3 ms·

This won’t do much good for the automakers either. They want to sell one version of a platform to all states. Dividing the standards makes things more expensive

by winrid 9y ago

This won’t do much good for the automakers either. They want to sell one version of a platform to all states. Dividing the standards makes things more expensive - they would absolutely have to do something about California’s waiver, which I doubt will happen while Trump is still in office. I don’t get their agenda.

Baikal2002 9y ago
1. Repeal every piece of legislation enacted by or under President Obama. 2. ???? 3. Profit
URSpider94 9y ago
They’re going to take on California. If they can pack the Federal bench with enough conservative judges, they just might win.
- aaronblohowiak 9y ago
  Abuse of interstate commerce clause has led to this abominable overreach of the federal government where states can’t self-rule in terms of setting more strict laws. As long as the fourteenth is followed, the fed government can gtfo.
- stevenwoo 9y ago
  They only need one more seat to change hands on the Supreme Court then they choose a case in the friendliest or most split appeals circuit court. Pretty much anything would be open for interpretation again, it's the Federalist Society dream opportunity.
- tankerdude 9y ago
  They don’t have to. The EPA has final word and CA has been filing an exemption that the EPA has said yes to until this bozo came into office. My dislike of the guy in Washington has been very high the last ~1.2 years.
  - Gibbon1 9y ago
    California could just impose a carbon tax on the sale of cars and trucks calculated based on mileage. Truck gets 15mpg. Expected life 200,000 miles. That's 13,333 gallons of gasoline, or 20 lbs Co2/gal * 13,333 /2000 lbs/ton = 133 tons of CO2. Say $50 per ton X 130 tones -> $6600 carbon tax. Do the same thing with NOX emissions. Bump it high enough that a non hybrid will cost an extra $5000.
ams6110 9y ago
CARB standards were always more strict. If that standard is now applied nationally, it happened recently. So going back to different requirements for states that follow CARB vs. states that don't would just be going back to the status quo of a few years ago.

by winrid 9y ago

Baikal2002 9y ago

1. Repeal every piece of legislation enacted by or under President Obama. 2. ???? 3. Profit

URSpider94 9y ago

They’re going to take on California. If they can pack the Federal bench with enough conservative judges, they just might win.

aaronblohowiak 9y ago
Abuse of interstate commerce clause has led to this abominable overreach of the federal government where states can’t self-rule in terms of setting more strict laws. As long as the fourteenth is followed, the fed government can gtfo.
stevenwoo 9y ago
They only need one more seat to change hands on the Supreme Court then they choose a case in the friendliest or most split appeals circuit court. Pretty much anything would be open for interpretation again, it's the Federalist Society dream opportunity.
tankerdude 9y ago
They don’t have to. The EPA has final word and CA has been filing an exemption that the EPA has said yes to until this bozo came into office. My dislike of the guy in Washington has been very high the last ~1.2 years.
- Gibbon1 9y ago
  California could just impose a carbon tax on the sale of cars and trucks calculated based on mileage. Truck gets 15mpg. Expected life 200,000 miles. That's 13,333 gallons of gasoline, or 20 lbs Co2/gal * 13,333 /2000 lbs/ton = 133 tons of CO2. Say $50 per ton X 130 tones -> $6600 carbon tax. Do the same thing with NOX emissions. Bump it high enough that a non hybrid will cost an extra $5000.

ams6110 9y ago

CARB standards were always more strict. If that standard is now applied nationally, it happened recently. So going back to different requirements for states that follow CARB vs. states that don't would just be going back to the status quo of a few years ago.