Michigan is not the first state to pass such law; Missouri passed similar back in June, and other states have it in the works. The (Federal) EPA can not enforce broad regulation such as this without cooperation from state environmental agencies... the feds simply do not have the funding or manpower. The courts will not, can not, strike-down the Michigan (or Missouri) law that forbids state employees from enforcing certain Federal Regulation... there is no law requiring states to enforce them. The courts won't let Obama have it both ways. Remember?? He used the courts to
stop Arizona from
enforcing federal immigration law, so now it's impossible for the feds to use the court system to require states to enforce others... it-is-what-it-is.
Think about it, even though marijuana is a federal crime, Colorado state law has legalized it and the feds can't do cold owl squat about it (unless they wanna' send in the FBI to start making federal arrests... which the Colorado courts will toss out anyway). The states are under no obligation to enforce any federal law or regulation... it-is-what-it-is. If Michigan and Missouri choose to ignore the new wood stove regulations there ain't a damn thing the feds can do about it... unless a stove manufacturer in Michigan sends or takes their product into another state for the purpose of retail sale, then it falls under the "interstate commerce" clause of the Federal Constitution. But someone from another state is free to drive into Michigan, purchase a non-compliant stove, and haul it home (unless the home state has a law against bringing such a thing into the state)... but installing it may not be legal because of the EPA regs, if the home state is enforcing them.
The new "proposed" EPA regulations have absolutely nothing to do with burning trash and tires... it's a "sue and settle" scam, nothing more. There's only two ways the EPA can make or change regulations...
- To comply with Executive Order from the President. Sometimes that "order" may be initiated by the President alone, other times it may be initiated because Congress has passed an Act requiring the President to accomplish something and he chooses to use the EPA for that purpose.
- To settle a law suit if they can show "settling" will cost the tax payer less than fighting the suit.
In October 2013, seven states sued the EPA because the current wood stove regulations did not include wood-fired boilers. Within weeks the EPA had the new "proposed" regulations drafted (really... that fast??). Here's what happened, the EPA makes a deal with seven states... "you sue us, we'll give you regulation (plus a few more our tree-hugger friends want), then you drop the law suit." Of course, the fact that those seven states could have enacted their own laws and regulations is never questioned... 'cause, in reality, it ain't about the environment, it's about the power and money.
So... which seven states??
New York, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, Oregon, Rhode Island and Vermont.
The rest of us get the royal screwin'.
*
!#=/+.
who would have thought Boehner would have made it back in ....
