Friday, December 21, 2007

So Much for States' Rights

Wow. Score one for the Republicans people who want the Earth to burn in flames.
For the first time ever, the EPA has turned down a request for a waiver so that California can set its own regulations on auto emissions, as it's authorized to do under the Clean Air Act.

Even more appalling is the reasoning.

In a hastily assembled after hours press conference, the EPA declared that the energy bill signed by Bush yesterday was much better than a "patchwork of state laws," even though the energy bill was much weaker than the California proposals and does not directly address greenhouse gases. Once again the Republicans demonstrate their absolute disdain for any authority being given to the states, and their love of centralizing all power under one man. State's rights? You have the right to go shove a tailpipe where the sun don't shine.

In turning down California's request, EPA administrator Stephen Johnson rolled out the next phase of the Republican Zeno's Paradox Plan for ignoring global warming. California, said Johnson, wasn't the right place to deal with this because it's really a national issue. Of course, the nation can't deal with this issue because it's really an international issue. And of course the other nations of the world aren't ready to do this exactly as we'd like so... California can't deal with this. No one can move until everyone does.
Sounds about right.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Thanks for shining the spotlight on Republican contempt for consumers, global warming and the environment. Nothing like being in bed with oil!

joe said...

This, as the world experiences record low temps and 400 scientists and climatologists come forward about how they've been ignored and accosted for not going with the global warming flow.

Rich man: Al Gore.
Paying his salary: You.
Gets to you by: Private Jet.

Anonymous said...

joe ... even if one does not accept the importance of global warming because you have failed to do your research or review the credentials of the opposition sources (many of whom are paid oil company lackeys), a google search for peak oil or peak world oil might enlighten. One might also evaluate those countries our FEARLESS LEADER has labelled as 'terrorist nations.' Interesting how they ALL have oil, gas or potential pipeline routes. Could that have been why Poppy Bush got us involved in Afghanistan initially? That gas pipeline through Afghanistan currently under construction couldn't have been the reason? Naw!
The US has 5% of the world's population and consumes 25% of the world's energy. We're energy pigs and the rest of the world knows it. Sorry you don't.

Anonymous said...

As a nation, we can't accomplish much until we change Washington, but we can individually make a commitment to reduce our carbon production and fossil fuel use. That would seem to be an 'In Your Face' statement. I've seen estimates that most people could reduce their energy use by 40% just because we waste so much. It might be a worthy individual goal to strive for and pass along to our children.
Thanks Joe for reminding me that P.T.Barnum was right when he said there was one born every minute. You proved he was correct.

Ryan Adams said...

Joe, this isn't really about Global Warming, it's about states' rights. I've never been a huge "states' rights" proponent - I see it (correctly, as this case would suggest) as a convenient method to somehow moralize racism and inequality in most cases that it's been used in the past, at least in civil rights movements. The same Republicans who will rail against people for violating states rights, however, are all too willing to ignore them when it comes to corporate profits.

While I don't think states ought to have the right to circumvent the federal government in most matters, states ought to have the right to go above and beyond federal policies, such as an instance like this. One of the benefits of such policies is that those states can serve as test grounds for the rest of the country. Maybe California's plan would have led positive gains? Maybe it wouldn't. We'll never know, because the Republicans aren't such a huge fan of states' rights when it comes to corporate profits.

You, as a Republican who I am sure is a believer in a strong array in states rights, ought to think California should have the right to set policy in that area, right? You've asserted states rights in other matters, such as marriage equality. Regardless of whether you or not you take Global Warming seriously (and I would urge you to do so), you should recognize that California has the right to set tougher emission standards than the federal government.

joe said...

First of all, this "failure to research opposition credentials" and that they're all oil lackies...

"The distinguished scientists featured in this new report are experts in diverse fields, including: climatology; oceanography; geology; biology; glaciology; biogeography; meteorology; oceanography; economics; chemistry; mathematics; environmental sciences; engineering; physics and paleoclimatology. Some of those profiled have won Nobel Prizes for their outstanding contribution to their field of expertise and many shared a portion of the UN IPCC Nobel Peace Prize with Vice President Gore."

Also:

"Additionally, these scientists hail from prestigious institutions worldwide, including: Harvard University; NASA; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR); Massachusetts Institute of Technology; the UN IPCC; the Danish National Space Center; U.S. Department of Energy; Princeton University; the Environmental Protection Agency; University of Pennsylvania; Hebrew University of Jerusalem; the International Arctic Research Centre; the Pasteur Institute in Paris; the Belgian Weather Institute; Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute; the University of Helsinki; the National Academy of Sciences of the U.S., France, and Russia; the University of Pretoria; University of Notre Dame; Stockholm University; University of Melbourne; Columbia University; the World Federation of Scientists; and the University of London."

Go ahead and attack that. I expect you to have actual documentation all 400 of them are in big oils pockets.

Secondly, ALL the state sponsors of terrorism are oil nations? Out of the 5 "terrorist nations", only TWO are oil producing countries. That would be Iran and Sudan. I don't know if you're cool with genocide and having zero rights, but I'm not, and I think both nations are disgusting. Why don't you read something besides Huffpost and dailykos before you make me wear out my keyboard some more.

Second anon:

I switched all the bulbs in my house to compact florescent. I also CAN'T WAIT to buy a Chevy Volt. If diggin' 40 miles without a drop of gas makes me a sucker, then so be it.

And finally, Ryan. No, I don't disagree with you. I actually agree with you as far as the states rights issue goes. But as far as this being Republican hackery, one of the most prominent disgusted individuals was a Republican. This was, out of 40 waiver requests, the only one denied. I would look into it deeper than just shouting Republican hackery. If it was going to be hackery, why would the other 39 requests not be denied? Did all 39 not have any impact on the auto industry? I serrrriously doubt it.

Moot point though, an investigation got opened, so we'll see.

Anonymous said...

well done Joe

Joel Patterson said...

There's definitely a Republican Hack at the center of this denied waiver for California. The head of the EPA heard the scientists and experts support for the California standards, and then did exactly what Dick Cheney, George Bush and the CEOs of the auto industry wanted.

joe is mis-informed about global warming. There may be 400 scientists who deny global warming, but they can't get agree amongst themselves as to what is happening with climate. And a scientist who can't provide evidence to convince other scientists is probably not doing science.

Anonymous said...

Antartica was at one time covered with trees, long before man was even here. Maybe we're just entering a natural warming phase.

Joel Patterson said...

Wow, Ryan!

Your post here is like flypaper for the anti-science cranks.

About Ryan's Take