While the opponents of the Bush Administration believe that the 80MPG Super Car Program should have been completed, as well as starting a program to finance affordable fuel cell cars; however, a full head on approach to the fuel cell will have a much greater effect on the dwindling fossil fuel supply then the implementation of a super car
On the 14th of March 2002, the United States Senate rejected a 50% hike in fuel efficiency for gas guzzling vehicles. The reason cited for this rejection was that the senators did not feel it was right to force mothers in their home states to drive a less desirable small car that was not as safe, because it was more fuel efficient. They also stated that raising the fuel efficiency for trucks would affect construction workers, because they would need to make the trucks smaller and a lighter weight to raise the fuel efficiency. Another reason cited was a change in fuel efficiency requirements would make cars less safe. Republican Sen. Mike DeWine of Ohio said, "Simply put, you cannot increase CAFÉ (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) standards without increasing fatalities. (8)- The supporters of this change in fuel efficiency criticized the senators for buckling under the pressure from automakers and labor unions who opposed the 50% fuel efficiency increase. While the Democrats and Republicans both agree that there is a definite need for an increase in fuel efficiency, neither side can agree on any way to fix the problem. With the Republicans gaining control of the House and Senate, it is possible that some sort of legislation will occur in the next 2 years. .
On September 20th, 2002, U.S. lawmakers passed legislation to trim gasoline usage by light trucks and sport utility vehicles by 5 billion gallons over 7 years. This change which will occur from 2006 through 2012 would only change the fuel efficiency of trucks and SUV's by 1 mile per gallon.