States have all kinds of specific laws about cars and trucks. Each state has its own standards for inspections, they have their own road laws, their own speed limits, etc. How can the EPA say "śNo, you can"™t ask cars sold in your state to be cleaner"ť? I think this is a dangerous precedent for states"™ rights. It also shows you who is paying Bush's campaign bills...
__________________
It is wise to remember that you are one of those who can be fooled some of the time.
Laurence J. Peter (author of the "Peter Priciple")
Because cars aren't only built in California and they can't do something the impedes interstate commerce, making it a legitimate Commerce Clause issue that I think the federal government would have the right to override (although the federal government does use the commerce clause as an excuse for a lot of things that it shouldn't)
Unfortunately the reason for doing so was to pass a one size fits all instead of killing it completely. The last thing we need is higher prices for cars and fuel but that's what our Goverment is giving us. Fortunately, the Republicans were able to stop the Dems from raising the cost for gas in this bill, unfortunately the bill contains nothing to do with our true energy needs.
__________________
John Adams “The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.”
Ronald Reagan: 'Everybody that is for abortion has already been born'
"I never said I was worth it. I only said I wouldn't do it for less " William F. Buckley Jr.
shepdogwv, using your reasoning, states couldn't make laws that regulated the sale of anything made in other states.States couldn't have their own laws about the sale of alcohol, they couldn't make zoning codes or laws because it might affect the sale of various raw materials and housing components, they couldn't make their own speed limits, because that also affects gas consumption.They couldn't do most of the things that constitute states' rights, using that logic.
__________________
It is wise to remember that you are one of those who can be fooled some of the time.
Laurence J. Peter (author of the "Peter Priciple")
shepdogwv, using your reasoning, states couldn't make laws that regulated the sale of anything made in other states.States couldn't have their own laws about the sale of alcohol, they couldn't make zoning codes or laws because it might affect the sale of various raw materials and housing components, they couldn't make their own speed limits, because that also affects gas consumption.They couldn't do most of the things that constitute states' rights, using that logic.
If states had this right why in the world would they be asking for a waiver?
__________________
John Adams “The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.”
Ronald Reagan: 'Everybody that is for abortion has already been born'
"I never said I was worth it. I only said I wouldn't do it for less " William F. Buckley Jr.
Basically it boils down to whether the burden imposed on the interstate commerce is excessive in relation to a legitimate local interest. (per the Supreme Court) and climate change is not a legitimate local interest. In fact it is an interest that can only be combated by a large nationwide (for our law's purposes) action, giving Congress the right to make that overall consistant rule for the U.S.
Actually it has to do more with the fact air is not confined to an individual state but the fact it floats from state to state making it a Federal issue.
The funniest thing about this whole issue is the fact Ca is threatning to sue over all of this. Perhaps they should check to see if the can afford to do so. They are facing a 15 billion dollar budget shortfall once again after having to borrow 11 billion to make up for the last one Arnold was elected to solve. Unfortunately he caved to the unions and backed off of the real solution so once again they are facing a budget crises. If that wasn't bad enough, the house voted to give state wide healthcare to everyone. Let's add another 50 billion to the budget deficit. All I can say is thank you, Ca. Your making me rich by driving business out of your state and into mine.
__________________
John Adams “The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.”
Ronald Reagan: 'Everybody that is for abortion has already been born'
"I never said I was worth it. I only said I wouldn't do it for less " William F. Buckley Jr.
Actually it has to do more with the fact air is not confined to an individual state but the fact it floats from state to state making it a Federal issue.
that's why it's not a legitimate local interest, because the means don't justify their ends (no right to attempt to clean up, what they don't own)....
seriously though, they would definitely be wasting a lot of money if they sue over this, why don't they worry about themselves instead of trying to fix the world.
Actually, because of the air currents and inversions in parts of California, especially in Los Angeles, which consistently has the worst air quality in the U.S. because of these inversions, this is largely a local issue for California. They're not necessarily trying to save the world. They're trying to save their own lungs in their largest city.
__________________
It is wise to remember that you are one of those who can be fooled some of the time.
Laurence J. Peter (author of the "Peter Priciple")
the article said that it was in part of their efforts to combat climate change, btw after reading a few more articles, what California wanted to do was have a greater MPG standard happen earlier then w/ federal legislation. It wasn't just making the automakers slap on a more restrictive Cat. to reduce the air emissions.
States' Rights
