« EPA on the Hot Seat: Wrap-Up and Reflection | Main | Prof. Adler and I Discuss the Standing Ruling in Mass. v. EPA »


Larry Fafarman

--All in all, this is a fairly modest piece of legislation, citing numerous findings (including the ongoing necessity of California's role as a "laboratory of emissions-control innnovations" and the rejection of relying on national fuel economy standards alone in Massachusetts v. EPA) to lead up to its conclusion that "it is the sense of Congress that the denial...is not supported by science, precedent, or applicable law." --

The problem is that this "laboratory of emissions-control innovations" has become too big, now consisting of California plus the 11 states that have adopted the California standards plus the 5 states that plan to adopt those standards, all together having over half of the US population. The original idea of the California waiver provision was to save money by using California alone as a relatively small "laboratory of emissions-control innovations," and that innovations that proved themselves in California would then be adopted at the national level. Another purpose of the waiver provision was that California, which had the worst air quality in the nation at the time of the introduction of this provision, would be the first to benefit from those innovations.

The comments to this entry are closed.