As if on cue, America’s Big Three automakers recently dusted off their decades-old cache of bogus excuses to resist anew proposed increases in fuel mileage standards.

Sounding like a broken record, skipping since 1975 (when the last significant rise in miles per gallon standards was mandated), Detroit’s war trumpets played an awfully familiar tune — emphasis on awful.

Buying time from Congress for years with threats of layoffs and everything else short of total apocalypse, the Big Three have successfully used their money and clout to deflect political pressure from both parties — but it didn’t exactly hurt that the laissez-faire-friendly modern day Republican Party controlled the House since the early 90s until last election.

But last week the Senate signaled the beginning of the end for the carmakers’ era of irresponsibility by passing legislation calling for the fleet averages of vehicles produced in America to average 35 miles per gallon by 2020. Marking an increase of about 10 MPG over today’s outdated standards, this shift can represent a new and lucrative way of business for the profit-challenged and increasingly marginalized Big Three.

After all, Detroit needs to do something to get out of their self-dug rut, and this legislation may be just the ticket. Congress is handing them a golden opportunity to reinvent the wheel, so to speak, because they can’t afford to lose out to Toyota, Honda and others for too much longer. Is it of little coincidence that in this day of perpetually rising gas prices the “greenest” companies also sell the most cars? A new, higher-mileage fleet will help to free the Big Three from their stubborn and failing old ways of business — and may lead them back from the brink.

But resisting change takes dogged determination. During the bill’s debate last week, the carmakers claimed the technology to achieve the mileage increase simply does not exist. The Senate found this hard to believe considering the huge research and development budgets of each company, the 30-plus years since the last big MPG jump, and not to mention the handful of vehicles already on the road that already possess a much higher fuel economy.

What are they ignoring their customers’ wants? After all, what driver wouldn’t want more low mileage options? And despite flogging a dead horse about high gas prices, but more miles per gallon means less fill-ups and more money in the pockets of everyday Americans.

And if Ford and the others really think they must cut jobs to have the money to implement this technology that they already possess, then possibly an executive or two can skip the Christmas bonus this year. When Ford’s compensated current CEO Alan Mulally almost $40 million for only four months of work last year, it demonstrated a commitment to maintaining skyrocketing white collar pay, while dwarfing increases in blue collar workers’ wages — the same folks that also must suffer the repeated mistakes of overpaid executives with visions of pink slips dancing in their heads

Frankly, resorting to the threat of layoffs is an obviously pitiful defense. No doubt that more higher gas mileage options will make the Big Three more competitive with foreign car companies — and selling more cars means needing the employees to build them, hence, a strong work force.

But car companies think they have everything to gain by maintaining the status quo of lower fuel standards. Their longtime resistance to such chance and their recent outcry shows that some industries bearing such enormous responsibilities cannot always be relied upon to call their own shots. We’ve witnessed what happens: years of staid inactivity with no plan for future progress. The Big Three had their chance (the 80s, 90s, 00s), but chose to turn a blind eye.

Currently the United States, by far, has the worst fuel efficiency standard of all developed nations, worse than every country in Europe, Japan, and yes, China. Politically, Bush cannot afford to veto this bill (if and when it also passes the House) — but he has been known to ignore popular public opinion, solid reasoning, facts and the general well-being of the country on occasion before. In countless speeches, though, he has stated his desire to wean the country from its addiction to foreign oil. He’s had no greater opportunity to do so until now; let’s hope he steps up to the plate.

The country’s environmental, economic and foreign policy situations require some concrete and course-altering changes. This will require sacrifice by some - a fact has only imbued wobbly-knees in our corporate and political for years. Let the Big Three do their part to alleviate these issues facing the country — not only because they have the power to do so, but for their own sake as well.

Daniel Robison is a New Albany resident and will enter IU’s School of Journalism this fall. Send comments to robison.daniel@gmail.com