State, Federal Powers Collide

[flashl]

Source: WSJ

Democrats to Challenge Bush Administration On Pre-emptive Rulings

The Bush administration and congressional Democrats are heading for a clash over a question with major business and policy implications: When do federal rules trump state laws?

Moves in the past several months from agencies including the Food and Drug Administration, the Federal Railroad Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency could bolster the federal government's power at the expense of state statutes. The new initiatives, largely applauded by business interests, affect products including drugs, autos and passenger railcars.

One of the most high-profile of the clashes came last month, when the EPA said it would block California from becoming the first state to regulate cars' carbon-dioxide emissions.

...

The spate of new efforts that could pre-empt states' laws, which comes after several similar moves over the past few years, is revving up opponents. They include Democratic lawmakers, who hope to slow or stall the initiatives.

WSJ

Read more: http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB120183800345834495-lMyQjAxMDI4MDAxMTgwMzE4Wj.html

---

Federal use of National Guard is a great example of past state-federal collisions.

[ixion]

1. so, who's the defender of state's rights now? hmmmmm?

for years the GOP claimed the mantle of states rights defender. I guess that's pretty much gone down the tubes along with everything else, now that BushCo came to town.

[stillcool]

2. No states rights when it comes

to 'business interests'. They have one more year to finish us off.

One of the most high-profile of the clashes came last month, when the EPA said it would block California from becoming the first state to regulate cars' carbon-dioxide emissions.

In rejecting California's plan, the EPA effectively stopped more than a dozen states that have passed similar laws or signaled an intention to do so.
-----------------------------------------------------------
The FDA's new effort isn't directly related to the federal-state issues, but lawyers say it has important implications. On Jan. 16, the agency proposed a new rule that laid out relatively narrow conditions under which a drug company can make changes to a medication's label without the FDA's explicit approval. Plaintiffs and pharmaceutical-industry lawyers say the move would bolster drug-company defenses claiming the agency's label decisions pre-empt further obligations that might be imposed by states.
---------------------------

The Federal Railroad Administration has proposed a rule that would strengthen safety standards for commuter trains that includes language saying it would pre-empt efforts by states. Advocates in California have pressed for a state law that would go beyond the FRA's proposal. Democratic Reps. Jim Oberstar of Minnesota and Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, the respective chairmen of the House transportation and homeland security committees, have objected to the FRA's pre-emption language.

An NHTSA(National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) spokesman declined to comment. An FRA spokesman suggested that California might be able achieve its ends through other means, such as withholding state funds from commuter rail agencies that don't comply with stricter requirements.

[benld74]

3. Oh Sure, give lip service to states havings their owns rights UNTIL

it doesn't suit your intended overall agenda! G** how I hate these bastards

[NBachers]

4. Medicinal Marijuana

It's a big issue here in California, where feds have been busting pot clubs. Bay Area cities have been fairly decent in not cooperating with the feds, but the new fed tactic is threatening property owners with seizures. If you own a building where a pot club is doing business, the feds are pressuring you to evict the club or lose the building. Since the clubs are mostly small storefront operations, the rest of the building will go down with it. Isn't this the kind of thing that started the Revolutionary War?