In his speech in Copenhagen Tuesday, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger applauded international leadership on climate change, but said that national or international agreements alone will not address the issue. He said that the "scientists, the capitalists and the activists" across the world have and will play an important role. And he talked about the job for subnational governments, like his own:
While national governments have been fighting over emission targets, subnational governments have been adopting their own targets and laws and policies.
...
In California, we are proceeding on renewable energy requirements and a cap and trade system for greenhouse gases. We are moving forward. As a matter of fact, we are making great progress. If hydro is included, we will get 45 percent of our energy from renewables in ten years from now and we are already at 27 percent.
We are proceeding on the world's first low carbon fuel standards and limiting greenhouse gas emissions from cars which, by the way, the Obama Administration has now just adopted. We are proceeding in a major way on green tech, no matter what happens in Washington or in Copenhagen.
I bring this all up as a reminder of the role of states here in the United States. The question: will federal climate change legislation, if and when it is passed, perhaps pre-empt states from taking some of these important steps Schwarzenegger spoke of?
We've talked about the good and the bad on this matter in some of the proposals so far (on Waxman-Markey, see William Buzbee, Kirsten Engel, and Alice Kaswan; on Boxer-Kerry, see Buzbee).
Just last week, Senators Graham, Kerry, and Lieberman lamented what they said was a "patchwork of inconsistent state and regional regulations." Quite a contrast to how Schwarzenegger put it. We'll be keeping tabs on the matter in the coming months.
Some of the most important ways to reduce energy consumption are uniquely within the province of state and local governments – such as zoning, regulation of electric utilities, and building codes. These governments have both expertise and legal authorities that the federal government doesn't, and in many cases they have proven results in lowering emissions.
For a bunch more on the issue, see our white paper from last year, Cooperative Federalism and Climate Change: Why Federal, State, and Local Governments Must Continue to Partner.
Showing 2,818 results
Ben Somberg | December 16, 2009
In his speech in Copenhagen Tuesday, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger applauded international leadership on climate change, but said that national or international agreements alone will not address the issue. He said that the “scientists, the capitalists and the activists” across the world have and will play an important role. And he talked about the job […]
Victor Flatt | December 16, 2009
There are two separate meetings going on here in Copenhagen, really. The one that everyone is focused on is the official negotiations between the countries to reach a new binding agreement on climate change (or extend Kyoto in some form). The other “meeting” is the interaction of the observer organizations inside and outside of the […]
Sidney A. Shapiro | December 15, 2009
The Concord Monitor has identified a New Hampshire factory (Franklin Non-Ferrous Foundry) that has been the subject of previous OSHA investigations and fines, yet continues to expose its workers to dangerous conditions. OSHA’s most recent fine, $250,000, came after the agency found that a worker had high levels of lead in his blood. The newspaper […]
David Hunter | December 15, 2009
Although virtually all of the attention regarding Copenhagen in the United States focuses on mitigation targets, in the developing world a primary focus of any environmental agreement is on the scale, sources and governance of any financial resources being made available. This is particularly true in Copenhagen, where the Global South has demanded upwards of […]
Ben Somberg | December 14, 2009
In this morning’s “Underused Drilling Practices Could Avoid Pollution,” ProPublica has more important reporting on hydraulic fracturing, the process of injecting chemicals at high pressure under deep rock to extract natural gas. Reports Abrahm Lustgarten: Energy companies have figured out how to drill wells with fewer toxic chemicals, enclose wastewater so it can’t contaminate streams […]
Holly Doremus | December 12, 2009
This posting is reprinted, by permission from Legal Planet. The Fish and Wildlife Service yesterday announced some very good news — the brown pelican will soon be removed from the list of endangered and threatened species. This enormous fish-eating bird has been protected since 1970, when it was included on the very first list of […]
James Goodwin | December 12, 2009
importholder
Daniel Farber | December 12, 2009
Cross-posted from Legal Planet. Cost-benefit analysis has become a ubiquitous part of regulation, enforced by the Office of Management and Budget. A weak cost-benefit analysis means that the regulation gets kicked back to the agency. Yet there is no statute that provides for this; it’s entirely a matter of Presidential dictate. And reliance on cost-benefit […]
Holly Doremus | December 12, 2009
This posting is reprinted, by permission from Legal Planet. The Fish and Wildlife Service yesterday announced some very good news — the brown pelican will soon be removed from the list of endangered and threatened species. This enormous fish-eating bird has been protected since 1970, when it was included on the very first list of […]