Are there any rational beings left in California?

Other than Judge Lawrence J. O’Neill that is.  Let me, as they say, begin at the beginning.

Two years ago California passed rules designed to curb global climate whatever. 

The rules also assign imported fuels a higher ‘carbon intensity’ score, meaning suppliers that use them could be forced to buy credits to comply with the rules.

There are two “translations” necessary here.

First, any supplier of fuel in California, whether that fuel be gasoline or ethanol, could be compelled to purchase “credits” from the state if that fuel came from some place other than California..  Of course, California doesn’t make a whole lot of fuel, so, pretty much any fuel supplied by a business to consumers in California is subject to this rule.

And, second, “buy credits” is secret code for tax.

California said [the rule was] justified because suppliers burn fuel and emit carbon when they transport fuels into the state.

Of course, you do the same thing when you drive into California with a full tank of gas and breath.  But, luckily, under California law, you do not have to buy “credits” to do so.

And, thanks to Judge O’Neill’s ruling last week, no one will have to buy “credits” to enter the Golden State. 

The judge found the California rules in violation of the United States Constitution…specifically, the interstate commerce clause… Article I, Section 8. 

The easiest way to explain this is that California sought to impose a tax on fuel  brought into California from another state.  Could, for example, Florida impose a “tax” on oranges brought into Florida from California?  Or, Connecticut impose a tax on nutmeg brought into Connecticut from Indiana?  Of course not.

That is the beauty of our Constitution. 

Someone in California should actually read it.


21 replies
  1. Shared Sacrifice
    Shared Sacrifice says:

    If I understand the carbon credit scam, we purchase credits and the money filters down to jungle dwelling people in exchange for their not deforesting and developing their pristine jungle utopias.??? But, if you give them money- aren’t they going to cut down trees, build homes, and buy vehicles.? Sounds like another brilliant scheme for bankrupting America!

  2. JBS
    JBS says:

    The carbon credit scheme, a true scam, evolved out of the (O.K. groan) sustainable development goal of the U.N. The United States is signed-up for this courtesy of Bush (41). The goal of SD is to make use of fossil fuel unattractive, i.e. expensive. The U.N. directive is that no one should be better off than anyone else, so getting you to stop burning fossil fuel will somehow benefit a goat herder in the Sudan who is burning camel exhaust for her cooking fire. (Hmmm, isn’t that fire emitting carbon?)
    That California is trying to capitalize from this is just, well, very left-coast. California has massive welfare entitlements, illegal “citizens” to the max and all of the problems of other states only writ larger. Thus, trying to eek out some extra tax, err, credit money is the California way.

    Shared Sacrifice has hit on one of the snags in the SD Plan, namely that most developing people want to have modern conveniences. Look what is happening in China as people’s income grows. Competition for consumer goods, modern apartments, cars, etc., and the attendant pollution.
    While the Constitution may bar California from selling credits, is the DOJ or another alphabet agency actually stopping…

  3. sammy22
    sammy22 says:

    ?CA has an air pollution problem, and has had for decades. The state has been trying to reduce emissions. How is this an issue that offends pristine New England, not to mention FL?

    • Dimsdale
      Dimsdale says:

      One way is that lazy legislators (in MA, anyway), force their citizens, who are not laboring under the same pollution situation as CA, to buy cars that comply with CA emissions rules.? Less power, more fuel consumption, restricted commerce (I can’t register a car that is emissions qualified for the bulk of the country in MA).

  4. Lynn
    Lynn says:

    Sammy, agreed to the pollution problem. However, this is a revenue producing move, that was thwarted. It doesn’t offend me in the least, I laugh at the Californians that don’t understand budgets and have to feed the beast.? It must be the Hollywood contingent that can produce such innovative methods of taxes err credits (thanks JBS).?

  5. RoBrDona
    RoBrDona says:

    Agree. This is not about whether you believe in the discredited garbage science of “global warming” or not. (I would be happy to tell you how I really feel…) Feel free to visit China if you want to learn about REAL pollution. It is about endless taxation in a variety of guises that is steadily killing America.? Carbon “credits” are a particularly virulent form.

    • Eric
      Eric says:

      Sure thing, as long as those decisions don’t have national consequences. ?Dimsdale has a good point in that CA State emission standards actually do affect all of us. ?And if you’re living in Connecticut you know it’s a sure bet that anything that happens in California is going to happen here next. ?Liberal legislators seem to make the most stupid laws for equally stupid reasons (i.e: “global warming” hijacking of our collective wallets). ??

    • Tim-in-Alabama
      Tim-in-Alabama says:

      “I am in favor of letting Californians decide how they want to make decisions for themselves,” and in opposition to everything SOS posts.

    • sammy22
      sammy22 says:

      A Federal Judge issued the ruling, and so what, I still am in favor of Californians deciding for themselves (even if a judge differs).

      • Dimsdale
        Dimsdale says:

        Then they should appeal the decision to a higher court, or pass one of those ballot propositions.

  6. Lynn
    Lynn says:

    Holy Cow Sammy, are you saying the citizens of California are above the law? Then I guess that Arizona can do what they want with their borders and handling immigration. States rights = states rights. Nah that’s racist!

  7. Plainvillian
    Plainvillian says:

    “It’s a scientific fact that if you stay in California you lose one point of your IQ every year.” – my favorite quote from Truman Capote, who had lots of experience dealing with Californians.

    • Dimsdale
      Dimsdale says:

      The exception proving the rule (see Murphy below).? You don’t mention Maxine Waters, Pelosi, Feinstein, Loretta Sanchez, Hollyweird, Barbara Boxer,? Arianna Huffington, Gray Davis etc. (just to name a few off the top of my head) for some reason.?? Why not?

  8. Murphy
    Murphy says:

    Actually Illinois gave us Reagan, He didn’t move to the wrong coast until he was 26. Which back then was an adult not a child like today.
    California’s pollution problem comes from them leveling everything west of the San Berndardino mountains and cramming in too way to many people. The mountains then trap everything that those masses expel creating the lovely orange sky. ?

    • Dimsdale
      Dimsdale says:

      Exactly!? The weather is mostly nice: ride bikes and take public transportation!
      I am so tired of waiting for “the big one”….

Comments are closed.