S. history despite people undoubtedly driving less and the previous downward trends. Sadly, the government solution seem to be based around inconveniencing regular people while simultaneously violating their right to privacy.

The 2,700-page document suggests installing automated traffic enforcement hubs, networked with speed and stoplight cameras (similar to what currently exists in China) and requiring automakers to install breathalyzers (or their equivalent) inside of vehicles that must be used before an automobile can even be started. This is a popular tactic among the court system as a way to ensure DUI recipients aren’t setting off three sheets to the wind. But one of the criticisms was that drivers could simply have someone else blow into the device. Well, the interested parties have accounted for that by requiring some kind of in-car monitoring system that not only makes sure you’re the one blowing but also has the ability to track face and eye movements in case you’re planning to get drunk while driving.

Considering automakers are already installing driver-facing cameras as part of their “advanced driving suites” or “driver assistance packages,” it’s not much of a stretch to see that hardware readapted for government use. The industry has even begun signaling that it’s happy to comply.

Carla Bailo, CEO of the Center for Automotive Research, recently told NBC News that the real issue won’t even be developing the hardware to do this. It already exists. The hard part will be making it cheap enough so that automakers can make sure all of it can go into literally every car produced.

“I don’t think that will be as easy as people might think,” Bailo said.

From NBC:

Nissan, for one, is working on a system that would use several different methods to see if an impaired driver is behind the wheel. Multiple sensors detect alcohol in cabin air. A camera atop the instrument cluster looks for facial cues signaling the driver is inebriated, and the vehicle itself looks for driving patterns suggesting an impaired driver.

But one concern is that the system could be triggered by drunk passengers, even with a sober, designated driver.

The federal government is funding research through the Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety program. Several possible solutions are being studied, including one similar to a Breathalyzer. It would measure alcohol in the air around the driver, however, rather than requiring a motorist to blow into a tube every time they want start their vehicle. Like Nissan’s system, the challenge is to avoid false positives from an inebriated passenger.

A second system measures blood alcohol content in the body’s capillaries by shining a light on a driver’s finger. It could be built into a vehicle’s start button or steering wheel.

It’s all very futuristic until you remember that self-driving cars were supposed to have arrived a couple of years ago and the industry’s solution was to release a bunch of half-baked assistance features that mandate constant surveillance so the automaker can avoid any liabilities. That technology is now becoming the keystone for the proposed safety legislation that’s lurking in the Senate infrastructure bill.

Those in need of further proof that this is all sketchy as hell need look no further than its endorsement by the world’s largest automotive lobby. The Alliance for Automotive Innovation (AAI) has already expressed support for driver-monitoring cameras, which are completely in line with what the bill’s proposing.

“The auto industry has long been committed to supporting public and private efforts to address this tragic threat to road safety,” John Bozzella, CEO of the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, stated. “This legislation furthers the possibility for advanced technologies to help address the risk of impaired driving.”

Additional requirements from the bill include automakers to include some sort of rear-seat monitoring that would alert operators when they’ve left a child in the rear seat (something many vehicles already have) and collision detection systems (ditto). The only real change is that they would be required hardware for all vehicles, rather than something that could be added as an option. Of course, the industry doesn’t care because their inclusion can now just be baked into the final asking price, rather than something you’ll have to be sold into at the dealership.

If you have a free weekend, I strongly urge you to read the bill. It’s not just the automotive content that veers into the weeds. The entire thing is loaded with those weird inclusions that have nothing to do with infrastructure but had no other way of being snuck into law. Though it could be too late by then because a vote on the bill is expected to take place at any moment.

[Image: Architect of the Capitol]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.

Tough Internal Combustion Engine Ban Sought

Environmental activists are calling on the Biden administration to ban the sales of passenger cars, light-duty trucks and SUVs equipped with gasoline engines by 2030. The State of California, the nation’s largest market for new vehicles, is calling for a ban the sale of new vehicles with gasoline engines by 2035. 

Call for tough federal ban

The Center for Biodiversity wants tougher regulations of auto emissions.

In an opinion piece published online by The New York Times, Daniel Becker, director of the Safe Climate Transport Campaign at the Center for Biodiversity and James Gerstenzang, the campaign’s editorial director, argued for the tougher regulations of auto emissions, noting that President Joe Biden could move to tighten regulations sometime this month. 

“As a first step, he should reimpose auto emission reductions for and cars, SUVs and other light trucks to 5% per year as called for under the Obama rules. Because those regulations went through the full rule-making process in 2012 and we’re reviewed in 2017, we believe we should be able to do this with a minimum of red tape,” the Becker and Gerstenzang said. 

“Then, he should instruct the Environmental Protection Agency to write rules that phase out sales of gas burning versions of vehicles by 2030. Annual emission should be raised to 7% a year through 2030,” they said. 

“These steps, which could take at least a year to make their way through the federal rule-making process and would guarantee the transition to electric vehicles so that cars and trucks are virtually emission free by 2050,” they added. 

California rules are not tough enough

California Governor Gavin Newsom.

They went on to say that the current rules that apply in California, to which automakers such as Ford, Volkswagen, BMW, Honda and Volvo have agreed, don’t go far enough to protect the environment. Those rules include an executive order issued in September 2020 by California Governor Gavin Newsom, calls on California’s state agencies to build a plan to phase out sales of all new gasoline-powered vehicles by 2035. 

Other carmakers, such as General Motors, Daimler and Toyota, reluctantly signed on the California deal after the 2020 Presidential election, since Biden had vowed to withdraw a federal lawsuit launched by the Trump administration that had contested California’s authority to set the rules for automotive emissions. 

Partisan divisions hamper effort to build consensus

Bjorn Lomborg: Climate change skeptic

The opinion piece is likely to ignite a full-blown political and legal war with carmakers in the middle, coping with uncertain and volatile regulatory environment as they move through the transition to electric vehicles. At the same time, automakers such as GM want to protect profits from trucks and SUVs powered by gasoline engines. 

Conservatives have argued electric vehicles are too expensive, could stifle economic growth and don’t address the needs of ordinary Americans. Many of them are also remain skeptical about climate change. Bjorn Lomborg, Danish political scientist and statistician, has gained renown for his critique of mainstream theories of ecological crisis. 

The threat of climate change has become more apparent, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists, which has long been an advocated for tighter emission controls. “People around the country are already experiencing record-breaking drought, deadly heat waves, unusually early tropical storms with the prospect of an above-normal hurricane season, extreme flooding, and major wildfires with a dire forecast of an intense wildfire year in Western states,” the organization noted in appeal to activists this week. 

“All these extremes are part of a ‘sobering’ trend — we keep surpassing records year after year, with 2020 tied for the hottest year on record, it said. “The climate crisis is here and we cannot wait,” the organization added. 

2021 Ford Mustang Mach-E GT Performance Edition
Car & Driver’s first “Electric Car of the Year: the Ford Mustang Mach-E.

At the same time, the auto industry has moved on. Since last autumn, GM and Ford have significantly increased the amount of money they are investing in EV technology. Globally, regulators in Europe and China are legislating automakers to expedite the introduction of electric vehicle technology. 

As a result, car culture in the U.S. is also beginning to shift. “Car & Driver,” a magazine that has long been considered a ‘’must-read’ for car enthusiasts, announced this week it was naming an “Electric Car of the Year.” The first award will go to the 2021 Ford Mustang Mach-E, the magazine said.

Toyota Donated $55K to Republicans Who Voted Against Certifying 2020 Election Results

Japanese automaker Toyota donated $55,000 to 37 GOP lawmakers who tried to decertify the results of the 2020 president election.

Axios Toyota chart
Toyota donated $55K to 37 Republican politicians who voted against certifying the 2020 election results.

Not only did the Japanese automaker support those politicians, but it was their top supporter — by a lot, according to investigative news website Axios, which pulled the data from a study by the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

The company’s $55,000 was nearly than double amount of the next closest company, defense company Cubic Corp., which approached nearly $30K in donations. Toyota spread that money out to four times more Republican politicians than the next closest company. Toyota officials defended their donations.

We do not believe it is appropriate to judge members of Congress solely based on their votes on the electoral certification,” Toyota officials said in a statement emailed to Axios.

“Based on our thorough review, we decided against giving to some members who, through their statements and actions, undermine the legitimacy of our elections and institutions.”

Influencing U.S. elections is a hot-button issue

For decades, what groups are funding politicians has been a contentious issue, but divisiveness surrounding the funding and influence has escalated in the last two presidential elections — Americans want to know who or what organizations are supporting their politicians and candidates.

In the wake of the attack on the U.S. Capitol Jan. 6 where protestors attempted to overturn the election while several Republicans inside the building attempted to forestall the inevitable, the divide has skyrocketed.

In all, 147 GOP members of the U.S. House of Representatives voted against certifying the November 2020 election results that saw former Vice President and Democratic challenger Joe Biden defeat Republican then-President Donald Trump. 

Biden captured the popular vote with 81.3 million votes to Trump’s 74.2 million votes. The Electoral College vote was 306 to 232 in favor of Biden with 270 needed to win the presidency.

Since then, Trump and many others have contended the election was stolen. However, neither the Trump campaign nor individual supporters have been able to produce evidence of this, including two cases that went to the Supreme Court — both were shot down.

Where did Toyota’s money go?

The automaker spent big on politicians, including Andy Biggs, an Arizona Republican in the U.S. House. Biggs has been an ardent purveyor of what many call “The Big Lie,” the idea that Trump actually won the election.

Axios reported an organizer of the “Stop the Steal” rally that immediately preceded the storming of the Capitol Building Jan. 6, Biggs helped organize the event. Biggs denies the allegation.

The negative response on social media was swift and predictable with thousands expressing their disappointment and vowing to no longer buy a Toyota. Many tweets used plays on words to talk about the newest Camry S-Edition or some other version of it and typing “#toyota” into the search function automatically pulls up #ToyotaHatesDemocracy.