Eric DeGesero, the spokesperson for three key associations opposed to electricity mandates, was thrilled when he learned late last week that Congress had revoked a waiver allowing California (and states that copied it, including New Jersey) to impose seemingly impossible-to-meet goals for electric vehicle sales on cars and trucks — which also were mandated here.
DeGesero, who represents the Fuel Merchants Association of New Jersey, the New Jersey Motor Truck Association and the New Jersey Propane Gas Association, said its members are not opposed to increased electrification — just increases that are mandated without a vote and seemingly without concern for the economic harm they would cause.
Congress apparently agreed.
Why California matters
California is the only state allowed to make its own clean air rules (it was given an exception when the Clean Air Act passed in 1970).
Other states can only agree to follow California’s rules (as New Jersey did on electric vehicle mandates).
Therefore, when the EV mandate was rescinded in California, it also was struck down in New Jersey — and any other state choosing to follow California’s lead).
By revoking a waiver that allowed California, New Jersey and others to impose incredible mandates (51% of all new car sales in 2028 and 100% by 2035), it not only opened the door for future car sales — it could spur an increase in truck sales as soon as this summer.
“Truck dealers have really been in the bind, because they haven’t been able to sell new diesel trucks to New Jersey businesses and governments,” DeGesero said.
“County and municipal governments haven’t been able to buy dump trucks or any of the other things that they need because they were being mandated to buy electric trucks that they didn’t want — and which may not fit their needs.”
As hard as it is to believe, choosing not to buy something was a better position than they were in on some other equipment.
“They couldn’t buy the sewer jets they need to clean out storm sewers because they simply don’t make models using electricity,” he said.
“It’s a relief that we can get back to where we just do business again.”
DeGesero, a passionate opposer to electrification mandates of all types (remember the supposed want to ban gas stoves and brick-oven pizza makers), said the question around electrification always has been about practicality, not politics.
“I think it’s a victory for affordability and people’s ability to choose how they want to drive, heat and cook — it’s just that simple,” he said. “These mandates aren’t affordable because the vehicles aren’t affordable, which is why the regulation hasn’t worked in New Jersey.
“Nobody wants to buy electric trucks: They’re too expensive, there’s no place to charge them and you have less payload.”
That being said, DeGesero feels the decision is a bigger victory for democracy than car and truck dealers.
“It’s more fundamentally about the idea that government shouldn’t be dictating to you how you live your life at this most basic and fundamental level,” he said.
DeGesero’s groups may have reached the end zone, but they are not necessarily spiking the football. Lawsuits figure to be coming. And then, there’s this: Voters could elect more representatives who favor these regulations — potentially reversing this decision.
DeGesero said he’d be OK with that — as long as that is what the majority wants.
“If this is an important issue to you, use 2026 as a referendum,” he said. “I’m OK with that. I wasn’t OK with what happened here.
“Gov. (Phil) Murphy’s bureaucrats outsourced their bureaucraticness to the California bureaucrats. We didn’t get to vote for any of that. We do get to vote for members of the United States Senate, and they made this decision. If you don’t like that, you can vote them out of office; it’s that simple.”
Simple describes DeGesero’s view on how the Senate voted when it chose to rescind the mandate.
“It’s the right policy and it’s the right process,” he said.
