California vs the Federal Government

[MODU]

I have to side with Arnold on this one.  There is no reason why a state cannot go above and beyond the minimum standards set by the Federal government.  Much like when I say the Federal minimum wage should be the lowest figure from which the states can use as a base and build upon, the current emission standards in the new law passed this week should be a baseline for which the states to work from.  If California and 16 other states want to increase the air quality through tougher standards, let them.  This isn't a fight to pick.

"Schwarzenegger: California will sue federal government"

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger plans to sue the federal government over its decision not to allow a California plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, he announced Thursday.

Environmental Protection Agency chief Stephen Johnson announced the decision Wednesday, refusing the state's request for a waiver that would have allowed it to cut emissions faster than a new federal plan the president signed into law Wednesday.

"It's another example of the administration's failure to treat global warming with the seriousness that it actually demands," the governor said at a news conference Thursday.

(Cont)

[StateBoiler]

I agree. Go Arnold! States' Rights!

[Gabu]

wtf?

On what basis do they prohibit states from fighting environmental issues on their own?

[StateBoiler]

wtf?

On what basis do they prohibit states from fighting environmental issues on their own?

Because we have a federal government that thinks they have the right to control every single aspect of everyone's life and no one person, group, or government has any right to challenge that.

[MODU]

wtf?

On what basis do they prohibit states from fighting environmental issues on their own?

I'm not sure, since I haven't read the compromise bill yet.  I think the stumbling block is California pushing the automakers to have a higher fuel milage rating than what the federal bill lays out.

[dead0man]

wtf?

On what basis do they prohibit states from fighting environmental issues on their own?

Way to much power at the Federal level.  People only see it that way when the Feds are going against them.  When they want the Feds to work for them, the Feds never have enough power.  When they come to stop you, they have to much power.  I keep it simple and say they always have to much power.

[StateBoiler]

wtf?

On what basis do they prohibit states from fighting environmental issues on their own?

I'm not sure, since I haven't read the compromise bill yet.  I think the stumbling block is California pushing the automakers to have a higher fuel milage rating than what the federal bill lays out.

Well, California has their own version of the EPA and has for a long time, called the California Air Regulations Board (CARB for short). When my company makes engine calibrations and fuel ratings we have to comply with both EPA and CARB for U.S.-based vehicles. If you don't comply with CARB, you can't sell vehicles in California.

Nothing stops a state from setting their own air regulations. The reason California gets away with it is their sheer size. If some state like Vermont tried to pass this or set up their own regulations, no vehicles would get sold there and the state would just be ignored. California is too large a market for a company to do that.

[MODU]

Well, California has their own version of the EPA and has for a long time, called the California Air Regulations Board (CARB for short). When my company makes engine calibrations and fuel ratings we have to comply with both EPA and CARB for U.S.-based vehicles. If you don't comply with CARB, you can't sell vehicles in California.

Nothing stops a state from setting their own air regulations. The reason California gets away with it is their sheer size. If some state like Vermont tried to pass this or set up their own regulations, no vehicles would get sold there and the state would just be ignored. California is too large a market for a company to do that.

Which makes me wonder if there is something in the legislation that was just passed that bars California (or any other state) from changing the regulations and standards.  I'll see if I can pull the bill this weekend and look at it.

[David S]

wtf?

On what basis do they prohibit states from fighting environmental issues on their own?

Now you're a states righter?  LOL

I would say that under the constitution the states have the power to enact stricter laws if they want. But they should be aware that creating a multitude of state level laws makes it very difficult for car maunfacturers to comply. That probably increases cost quite a bit.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Well, California has their own version of the EPA and has for a long time, called the California Air Regulations Board (CARB for short). When my company makes engine calibrations and fuel ratings we have to comply with both EPA and CARB for U.S.-based vehicles. If you don't comply with CARB, you can't sell vehicles in California.

Nothing stops a state from setting their own air regulations. The reason California gets away with it is their sheer size. If some state like Vermont tried to pass this or set up their own regulations, no vehicles would get sold there and the state would just be ignored. California is too large a market for a company to do that.

Which makes me wonder if there is something in the legislation that was just passed that bars California (or any other state) from changing the regulations and standards.  I'll see if I can pull the bill this weekend and look at it.

Actually the Federal law creates an exception allowing California to make tougher air pollution regulations in some circumstances and then allows other states to follow the California regulations if it cares to.  So basically, the lawsuit will be over whether California's attempts to regulate CO₂ emissions fall within the scope of those areas that California is allowed to be tougher than the rest of the nation.

[Hash]

Go Arnold!

[CultureKing]

Hopefully California will win. Oregon and Washington I think are also joining with Arnold on this.

[Gabu]

Now you're a states righter?  LOL

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."

- Ralph Waldo Emerson

[Jacobtm]

I'm just never going to get over Arnold Schwarzeneggar having such reasonable, generally good opinions...

[True Democrat]

I'll defer to Brandeis on this issue at least.

[Person Man]

states raaghts.... yee haw!

Looks like the old Democratic Party is back...and for the right reasons....even if Ahnold is a Liberal Republican.

Then again, maybe we are not being federalists. Maybe we are. Maybe we are being federalists in the since that states can act as a ratchet for constitutional rights and issues where the federal government has defered.

Maybe this is Progressive Federalism. Perhaps the XIVA s5 rights given to congress should be incorporated to states as a hybrid X A/ XIVA-5 type of constitutional creature that will be a new power for state legislatures.

This could be the new marriage of Libertarianism and Liberalism that was concieved during Clinton and born during Bush and hopefully will soon come of age.

[jokerman]

The EPA under Bush has been a joke.  I think the Onion wrote an amusing article on that one time, stating that the EPA had announced, due to the fact that it has nothing to do with the "environment", and that because its also not really "protecting" anything, it's dropping the E and the P to become the "The Agency."

[Person Man]

Well, The Party runs The Agency so they can develop and manage The Empire...or something like that. Sounds like the book, 2070 (2007) (1948- 1984 ... 

[bullmoose88]

Barring some sort of compromise and thus this case gets to the top, where is California et al going to get its 5 votes from?

Go Arnold and those trying to push a stubborn Federal Government along, but I'm still not sure how they're gonna get the five votes they'll ultimately need.

[Хahar 🤔]

Hooray for Arnold!