California’s Status As A Special Snowflake In The Automotive World May Be Ending

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Zorro, Jul 24, 2018.

  1. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,424
    Likes Received:
    51,236
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The EPA May Terminate California's Very Special Right to Impose More Stringent Pollution-Control Measures Than the Clean Air Act Requires on the Rest of the Nation

    Basic Rights

    Basically the Clean Air Act enacts national standards for things like cars' exhaust. But it contains a provision that any state may be granted a waiver permitting them to enact even more stringent regulations, so long as they're "necessary" for that state.

    California has sought such a waiver and has been granted that waiver for as long as the Clean Air Act has existed.

    California is the country's largest auto-market, so car manufacturers just build for California. It would be more costly to set up factories to produce some cars that are California-legal and some others that are legal everywhere else. So the waiver permits California to essentially set the nation's car-exhaust policies.

    This, of course, forces the rest of the country to subsidize California's environmental occultism, as the costs of these unnecessary abatement schemes are lowered in cost because their R&D costs are shared by a nation which doesn't need them, and California gets the savings of a massive economy of scale only by drafting unwilling Americans to be forced into being consumers of the products that they demand but which few others want.

    Trump's EPA seems ready to end this special perpetual waiver.

    The current issue really started around 2002 when California decided to regulate “greenhouse gases” (GHG) spewed into the otherwise pristine California atmosphere by automobiles. Their special status in regards to emissions waivers effectively allowed them to begin imposing their climate idolatry on the nation.​
     
  2. nra37922

    nra37922 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2013
    Messages:
    13,118
    Likes Received:
    8,506
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Watch out for the 9th circus court of appeal. Circus is not a type...
     
  3. Steve N

    Steve N Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2015
    Messages:
    70,178
    Likes Received:
    89,696
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Most cities in CA won't impound or ticket a heavily polluting car if it's driven by an illegal alien. California can get tens of thousands of highly polluting cars of the roads if they got rid of their illegals and the junk heaps they drive. Not only would this help free up the nightmare congestion California is known for, it would reduce pollution from all vehicles. And don't gt me started on their school buses. I've always wondered why school buses were allowed to spew that black smoke into the air and no one cared.
     
  4. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    41,825
    Likes Received:
    32,493
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So states rights unless the right disagrees. Seems par for the course.
     
    Yulee, The Bear, Cubed and 2 others like this.
  5. JakeJ

    JakeJ Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 5, 2015
    Messages:
    27,360
    Likes Received:
    8,062
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yeah, criticizing black smoke out of an exhaust is pure racism! Dirty exhaust diversity strengthens America!
     
  6. Aphotic

    Aphotic Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2014
    Messages:
    13,595
    Likes Received:
    6,113
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So that federalist thing. The right hates it now?
     
    The Bear likes this.
  7. TomFitz

    TomFitz Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2013
    Messages:
    40,411
    Likes Received:
    15,895
    Trophy Points:
    113

    What a bizarre argument the government is going to wind up having to make!

    They're actually going to go to court to argue that someone can't EXCEED the milage and emissions standards!!!!

    This is ridiculous.

    If this becomes precident, thousands of local environmental regulations, many of which are very regionally specific, and others that are governed solely by the most general of EPA guidelines, won't have any force of law.

    Which would cause a rush to create new Federal regulations!
     
    roorooroo and Yulee like this.
  8. Russ103

    Russ103 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2014
    Messages:
    7,595
    Likes Received:
    3,281
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I’m all for states rights, but when one state dictates how auto makers build their products for the other 49 states, that state needs to pound sand.
     
  9. TomFitz

    TomFitz Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2013
    Messages:
    40,411
    Likes Received:
    15,895
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's ridiculous. California hasn't forced itself on the rest of the nation. No one is required to make or sell products in California.
     
    Saganist, FreshAir, roorooroo and 3 others like this.
  10. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,424
    Likes Received:
    51,236
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes
    It's quite rational. Excessive regulation is an unconstitutional taking of the property of another.
    Ony to the extent that they are excessive. Where the regulatory agency has a legitimate need, that cannot be met in an a less intrusive manner, I'm sure the regulation will withstand scrutiny.
    I doubt it.
     
  11. Steve N

    Steve N Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2015
    Messages:
    70,178
    Likes Received:
    89,696
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Bigotry? The truth can't be bigoted. I lived there for 21 years, I saw the articles in the papers, the stories on the local TV news and saw it with my own eyes - many cities have policies in place giving the border bandits special rights and privileges. In many cities illegals with no license, registration or insurance will not get ticketed or have their cars impounded but American citizens will. The bigotry you speak of is towards American citizens.
     
    myview, Russ103 and GreenBayMatters like this.
  12. MolonLabe2009

    MolonLabe2009 Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Messages:
    33,092
    Likes Received:
    15,284
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So, the left hates Federalism now? LMFAO!
     
    Wolfpack and GreenBayMatters like this.
  13. TomFitz

    TomFitz Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2013
    Messages:
    40,411
    Likes Received:
    15,895
    Trophy Points:
    113
    My point stands. Your made up assertions about "excessive" notwithstanding.

    Who decides "excessive"? You? Scott Pruitt's lobbying friends?
     
  14. TomFitz

    TomFitz Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2013
    Messages:
    40,411
    Likes Received:
    15,895
    Trophy Points:
    113
    When you go out of your way to make gratuitious remarks about race on a thread about air pollution regulations, your post speaks for itself.
     
    Marcotic and The Bear like this.
  15. Tim15856

    Tim15856 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2016
    Messages:
    7,792
    Likes Received:
    4,229
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I just saw something last night, I didn't catch the whole thing, but he said the illegals will borrow someones car that has insurance, I guess they have to check in somewhere with a legit car, but even if they don't own it, they get through that inspection and then go back to driving their uninsured cars.
     
  16. Tim15856

    Tim15856 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2016
    Messages:
    7,792
    Likes Received:
    4,229
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I don't think that is the point he is trying to make. Even though cars with CA standards cost more than the other 49 states, he is claiming the other 49 subsidizes CA cars by paying a part of the R&D. Well, spreading the costs in that matter is up to the automotive company, they could charge even more for CA autos or they could avoid selling cars in that state if they don't want to meet those standards.
     
    FreshAir and roorooroo like this.
  17. Aphotic

    Aphotic Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2014
    Messages:
    13,595
    Likes Received:
    6,113
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'd like to see how many hoops you have to jump through, and how many linguistic and literary twists you'll have to make to prove this statement.
     
  18. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,424
    Likes Received:
    51,236
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Regulatory taking is government limits on the uses of private property to such a degree that the regulation effectively deprives the property owners of economically reasonable use or value of their property to such an extent that it deprives them of utility or value of that property, even though the regulation does not formally divest them of title to it, Silly!

    United States v. Causby

    When the regulation goes too far Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon

    Lingle v. Chevron

    No person .....{shall be} deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.​
     
  19. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,424
    Likes Received:
    51,236
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The Courts, Silly!
     
  20. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    41,825
    Likes Received:
    32,493
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    That wasn’t my claim but feel free to chase down that straw man because you have no other argument.
     
    The Bear likes this.
  21. Moonglow

    Moonglow Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2013
    Messages:
    20,754
    Likes Received:
    8,047
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The same 9th that just said open carry was okay? That circus?
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2018
  22. Aphotic

    Aphotic Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2014
    Messages:
    13,595
    Likes Received:
    6,113
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So you're arguing that California's emissions regulations are seizing property from vehicle owners and manufacturers?
     
  23. camp_steveo

    camp_steveo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    23,014
    Likes Received:
    6,601
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well. I didn't read it, but Los Angeles is the most polluted air in the US, or it was. So, CA does need to be cleaned up.
     
  24. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,424
    Likes Received:
    51,236
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes. Excessive regulation is a "taking" and many Blue States do this in violation of the civil rights of those that live there. I expect as we return to Representative rule from the Court Oligarchy that most of us grew up under and that we will begin to see the private property rights of Americans reasserted against excessive government.

    This particular case though involves the government of the State of CA unconstitutionally taking from the other states in the Union.

    There will be many routes to the following two pronged test that I expect to build as we return to Constitutional. limited, representative government

    i) Does the State have a compelling legitimate interest to regulate?
    If that prong is met then we go to prong ii)
    ii) Is this the least intrusive manner for the State to meet that interest?

    Where regulation does not meet both prongs, the free choice of the individual governs.
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2018
  25. Aphotic

    Aphotic Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2014
    Messages:
    13,595
    Likes Received:
    6,113
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's some mental gymnastics there. No one is forcing anyone to sell anything in California, and there is no undue burden on emissions. If anything, consumers, beyond the ridiculously absurd right, are more conscious of what their carbon footprint is anymore, and would prefer cleaner, more fuel efficient vehicles.

    I fail to see how a catalytic converter requirement is theft of property from Ford Motor Company.
     
    Marcotic likes this.

Share This Page