The CAFE standards were introduced in 1975[1]. I’m on my phone so investigating links properly is awkward, but it appears the footprint legislation was brought into effect in 2008[2]. Or in other words, before Obama.<p>I had to go and double check because a fact I was certain of was the PT Cruiser was designed to be classified as a light truck in order to require a lower CAFE standard, far before the 2008 reform. I’m sure there are many examples of this. The system in general is gamed aggressively. I can give a recent example:<p>The Honda CR-V. Look at the front bumpers of a European and US spec car<p>European: <a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4a/Honda_CR-V_2.2_i-DTEC_Lifestyle_%28IV%29_%E2%80%93_Frontansicht%2C_25._Januar_2014%2C_D%C3%BCsseldorf.jpg" rel="nofollow">https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4a/Honda_CR...</a><p>US: <a href="https://file.kelleybluebookimages.com/kbb/base/house/2012/2012-Honda-CR-V-FrontSide_HTCRV121_640x480.jpg" rel="nofollow">https://file.kelleybluebookimages.com/kbb/base/house/2012/20...</a><p>The difference in front bumpers is due to a front approach angle requirement in CAFE’s regulations (18 degrees, off the top of my head?) to get a light truck classification.<p>Footprint isn’t really the issue. It’s related, and certainly why cars are getting bigger than they once were, but to my understanding the bounds of footprint for each classification hasn’t changed since the legislation was brought in, while cars are ballooning regardless. I think part of it is just consumer preference for more car.<p>[1] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_average_fuel_economy" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_average_fuel_economy</a><p>[2] <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20081216085824/http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/portal/site/nhtsa/menuitem.43ac99aefa80569eea57529cdba046a0/" rel="nofollow">https://web.archive.org/web/20081216085824/http://www.nhtsa....</a>