The Emissions & Pollution Association Environmental Protection Agency rejected California’s bid to enforce tougher regulations on car emissions. In essence, there was no good reason why they did it, except possibly that this guy works for the Bush administration.
The reason this is so notable is that the EPA is a Federal Agency run under the Executive Branch. Constitutionally speaking, they trump states. However, to gain some perspective, let’s look at another constitutional hot-button issue, guns.
Gun ownership is protected under the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution. However, states have varying levels of strictness when it comes to gun-control laws. As a result, we have, let us say, a “patchwork of different standards” applying to the global issue of guns. And while it is addressed on the national level, it is ALSO being addressed on a local one.
The Clean Air Act is not a Constitutional mandate, but a Congressional one, giving an Executive agency authority. Essentially, it has less teeth than the 2nd Amendment. So why is the EPA rejecting California’s right to enforce stricter laws?
I’d prefer not to openly speculate about the nobility of the Bush administration’s intentions, but there is no other reasonable explanation for such an act. This is part of an ongoing effort to consolidate power and create a “wealthocracy” – rule by the wealthy and powerful, especially corporate interests. Unfortunately, rule by a few corporate special interests already has a name – fascism. It is becoming increasingly likely that the sovereign power held by people through elected officials is being squandered on those with money, and those with power.
Good luck to California (and the other states joining CA) in trying to assert those often-ignored 10th Amendment rights.
