Semantics, it's non-latching due to EPA penalties/regulations.It’s not “EPA nonsense”...... it’s FCA nonsense. FCA had a choice to make. One choice burdened their customers by not making the switch latching. The other choice burdened Their shareholders by having the company pay a slightly higher cash penalty for not meeting some level of CAFE standards. FCA designed a horrific implementation of the ESS system and then chose to burden their customers with it to save their shareholders a couple of bucks. That is FCA nonsense.
of Course, the obvious choice would have been to build a latching switch (Or better yet, build the damn jeep with an option to not have any of the ess crap) and then simply raise the price of the vehicle by some surcharge amount for those who didn’t want the ess craptastic system. Shareholders pay nothing and the fines are offset by the increase in price For those who don’t want ess.
How about this - instead of making everyone pay the burden as you proposed, those drivers that can't bear to push a button every trip can spend the money on one of the countless bypasses? And those of us that can push a button that's ~6 inches from the button required to start the vehicle can keep the savings.