Evironmental Regulation

[Anniane]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/20/washington/20epa.html

The article quotes several people as calling California's emissions laws part of the "patchwork" of "inefficient", "confusing" rules as opposed to a national standard. Firstly, I find it curious, though not unexpected, that the Bush administration here is on the side of a centralized effort. More ironic, the "national" standard of Bush's EPA is far less strict; it seems somewhat compromised by demands (and logrolling according to the article) by the auto industry. But must environmental regulation be done on a national level, or else cause mass confusion?

[Osamafune]

Personally I don't see global warming as entirely man's fault and would continue even if we stopped putting out any CO₂, and thus make environmental regulation unneeded. An increased fuel mileage and lessening our dependence or foreign, nonrenewable resources is dandy though.

But yeah, if it's going to be done, I agree it needs to be done on a national level.

[Myroria]

Nobody can tell me what to do with my money. I'm against income tax, I'm against universal healthcare, it's only natural for me to object to a law inhibiting my right to drive or do whatever I want. If I want to drive an SUV that gets 7 mpg, I will drive an SUV that gets 7 mpg, and no one should be able to tell me otherwise.

By the by, I use paper towels in the bathroom out of spite.

[Osamafune]

Problem is, if you want to drive something with even halfway decent gas mileage, you can't find it. So you couldn't "choose" to drive one with 7 miles to the gallon, you would basically be told to by the car manufacturers.

[Delfos]

POWER TO SCHWARZENEGGER!