Minnesota legislators concerned with reducing automotive emissions of greenhouse gasses have devised a drastic plan.
Evidently, state lawmakers donâ€™t trust themselves to establish pollution standards for Minnesota, because the bill theyâ€™ve crafted abdicates that authority to the California Air Resources Board (CARB).Â
CARB is a division of the California Environmental Protection Agency and consists of 11 members appointed by Californiaâ€™s governor (Arnold Schwarzenegger). They set emission standards for vehicles sold in California that are twice as ambitious as federal guidelines, requiring 30% lower emissions in less than eight years.
Representative Hortman (DFL â€“ Brooklyn Park) wants to permanently entrust the 11-member California panel with regulatory authority over Minnesota. The bill she introduced (HF863) directsÂ Minnesotaâ€™s Pollution Control Agency to adopt rules that â€œmust be identical to and must incorporate by reference the California low emission vehicle regulations adopted by the California Air Resources Board under the California Code of Regulations, title 13.â€
Not only does Representative Hortman intend to adopt current known California regulations, but she intends to do so in perpetuity, giving appointed California bureaucrats the power to enact unknown future regulations for the state of Minnesota.
The bill states that MPCAâ€™s rules â€œmust be amended as necessary in a timely fashion to minimize the time during which Minnesota’s rules are not identical with California’s regulations, as required under United States Code, title 42, section 7507. Amendments under this clause must be made under section 14.388, subdivision 1, clause (3). Any portion of California’s regulations requiring a federal waiver under the Clean Air Act in order to become effective may not be enforced in Minnesota unless and until California receives the requisite federal waiver.â€
In their rush to â€œsave the planet,â€ they forgot to save Minnesotaâ€™s sovereignty. A UCLA student would have more influence over Minnesotaâ€™s vehicle regulations than any voter or politician in Minnesota would!Â
“We’re talking about an 11-member panel in California, that’s going to be regulating the state of Minnesota,â€ said Representative Tom Hackbarth (R â€“ Cedar), â€œThat’s not the way to operate in our state. I don’t think our legislature wants to give away that kind of authority.”
Auto makers say the California emissions standards (which arenâ€™t even in force in California, since they contradict federal regulations) would sharply increase the cost of automobiles, and limit the number of SUVs and trucks that could be sold in a state where they were implemented. According to the Minnesota Automobile Dealers Association, Minnesotans buy more trucks than cars, which poses a problem with California Standards. Higher demand SUVs and trucks would have to be rationed. Ford Dealers would have to sell a certain number of Focuses before they could sell an F-150, for example.
If Hortmanâ€™s bill is adopted, more expensive vehicles, rationing, and an abdication of Minnesotaâ€™s regulatory power to another stateâ€™s government bureaucracy will result.
I really disagree with this whole site. Science has proven that Global Warming is REAL, and if we don’t ACCEPT it and DO something, we will basically kill ourselves.
It’s fine and American to disagree and express one’s opinion, but on what do you base your opinion that global warming (and man-made global warming in particular) is real, and that it is a dire problem? You really disagree with the entire site? Aren’t you swayed by scientific evidence? The majority of the information presented here is research and the conclusions of published scientists. Or is it simply that you disagree with digging into the specifics of global warming dogma and exposing flaws in some of what we’ve been told?
The Earth has gone through countless cycles of warming and cooling. Why is it different and requiring intervention today? Personally, I’d be more alarmed if Earth was cooling. Ice Ages don’t look like any fun at all.
I used to buy into the hype of global warming until a co-worker started to ask why I believed it and what evidence I had to support it. I didn’t have any evidence because I simply blurted out the latest scare headlines from the news. I encourage people to read articles objectively, being aware of vast generalizations and scare tactics. Most importantly, realize that scientists are not paid well until a problem arises.
I agree with Bret and Dan,
More so these days people have lost there credibility in what they speak. Since when does a movie such as Al Gore’s Inconvenient Truth be allowed to be called a scientific documentary without any scientific evidence? Where are the facts?
His melting glacier theory has been trashed: “Science Magazine: Glaciers Not On Simple Upward Melting Trend” Read it, John. It’s actually credible in that it gives the researchers names and how to find their data. Hope that’s good enough for you. You know… facts!
Where is Al Gore’s credibility, I distinctively remember when watching his political garbage “I want to be a scientist” that all he could come foward with is and I quote, “Scientists say” Who Gore? Who? I Don’t even see any names in your credits, where do you get your data?
And people like him are the major cause to this idiocracy known as global warming. People actually believe him because of who he is, And he knows it.
The CO2 charts!! Any person who takes a general level chemistry class can see how ridiculous that is.
And so I say: Read!! look for factual and credible data: find an author who is willing to admit to his work, dates, availability of presentation of research that was done, how, and the data.
For some unknown reason Dan loves oil, and coal too I guess. I’m sure however that he is not “lining his pockets” while he lovingly defends these industies. It is just some kind of love, right Dan? Or, let me guess, a love for the “truth.” That must be it. Anyway, Dan, you must admit that these finite and dirty products are going to disappear someday, or become so expensive to extract they may as well be completely gone. Or am I wrong about you Dan? Do you have any answers besides our continued addiction to oil and coal? Even if you disagree with the negative effects on the environment, most people are not deluded enough to think oil and coal will really last forever and renewable alternatives be ignored…? What is your answer Dan? Please enlighten us.
I love liberty and progress. I don’t like poverty, starvation and I really dislike being swindled. I am particularly fond of hydrogen power. Give me a hydrogen car!
In a land where evil lurks in the form of humans, it’s not comforting to see here in Minnesota that we have lowered ourselves to this. Let’s not be smart enough to watch out for our localized needs and enact the most expensive, restricting, and nutcase driven ants-are-people-too laws.
Must be feely-goody? Go nuclear!