Trump prohibits California's higher emissions standards

[Teallaura]

We don't do it like that, Denmark has a strange system of taxing cars based on how much they cost. Its a horrible taxation system that everyone wants to move away from, but its gotten rather calcified. The only effect of this system has been to force people to drive old, cheap cars.

At any rate it'll still be an electrical car. No smog, no noise.

Psst! Electric, not electrical. All modern cars have electrical systems, but only electric cars solely run on electric motors.

English: when you need an adjective or adverb and like guessing which form to use.

[oxmixmudd]

Long story short: Cali needs enforced federal environmental regulation because liberals don't practice what they preach.

This is a nutty response. California needs more restrictive emissions enforcement because the natural conditions there allow emissions to create more havoc on their air quality than most other places in the US. They have enacted special laws governing emissions because they need to.

Jim

[oxmixmudd]

I’m from southern California and have several members of my family dreading when they have to get their car smog check done. You never know when you’ll be hit with a 500 dollar + repair bill so you can get your car back into spec. This is on top of the higher cost of living and taxes. Maybe Jim would like to be hit with this sort of repair cost, on a fixed or low income.

That is difficult. Of course, LA is not an easy place to live period if you are low-income. But there really isn't much choice. The air quality there is not all that great even with the more restrictive emissions. So unless you'd like it to be like Beijing where the air quality is so bad it has significant health impacts and people living there develop black spots on their lungs because of the air pollution, it's just part of the cost of living there.

Jim

[oxmixmudd]

Have you ever had to pay for a smog test, every 2 years, and than pay several hundred dollars in replacement parts and labor to get your car back into emissions standards?

They don't call it a smog test, but where I live you have to pass an emissions test every two years and you don't get it certified till it passes. I think you can get a temporary exemption if you've spent at least $450 and it still can't pass. It's just part of the cost of owning a car, and it's a necessary part of keeping a healthy air quality for everyone.

Jim

[lilpixieofterror]

That is difficult. Of course, LA is not an easy place to live period if you are low-income. But there really isn't much choice. The air quality there is not all that great even with the more restrictive emissions. So unless you'd like it to be like Beijing where the air quality is so bad it has significant health impacts and people living there develop black spots on their lungs because of the air pollution, it's just part of the cost of living there.

Jim

I grew up in Southern California and LA is a trash heap even not counting the smog. By far, cars of today are far more fuel efficient and have far better emissions than they did just 25 years ago. Telling poor people, “Too bad, so sad” isn’t a great way to show caring for someone that can’t afford a 350 dollar California Cadillac Converter and the 300 dollar installation cost. You can’t go anywhere in the state, without a car, so what should they do?

[Terraceth]

So from what I can tell, California and some other states enacted these laws, and Trump is revoking them. I'm confused... how exactly is he doing that? Obviously the Federal Government has the power to override state laws in some instances, but isn't that something that Congress would need to do, not the President? Is there some law passed by Congress I'm unaware of that lets the President change this?

[Teallaura]

And here, I think, is what set off the issue and why the courts may not be as favorable as more liberal observers think:

Source: Fox News

California struck a deal earlier this year with four of the world’s largest automakers – Ford, Honda, BMW, Volkswagen – to bypass the Trump administration’s freeze emissions and fuel economy standards adopted under Obama at 2021 levels.
Source

© Copyright Original Source

California has no right to override Federal policy - the waiver doesn't grant that.

[lilpixieofterror]

They don't call it a smog test, but where I live you have to pass an emissions test every two years and you don't get it certified till it passes. I think you can get a temporary exemption if you've spent at least $450 and it still can't pass. It's just part of the cost of owning a car, and it's a necessary part of keeping a healthy air quality for everyone.

Jim

That isn’t how it works in California and have you lived in the state? Public transportation is terrible and you can’t get anywhere you need to go using it. No car = no job. If you fail a smog test and it goes to the state, you’re screwed.

[Teallaura]

So from what I can tell, California and some other states enacted these laws, and Trump is revoking them. I'm confused... how exactly is he doing that? Obviously the Federal Government has the power to override state laws in some instances, but isn't that something that Congress would need to do, not the President? Is there some law passed by Congress I'm unaware of that lets the President change this?

California’s authority to set tougher emissions standards goes back to the waiver issued by Congress during passage of the Clean Air Act in 1970.

Trump is revoking the waiver that allows California to set standards higher than the Federal standards.

[seanD]

This is a nutty response. California needs more restrictive emissions enforcement because the natural conditions there allow emissions to create more havoc on their air quality than most other places in the US. They have enacted special laws governing emissions because they need to.

Jim

It's not nutty at all. If it was an environmental crisis so critical that it needed federal intervention, you voluntarily reduce automobile use state-wide by accessing public transit systems (which are abundant in this state), thus you reduce emissions. And you also have the added benefit of saving the imminent destruction of the planet in little more than a decade from climate change, which should be even more of an incentive towards this goal. What this tells me is that liberals don't practice what they preach either because they don't really believe the bullcrap they're peddling, or it's too inconvenient for them to practice what they preach, or both.

[oxmixmudd]

I grew up in Southern California and LA is a trash heap even not counting the smog. By far, cars of today are far more fuel efficient and have far better emissions than they did just 25 years ago. Telling poor people, “Too bad, so sad” isn’t a great way to show caring for someone that can’t afford a 350 dollar California Cadillac Converter and the 300 dollar installation cost. You can’t go anywhere in the state, without a car, so what should they do?

Well, short of government subsidies, what can they do? Bad air affects the health of everyone pix. And the REASON Modern cars are so much more fuel efficient and emit so much less air pollution than they used to are those very same government regulations you and others here are so quick to want to get rid of. Personally, because cars are a virtual necessity in some places - e.g. LA, I think the state or city government should probably offer some sort of basic assistance to low income as regards these necessary elements such as emissions. They can't buy your tires, or your gas, or fix your transmission, but air quality I think could fall under the purview of government, so it would make sense to help reduce (not eliminate) the cost of meeting those requirements for lower income people.

Jim

[oxmixmudd]

That isn’t how it works in California and have you lived in the state? Public transportation is terrible and you can’t get anywhere you need to go using it. No car = no job. If you fail a smog test and it goes to the state, you’re screwed.

I get that. This isn't rocket science pix. You can't relax emissions requirements because it makes owning a car a bit more expensive. There is no 'right' to own a car. And cars are very expensive things to own. Insurance, property tax, emissions, tires, oil changes, tuneups, not to mention the major repairs that hit older cars like CV joints, transmissions, engine rebuild etc - which are so expensive that for older, cheaper cars it probably just means its a loss and you go hunting a new car. But just like you can't let a car with bad tires, bad brakes or a cracked windshield out on the road, you can't let large numbers of cars with bad emissions out there either. Public safety is part of the responsibility and cost of owning a car. You have to be insured, the car needs to be road worthy, and it needs to meet basic emissions requirements. Otherwise it isn't safe for the rest of the public.


Jim

[oxmixmudd]

It's not nutty at all. If it was an environmental crisis so critical that it needed federal intervention, you voluntarily reduce automobile use state-wide by accessing public transit systems (which are abundant in this state), thus you reduce emissions. And you also have the added benefit of saving the imminent destruction of the planet in little more than a decade from climate change, which should be even more of an incentive towards this goal. What this tells me is that liberals don't practice what they preach either because they don't really believe the bullcrap they're peddling, or it's too inconvenient for them to practice what they preach, or both.

your comment is more about bashing those you disagree with than truth.

Jim

[oxmixmudd]

So from what I can tell, California and some other states enacted these laws, and Trump is revoking them. I'm confused... how exactly is he doing that? Obviously the Federal Government has the power to override state laws in some instances, but isn't that something that Congress would need to do, not the President? Is there some law passed by Congress I'm unaware of that lets the President change this?

I really don't know - and they are suing - he may not have the right to do it in the end. He really has a beef with California's governor and city mayors - they've challenged him many times. So I believe this is very likely at least in part just another petty, personal attack on California at the expense of the health and well being of at least Californians, but also people living in high population density areas across the US. It is possible he is also trying to service his business buddies that have some $$$ in mind in terms of gain by eliminating the regulations. But I bring it up primarily because it is just 1 of many examples of how Trump is significantly rolling back environmental protections to the benefit of big business or to settle personal scores based on his hatred of Obama, or anyone that has publicly opposed him one way or another.

Not many remember the gross abuses of the environment in the first 2/3 of the 20th century that created the EPA and many of the regulations we now have that protect us from bushiness that has no scruples, no self -discipline when it comes to choosing to spend a bit more to make sure they are being good stewards of our planet and its resources.



Jim

[lilpixieofterror]

Well, short of government subsidies, what can they do? Bad air affects the health of everyone pix. And the REASON Modern cars are so much more fuel efficient and emit so much less air pollution than they used to are those very same government regulations you and others here are so quick to want to get rid of. Personally, because cars are a virtual necessity in some places - e.g. LA, I think the state or city government should probably offer some sort of basic assistance to low income as regards these necessary elements such as emissions. They can't buy your tires, or your gas, or fix your transmission, but air quality I think could fall under the purview of government, so it would make sense to help reduce (not eliminate) the cost of meeting those requirements for lower income people.

Jim

That’s an awesome Strawman you’ve set up there, but the point made is that this effects the poor the most, which Democrats tell us they care about so much, but set up smog checks and huge repair bills that effects them the most. In reality, cars are both more fuel efficient and have much better emissions output than just 25 years ago. If your goal is emissions reductions, you should look to China and India and their rising pollution levels.