Friday - November 16, 2007

sounds like judicial activism to me

Here’s the story

SAN FRANCISCO(AP)


A federal appeals court sharply rejected the Bush administration’s new pollution standards for most sport utility vehicles, pickup trucks and vans and ordered regulators Thursday to draft a new plan that’s tougher on auto emissions.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration failed to address why the so-called light trucks are allowed to pollute more than passenger cars and didn’t properly assess greenhouse gas emissions when it set new minimum miles-per-gallon requirements for models in 2008 to 2011.

The court also said the administration failed to include in the new rules heavier trucks driven as commuter vehicles, among several other deficiencies found.

Judge Betty Fletcher wrote that the administration “cannot put a thumb on the scale by undervaluing the benefits and overvaluing the costs of more stringent standards.”

Charles Miller, a Justice Department spokesman, said the administration was in the process of reviewing the decision. “We will consider all of our options,” he said.

California and 10 other states, two cities and four environmental groups sued the administration after it announced the new fuel economy standards last year.

“It’s a stunning rebuke to the Bush administration and its failed energy policy,” California Attorney General Jerry Brown said.

Jerry Brown? Isn’t that the same old pinko hippy who used to ... nevermind.

I do somewhat agree with what the court is trying to do. If we are to have vehicular mpg standards then they should apply to all vehicles. It seems to me that almost all SUVs and pickup trucks are used as personal, non-commercial, transportation. But is this the way to do it? Can’t our super-wonderful^tm legislators work this kind of thing out in advance? This story stinks of opportunistic Gotcha politics. Or should the whole thing be turned around, and let freedom and capitalism decide which vehicles to sell? There sure seems to be a market for gas sucking monster trucks these days. Wonder why?

The court ordered the White House to examine why it continues to consider light trucks differently than cars. Regulators made a distinction between cars and light trucks decades ago when most trucks were used for commercial purposes.

NHTSA had argued that it considered the intent of the manufacturer in making light trucks, rather than their actual highway use, in developing the new fuel standards.

Yeah , no kidding. Detroit really throws the BS with their “professional grade” ads, and all the other “work truck” ads that show their vehicles carrying tons of gravel up the muddy mountainsides. But the plain truth is that most of these things are never even driven on an unpaved road, much less through the outback, and spend their time schlepping suburban moms and their kids to soccer practice and the grocery store.

Along with California and Connecticut, plaintiffs in the lawsuit filed last year include Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, New York City, the District of Columbia and several environmental groups.

Wow, look at the plaintiffs. I give you less than one guess to pick the political party behind this lawsuit. That would be the party of Endless Complaint But No Actual Solutions, right?

Posted by Drew458     on 11/16/2007 at 01:30 PM   
Filed Under: • Miscellaneous •  
• Comments (11) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2008 Domain Owner