I'm For States Rights!

Watermark said:
The power to set limits on individuals doesn't give you the power to lower a states limit on individuals to their, you unconstitutional idioitic logically fallacious fucktard.

Listen, they don't TELL the state to set the minimum. They set it themselves, with their own police and beaurocracy. They cannot tell the states police and beaurocracy what to do.
Click to expand...

You are trying to evade the issue to conveniently pull something out of your ass.

The power to regulate interstate was not to grant power to the feds to place limits on individuals, but on the states. It was included to avoid trade wars between the states.

If this is a matter of interstate commerce, the state is prohibited from regulating it. If it is not then the feds minimums are illegitimate.
 
RStringfield said:
You are trying to evade the issue to conveniently pull something out of your ass.

The power to regulate interstate was not to grant power to the feds to place limits on individuals, but on the states. It was included to avoid trade wars between the states.

If this is a matter of interstate commerce, the state is prohibited from regulating it. If it is not then the feds minimums are illegitimate.
Click to expand...

This is not a matter of interstate commerce.
 
Watermark said:
"The feds have the authority to set maximums because they have the authority to set minimums."

How could that NOT be logically fallacious?

And they aren't "setting maximums", they're illegaly forcing states to lower their own individually set minimums.
Click to expand...

Listen dumbass, maximums are not really relevant. The feds have granted waivers on certain matters to give states some room to set their own standards. But they are not required to do so.

The state has no authority to set minimums because this has been deemed a matter of interstate commerce. Either the feds have power here or they don't.

Your argument, that they have power to set minimums that the states must follow but may not also reject state minimums is ridiculous and is based on nothing but your own whims.
 
You want to have your cake and eat it too. Both Dems and Repubs are full of shit on this issue. They want to allow state's rights only so long as the states do what they say.
 
Hmm and I thought states rights was a rebutlicken issue.

They used to be so proud of supporting states rights.
 
Well, there ya go.

After a long running thread, where we were lectured that it was entirely appropriate for EPA to nix California's emmisions regulations, it turns out that a Bush EPA policial appointee single handidly over ruled the recommendations of virtually the entire technical and regulatory EPA staff, who were recommending that California's regs be approved.

EPA staff say Cheney had role in quashing California emissions standards

Published: Friday December 21, 2007


Ford, GM won't deny claims executives met VP

Multiple staffers at the Environmental Protection Agency told the Los Angeles Times for Friday's editions that Bush Administration appointee Stephen Johnson, who heads the agency, quashed California's plan to regulate automobile emissions single-handedly, going against the wishes of nearly all of his staff.

The head of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ignored his staff's written findings in denying California's request for a waiver to implement its landmark law to slash greenhouse gases from vehicles, sources inside and outside the agency told the Times' Janet Wilson on Thursday.

"California met every criteria . . . on the merits. The same criteria we have used for the last 40 years on all the other waivers," said an EPA staffer Wilson quoted. "We told him that. All the briefings we have given him laid out the facts."

California had sought a waiver from the federal emissions standards to implement a law which would further restrict emissions.

According to Wilson, "Some staff members believe Johnson made his decision after auto executives met with Vice President Dick Cheney and after a Chrysler executive delivered a letter to the White House outlining why neither California nor the EPA should be allowed to regulate greenhouse gases, among other reasons. The Detroit News reported Wednesday that chief executives of Ford and Chrysler met with Cheney last month."


http://rawstory.com/news/2007/EPA_staff_say_Cheney_had_role_1221.html
Click to expand...
 
RStringfield said:
Listen dumbass, maximums are not really relevant. The feds have granted waivers on certain matters to give states some room to set their own standards. But they are not required to do so.

The state has no authority to set minimums because this has been deemed a matter of interstate commerce. Either the feds have power here or they don't.

Your argument, that they have power to set minimums that the states must follow but may not also reject state minimums is ridiculous and is based on nothing but your own whims.
Click to expand...

You're argument, that states can't set their own policies, is ridiculous.

Because the feds give out 20 years sentences for cocaine users, I guess a state can't give out life sentences.
 
DigitalDave said:
I've always said that that EPA is one of the Federal Programs that need to stay that way because a state that pollutes, also pollutes the state beside it. However, I think if a state wants to have higher standards than what the Federal EPA demands, its all good. It's gonna be ten years before I can get one of those Chevy Volts at a decent price...
Click to expand...

The Clarity is the one I am waiting for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top