Dear Editor:
Regarding “California AG calls cars a public nuisance in suit against automakers” (Sept. 21), has there ever been more blatantly political grandstanding by a state government? If California’s attorney general truly believes automobiles are a “public nuisance” as stated in its lawsuit, why doesn’t the state simply ban automobiles? Or is there an ulterior, political motive?
The attorney general says the state needs to be reimbursed for money it chooses to spend on global warming. What then is the state doing with the 32 cents per gallon it collects in gasoline taxes, which are the third highest in the nation?
The simple fact is that automakers offer consumers a vast assortment of vehicles to choose from, including hybrids, ethanol flex-fuel vehicles, and conventional vehicles that get more than 40 miles per gallon. If California consumers choose not to buy them, whose fault is that?
Sincerely,
James M. Taylor
James M. Taylor ([email protected]) is senior fellow for environment policy at The Heartland Institute and managing editor of Environment & Climate News.
