Federal preemption under Trump and the GOP?

Page 1 of 1 [ 7 posts ] 

beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,245

10 Jan 2017, 11:17 pm

It looks like Trump and the GOP Congress may attempt to preempt state laws battling climate change:

https://ww2.kqed.org/science/2017/01/10 ... n-climate/

If that's the case, then California's very strong regulations battling climate change will no longer have effect.

Other countries cannot expect the United States to willingly fight climate change in at least the next 4 years and must adjust their strategy accordingly.


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,245

10 Jan 2017, 11:19 pm

Hypocrite, if so (from the OP article):

Quote:
Trump’s nominee to lead the EPA, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, has repeatedly sued the agency, arguing that federal pollution rules violate state rights. Now he might lead a charge to limit the rights of states to enforce their own pollution rules to slow climate change.


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


feral botanist
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Jul 2016
Gender: Male
Posts: 881
Location: in the dry land

10 Jan 2017, 11:31 pm

There seems to be a definite switch between who does and does not support states rights.

Will this bring about the loss of unity that holds the nation together?



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,608
Location: the island of defective toy santas

10 Jan 2017, 11:41 pm

GOP hypocrites are in favor of states rights unless it goes against their own priorities - states' rights to oppress/disenfranchise disfavored classes of people? fine! states' rights to manage their own affairs if it interferes with GOP bigwig clients' profits? not fine. greed is NOT good, in fact it is a deadly sin.



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

11 Jan 2017, 2:19 am

It's a two way hypocrisy street, since Democrats aren't very respectful of state's rights when it comes to anything but drug policy and climate change, while the GOP is just the opposite.


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


feral botanist
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Jul 2016
Gender: Male
Posts: 881
Location: in the dry land

11 Jan 2017, 12:59 pm

Dox47 wrote:
It's a two way hypocrisy street, since Democrats aren't very respectful of state's rights when it comes to anything but drug policy and climate change, while the GOP is just the opposite.


And now it is the Republicans who are starting to question states rights concerning climate change, gender rights, and abortion.

Looks like there is enough hipocracy to go around.



AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

11 Jan 2017, 1:16 pm

Dox47 wrote:
It's a two way hypocrisy street, since Democrats aren't very respectful of state's rights when it comes to anything but drug policy and climate change, while the GOP is just the opposite.

Democrats also enjoyed several states' rights regarding marriage equality in the months and years leading up to the U.S. Supreme Court opinion in 2015. In fact, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts argued exactly that before federal courts. As I have said for years, the Constitution for the United States of America isn't a Chinese menu where one can pick a little of column A and a little of column B. The Constitution IS until it is amended lawfully under its own rules. Both major American political parties pick and choose instead of standing resolute for the whole document. "A plague a' both your houses!"


_________________
Diagnosed in 2015 with ASD Level 1 by the University of Utah Health Care Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinic using the ADOS-2 Module 4 assessment instrument [11/30] -- Screened in 2014 with ASD by using the University of Cambridge Autism Research Centre AQ (Adult) [43/50]; EQ-60 for adults [11/80]; FQ [43/135]; SQ (Adult) [130/150] self-reported screening inventories -- Assessed since 1978 with an estimated IQ [≈145] by several clinicians -- Contact on WrongPlanet.net by private message (PM)