CSNbbs

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/...ar-AAHrjFQ

"The Trump administration is expected on Wednesday to formally revoke California’s authority to set auto emissions rules that are stricter than federal standards,....

A revocation of the California waiver would have national significance. Thirteen other states follow California’s tighter standards, together representing roughly a third of the national auto market....

White House officials have also been eager to move quickly to revoke California’s authority to set its own standards because they want the opportunity to defend the effort in the Supreme Court before the end of Mr. Trump’s first term. The thinking goes that if a Democrat were to be elected president in 2020, the federal government would be unlikely to defend revocation of the waiver in the high court...."

I understand the logic and the idea of California setting the rules for the rest of the country is abhorrent (they already have 14 states), but it just seems like a case where you choose your battles. Plenty of other battles to be fought.

I'm sure the automakers are lobbying hard for this as well as oil refiners. It is annoying that it seems like every product you buy has a special California warning somewhere on it.

I wish the Trump administration would do the same for CARB (California Air Resource Board) that has set dozens of standards involving products coming into the state. Basically by doing so setting the national and often international standard due to California's large market. Formaldehyde in wood products is big one. It costs manufacturers untold millions of dollars in testing and manufacturing costs to conform to the CARB standards. To sell any wood product in the state of California your product must be CARB certified. Our company spent over 30 grand to have our products certified and we are a tiny player in this.

So much for state rights.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

(09-17-2019 09:25 PM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/...ar-AAHrjFQ

"The Trump administration is expected on Wednesday to formally revoke California’s authority to set auto emissions rules that are stricter than federal standards,....

A revocation of the California waiver would have national significance. Thirteen other states follow California’s tighter standards, together representing roughly a third of the national auto market....

White House officials have also been eager to move quickly to revoke California’s authority to set its own standards because they want the opportunity to defend the effort in the Supreme Court before the end of Mr. Trump’s first term. The thinking goes that if a Democrat were to be elected president in 2020, the federal government would be unlikely to defend revocation of the waiver in the high court...."

I understand the logic and the idea of California setting the rules for the rest of the country is abhorrent (they already have 14 states), but it just seems like a case where you choose your battles. Plenty of other battles to be fought.

Except we all get to pay for the extremes of the Ca stupidity. Living in the foothills of Georgia or Va., we don’t need to meet California emissions standards after they f#%^’ed things up themselves for generations.

If they want to further burden their shriveling middle class? Fine, have at it.

But the land of fruits and nuts can stay the eff out of my garage or driveway.

“We’re all gonna love driving our electric (federally mandated) cars”.

Uhhh, no. You’ll pry the steering wheel of my ‘84 CJ from my cold, dead hands. F#%^!off!

(09-18-2019 06:11 AM)fsquid Wrote: [ -> ]So much for state rights.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

California should secede.

(09-18-2019 06:11 AM)fsquid Wrote: [ -> ]So much for state rights.

Say that too often, and some people will call you a racist. I’m just warning you.

Personally, I would love to see the concept of federalism restored to its proper place in our society. But mine is a lonely voice on that issue.

Ironic that one of the most effective destroyers of States’ Rights in this country was a former Governor of California named Earl Warren. And with just one or two exceptions, his successors haven’t been much help, either.

(09-18-2019 06:28 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-18-2019 06:11 AM)fsquid Wrote: [ -> ]So much for state rights.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

California should secede.

Water and defense contractors won't let that happen.

(09-18-2019 06:11 AM)fsquid Wrote: [ -> ]So much for state rights.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Called interstate commerce

(09-18-2019 07:01 AM)Native Georgian Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-18-2019 06:11 AM)fsquid Wrote: [ -> ]So much for state rights.

Say that too often, and some people will call you a racist. I’m just warning you.

Party of "states rights" strikes again!

(09-18-2019 09:51 AM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-18-2019 06:11 AM)fsquid Wrote: [ -> ]So much for state rights.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Called interstate commerce

That falls under Congress authority.

(09-18-2019 06:11 AM)fsquid Wrote: [ -> ]So much for state rights.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Exactly...those used to be a thing of the right, before ETTD.

Something about tailpipes in the “Land of Fruits and Nuts” just doesn’t seem right

I'm all for it. When I was running a trucking company CA set emissions so strict that any pre-2011 truck wouldn't pass and the state would not issue permits if needed. If the load didn't require permits it was a run at your own risk type deal of getting caught. I hated sending trucks to CA anyways, but the money was good and southern CA deliveries were pretty easy.

(09-18-2019 09:51 AM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-18-2019 06:11 AM)fsquid Wrote: [ -> ]So much for state rights.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Called interstate commerce

This is a tough one in that in order to sell cars, all auto makers essentially follow California's laws... otherwise, you couldn't sell a car originally bought in Texas, in California. If we had 50 different rules, there wouldn't be any interstate commerce in automobiles. California cars would be more expensive, in California.

Oil companies don't care as long as you're driving. Automakers don't really care because everyone already has the same standards... It's the consumers who care. Lowering some standards could increase efficiencies and lower costs... and really don't make that big a difference in the grand scheme.... not unlike how us being green and China not doesn't really help 'the global environment' as much as us being slightly less green and them being much more green than they are

(09-18-2019 10:08 AM)fsquid Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-18-2019 09:51 AM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-18-2019 06:11 AM)fsquid Wrote: [ -> ]So much for state rights.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Called interstate commerce

That falls under Congress authority.

There are reasons the exemption can be rescinded. I'm guessing the administration is arguing one of those points.

California had the exemptions because Reagan passed into laws these stricter emissions. Have you ever seen the smog? It blocks out the sunlight. The air is getting cleaner thanks to the California laws. The reason California is stricter because there are more people than other states. When there are more people? There are more cars and factories. The businesses including car makers and all that are working with the state to help turn the state around. The car companies and all that helped by investing into make cars, buildings and all that better.

(09-18-2019 12:31 PM)DavidSt Wrote: [ -> ]California had the exemptions because Reagan passed into laws these stricter emissions. Have you ever seen the smog? It blocks out the sunlight. The air is getting cleaner thanks to the California laws. The reason California is stricter because there are more people than other states. When there are more people? There are more cars and factories. The businesses including car makers and all that are working with the state to help turn the state around. The car companies and all that helped by investing into make cars, buildings and all that better.

So California has close to 50 years to get this right, yet they still have 8 of the top 10 most air polluted cities in the country... time to get off the pot.

(09-18-2019 12:31 PM)DavidSt Wrote: [ -> ]California had the exemptions because Reagan passed into laws these stricter emissions. Have you ever seen the smog? It blocks out the sunlight. The air is getting cleaner thanks to the California laws. The reason California is stricter because there are more people than other states. When there are more people? There are more cars and factories. The businesses including car makers and all that are working with the state to help turn the state around. The car companies and all that helped by investing into make cars, buildings and all that better.

Out of the 50 states and DC, California ranks 45th for number of cars per 1000 people. (2015 data)
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformati...15/mv1.cfm
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys...lldata.csv

A large part of California's smog problem is geographic. Onshore winds keep emissions trapped up against the mountains where dry, arid conditions add to the issue. Cooler air flows down from the higher elevations trapping the smog.
https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/knowzone/students.../whyis.htm