If state standards aren’t allowed and California wants tougher environmental standards on California land, but Texas doesn’t, you force a showdown, a loser, and simmering resentment for decades.
Federal standards are in the interest of all citizens, whether or not they frustrate some state politician or not shouldn't even count as an objection.
I don't care if the Texas government is happy, but I do care if the people in Texas are healthy. Maybe that's just me though.
First, I’m sure it’s hard to imagine, but California could lose said showdown and find themselves obstructed from protecting even only California. Second, it’s not just some lone politician that would care. The whole Roe v. Wade thing should have made clear that half of the country had been seething to overturn it for decades. Our whole system is built on consent of the governed; Federal mandate is therefore tricky if one large state is in overwhelming support of an issue while another is overwhelmingly opposed.
Comments
100% agree with the first sentence.
Federal standards are in the interest of all citizens, whether or not they frustrate some state politician or not shouldn't even count as an objection.
I don't care if the Texas government is happy, but I do care if the people in Texas are healthy. Maybe that's just me though.
First, I’m sure it’s hard to imagine, but California could lose said showdown and find themselves obstructed from protecting even only California. Second, it’s not just some lone politician that would care. The whole Roe v. Wade thing should have made clear that half of the country had been seething to overturn it for decades. Our whole system is built on consent of the governed; Federal mandate is therefore tricky if one large state is in overwhelming support of an issue while another is overwhelmingly opposed.