http://sfist.com/2007/12/21/bush_to_califor.php All comments for Bush to California: Choke On It en-us 2009 SFist_Brock Tue, 06 Jan 2009 14:09:24 -0800 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss brochtrup@gmail.com brochtrup@gmail.com 60 http://sfist.com/2007/12/21/bush_to_califor.php#comment-1258209 http://sfist.com/2007/12/21/bush_to_califor.php#comment-1258209 Comments Tue, 25 Dec 2007 22:34:52 -0800 <p>AB 1493 (Pavley) in the hizouse! The head of the federal EPA, appointed by Bush, an oil guy, doesn't want tailpipe emission standards? No! Nine other states have written legislation modeled after dear old Fran's bill and the federal EPA won't allow implementation for them, either. Is that willy-nilly I smell?</p> http://sfist.com/2007/12/21/bush_to_califor.php#comment-1256915 http://sfist.com/2007/12/21/bush_to_califor.php#comment-1256915 Comments Fri, 21 Dec 2007 19:21:58 -0800 <p>umm, just for factual accuracy, California hasn't been setting its own carbon dioxide limits since the 70's. California has had its own emission control laws regulating various pollutants -- these were allowed by the EPA because the air quality was so poor in the state. Regulating carbon dioxide emissions is new approach and required a different justification. There is a debate as to whether California's justification was sufficient under the EPA statutes, so there was likely to be a lawsuit either way the EPA ruled. And the EPA's ruling was hardly as "will-nilly" as described. </p> http://sfist.com/2007/12/21/bush_to_califor.php#comment-1256914 http://sfist.com/2007/12/21/bush_to_califor.php#comment-1256914 Comments Fri, 21 Dec 2007 19:21:45 -0800 <p>umm, just for factual accuracy, California hasn't been setting its own carbon dioxide limits since the 70's. California has had its own emission control laws regulating various pollutants -- these were allowed by the EPA because the air quality was so poor in the state. Regulating carbon dioxide emissions is new approach and required a different justification. There is a debate as to whether California's justification was sufficient under the EPA statutes, so there was likely to be a lawsuit either way the EPA ruled. And the EPA's ruling was hardly as "will-nilly" as described. </p> http://sfist.com/2007/12/21/bush_to_califor.php#comment-1256889 http://sfist.com/2007/12/21/bush_to_califor.php#comment-1256889 Comments Fri, 21 Dec 2007 17:44:47 -0800 <p>'08. '08. '08. Come this time next congressional cycle those fuckers are going to WISH California was the only state with those emission limits.</p> http://sfist.com/2007/12/21/bush_to_califor.php#comment-1256837 http://sfist.com/2007/12/21/bush_to_califor.php#comment-1256837 Comments Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:28:20 -0800 <p>Succession creeps ever closer. California uber alles!</p> http://sfist.com/2007/12/21/bush_to_califor.php#comment-1256793 http://sfist.com/2007/12/21/bush_to_califor.php#comment-1256793 Comments Fri, 21 Dec 2007 14:29:25 -0800 <p>Jerry Brown in the hizouse! </p>