Posted on 01/25/2009 5:28:28 PM PST by BigMacGOP
President Obama on Monday will direct federal regulators to move swiftly to grant California and 13 other states the right to set strict automobile emissions and fuel efficiency standards, two administration officials said Sunday evening.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Yeah...just what the dying automotive industry needs.
So, will I be able to drive my non-Kaliformica emission unapproved vehicle into that state when the smoke clears?
Bet he is keeping a Federal minimum standard, however.
A liberal’s wet dream.
Of course it will be done.
Government stepping on more of our freedom...
So much so that they will grab his ankle on the way down.
screwed...royal and blue.
[So, will I be able to drive my non-Kaliformica emission unapproved vehicle into that state when the smoke clears?]
That’s why I’m rebuilding my 67 Camaro and just bought a 57 Bel Air, to grandfather in before we are all forced to motorized bicycles.
> Yeah...just what the dying automotive industry needs.
It’s ok. We’ll borrow money for a bigger bailout. Then we’ll impose more regulations. Then we’ll borrow more money for a bigger bailout. Then...
I can’t think of a single reason why this is desirable. Not one.
“just what the dying automotive industry needs”
Actually, that’s the point. It’s easy to see this one coming.
First; set new standards. Second; declare the Big Three’s new product lines to be in compliance with those standards. Third; make it illegal to operate any older vehicle (none of which meet the new standards). Fourth; watch the unions get rich as US consumers are forced to buy new, overpriced vehicles from the Big Three.
Elegant simplicity from the criminal minds of the Democrats.
Went downhill fast.
I think history puts a lie to the theoretical connection you're trying to concoct.
Auto makers will have to begin producing 50 different engine packages for US autos.
It would be easier to produce one emissions package, the strictest, but the minute production began a state would pass a yet stricter standard.
“before we are all forced to motorized bicycles.”
Motorized?
That’s wishful thinking.
It won’t be as bad for those who live in the warmer states, but pedaling a bicycle in the Winter is going to be tough in Chicago.
The EXIT for California is EAST and NORTH, Please leave in an Orderly fashion, there is plenty of Room in the other 49 states.
Yeah, more government control and dependence...but,taxes, no. Here in King County in WA state, the high a$$ auto tax/tabs is what keeps things going [ignorant libs even admit it when caught off guard and are trying to find more money they can spend]...and yet the stupid idiots keep doing things to get people outta their cars and into public transportation.
I believe this is exactly the reason there are so few automobile models that are sold with diesel engines.
For a map of the boutique gasoline areas, see:
http://www.willisms.com/archives/2006/04/boutique_fuel_n.html
your post made no sense at all.
It’s easy to see this one coming. First; set new standards. Second; declare the Big Three’s new product lines to be in compliance with those standards. Third; make it illegal to operate any older vehicle (none of which meet the new standards). Fourth; watch the unions get rich as US consumers are forced to buy new, overpriced vehicles from the Big Three. Elegant simplicity from the criminal minds of the Democrats.'
YES!!!
This also brings to mind the lunacy that was voted on to have a mass transit system built here in California (Prop 1A); more than likely since most of us will not be able to afford these overpriced tin cans on wheels (with apologies to those Navy veterans who served aboard DDGs), the Liberals will have one of their biggest pipe dreams come true: The Masses (washed and unwashed) all squeezed together on commuter trains, just like in the former Soviet Union, only not running on time.
It was interesting reading an interview with the lead of BMW new car development recently. He was basically saying there is complete panic in the auto industry over the standards California is trying to implement and that it is screwing with all their R&D and plans for the cars they wanted to release.
Stick your public transportation and light rail where the sun doesn’t shine!
I wouldn’t use it if you paid me!
Too bad Barry thinks FOCA, on the other hand, should be at the federal level instead of letting individual states decide the strictness of their abortion laws.
Please make that 48. The Californians that moved up here in mass in the 1990s have completely destroyed Washington State and its politics.
Public transport is run at a loss and taxes make up the difference.
I see where you are coming from, but any major public transport system is also a major loser, from AMTRAK to SEPTA.
I have heard about those high taxes on autos out West.
My cars average abour 24 bucks a year to register here.
There are no emissions inspections at all.
And no income tax, either.
California has never had adequate public transportation, and I doubt they ever will.
Arnie is just as nuts as the other democrats running that state.
Pssssssssst! It wasn't the income tax.
It was the automobile.
What’s AHHHnold going to do with his Hummers?
It's no piece of cake in Pocatello, Idaho either. The mountain bikers are total fanatics around here, but they know when to park the bikes. Once there is snow and ice on the ground, the bikes are down until the streets are clean and dry again. Ditto for the motorcyclists. Winter is 4x4 time for the intelligent and accident time for the 2x2 "thrifty" driver. The roads here are "mountain roads" all the time.
Gasoline blends are also sensitive to altitude. In my area, the typical unleaded gasoline runs 85 octane. Mid-grade is 87. Premium is 91 or 92. Sinclair carries 93 if you need it. That's normal for high altitudes. Regular in San Diego is 87, mid is 89, premium is 92. Never mind all the stupid "boutique" blends done for no particular reason.
The Economic Snowball Effect.
Shoot. The only states north of here are Oregon and Washington and those states are at least as loony as California.
Nevada and Arizona are looking better all the time. If only those states had oceans.
Sorry, we are going to erect huge stations at all borders to keep miscreants like you out. You may only bring in pre-approved Prius’.
Furthermore, all 18 wheeler long-haul trucks are banned. Much too inefficient.
It sure isn’t a payoff to the UAW, is it?
“The EXIT for California is EAST and NORTH”
Yeah, but maybe true freedom is only available at the SOUTH exit. Of course, you need a lot of ammo to fight the drug gangs.
“This is a complete reversal of President Bush’s policy of censoring or ignoring global warming science,” Mr. Weiss [director of climate strategy at the Center for American Progress] said. “With the fuel economy measures and clean energy investments in the recovery package, President Obama has done more in one week to reduce oil dependence and global warming than George Bush did in eight years.”
What a freaking idiot.
I think outlawing vintage cars is off the table, even for these bozos...
Intended consequence: manufacturers have no choice but to build for the strictest standard from a large state (sorry, Vermont, you cannot wag the dog). We all get Kalifornia Kars.
There goes the big three, amazing that one man can do so much damage and this is only day 5?
Commerce Clause Limitations on State Regulation
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/statecommerce.htm
...The Commerce Clause is a grant of power to Congress, not an express limitation on the power of the states to regulate the economy. At least four possible interpretations of the Commerce Clause have been proposed. First, it has been suggested that the Clause gives Congress the exclusive power to regulate commerce. Under this interpretation, states are divested of all power to regulate interstate commerce. Second, it has been suggested that the Clause gives Congress and the states concurrent power to regulate commerce. Under this view, state regulation of commerce is invalid only when it is preempted by federal law. Third, it has been suggested that the Clause assumes that Congress and the states each have their own mutually exclusive zones of regulatory power. Under this interpretation, it becomes the job of the courts to determine whether one sovereign has invaded the exclusive regulatory zone of the other. Finally, it has been suggested that the Clause by its own force divests states of the power to regulate commerce in certain ways, but the states and Congress retain concurrent power to regulate commerce in many other ways. This fourth interpretation, a complicated hybrid of two others, turns out to be the approach taken by the Court in its decisions interpreting the Commerce Clause.
In reality General Motors bought up specific segments that they could shut down to destroy the network, so it's not technically speaking "the automobile", it's more "the automobile manufacturer named General Motors".
Now, back to the original context ~ the poster was targeting "networks" as a form of centralization that would lead to all sorts of stuff ~ and I was merely pointing out that even before the Income Tax (and all the fascist nonsense that amendment has fostered) we had a very successful centralized highspeed rail system in the Midwest.
Which meant, of course, that the existence of a rail system is possible without Socialism or the Income Tax.
That is, they are independent of each other, or can be, although Socialists are always advancing the notion that we'd be better off with rail than with automobiles.
The problem with the Socialists is they fail to appreciate the scale of the USA compared to Western Europe, as well as the differences in urban density in each area.
Wide open spaces mean you need something like a car to get home, and vast distances between cities mean you need something like an airplane to fly there in a realistic period of time.
I think the Socialists (and here I include the Democrats) simply are not capable of considering scale. It's Left Brain Damage or something.
Well, that should send more nails in the Auto Industries coffins, as well as raise the price of gas again.
Good move, Demokrats.
You are jumping to erroneous conclusions. I’d recommend a good gluten free beer next time.
That's simply not true historically. We had public transit before we had automobiles and a road system to support them.
Then don’t sell cars in California.
“Government stepping on more of our freedom...”
I don’t know if I agree. I tend to think state’s rights are a good thing. Especially when the other likely option is passing the CA proposed restrictions for every state. Given who is now in charge, that is a very real possibility. As someone said, “elections have consequences.” ....they are going to be painful.
My mistake. I was unaware of the context.
And, yes, I'm quite familiar with the network of "interurbans" around most Midwestern cities. And, for that matter, the Southwest, the Southeast and the Far West.
Pacific Electric, for instance, had an extraordinarily dense network in the LA area -- pre-freeway.
I think the Socialists (and here I include the Democrats) simply are not capable of considering scale.
The only scale liberals recognize is the urban hive they currently reside in...and the current time period. There is no sense of rural -- or even suburban -- scales. Nor of what may have been in any other decade.
Geography and history are beyond them (for one thing, they were never taught either).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.