TRENTON, NJ – Senate Republican Leader Anthony M. Bucco has criticized Governor Murphy’s proposed rule to ban vehicle manufacturers from selling gas-powered cars in New Jersey by 2035, arguing that it goes too far, too fast, and will be too expensive for lower- and middle-class families.
In July, Governor Murphy announced the Advanced Clean Cars II proposal, requiring vehicle manufacturers to gradually increase the percentage of zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) in their new light-duty vehicle sales until they reach 100% by 2035. The proposal is set to be published in the New Jersey Register on August 21, initiating a 60-day public comment period.
Senator Bucco voiced concerns over the restriction of consumer choices, emphasizing that residents should have the option to purchase and drive electric vehicles (EVs), hybrids, and gas-powered cars.
“These extreme energy policies are going too far, too fast, and will cost working families too much to implement successfully. The government has no right to limit the choice of consumers,” Bucco stated.
In an attempt to analyze the financial impact of Governor Murphy’s Energy Master Plan on middle- and low-income families, Senator Bucco sponsored Senate Bill 3684.
Democrats subsequently rejected the bill.
The high cost of electric vehicles, often exceeding $50,000, remains a significant concern.
Critics of the proposal argue that while the governor insists the rule “does not impose any obligations on consumers or car dealers,” the transition towards electric vehicles will undeniably affect the consumer market.
Bucco further urged for legislative involvement in the matter, stating, “The Legislature must have a seat at the table. Governor Murphy should not have sole authority over the implementation of his extreme Energy Master Plan.”
The upcoming public comment period presents a critical moment for stakeholders to weigh in on a proposal that significantly reshapes New Jersey’s automotive landscape.
As electric vehicle technology and infrastructure continue to evolve, the debate over the appropriate pace and scope of transition remains a contentious issue at the intersection of environmental policy, consumer rights, and economic considerations.