States
Tie Their Own Hands with "No More Stringent" Laws |
It's not news
that the federal government is rolling back environmental protections
laws. The Bush administration has been doing it since day one -- whether
it's drilling for oil and gas on protected lands, gutting the Clean
Air Act, or cutting forests to save them, they've tried it. They're
weakening the laws and rules that protect our environment left and
right. And, across the country, states are realizing that if they
want a healthy environment, they're going to have to protect it themselves.
But some states can't do that. About one-third of the states have
statutory provisions that limit the ability of their regulatory agencies
to adopt environmental regulations that are more stringent than federal
ones. These provisions, known as "no more stringent" laws,
vary in what they cover. In some states (MS, KY, NC, IA and OR) the
provision is limited to certain aspects of the Clean Water Act. In
others, (ME, FL, PA, WI, UT, IN and OH) it requires a more extensive
review for proposed state regulations that go beyond federal ones.
Montana requires a public hearing and detailed study before rules
"more stringent than the comparable federal regulations or guidelines"
can be put in place. Other states (e.g., SD and ID) outright prohibit
any rules that go beyond federal regulations that cover "an essentially
similar subject or issue," even if the federal program is voluntary,
or only covers a certain geographic area. Missouri recently tried
to pass an even more egregious provision, HB215, which would have
prohibited agencies from regulating anything the federal government
doesn't. These provisions endanger the health of both citizens and
the environment. In a time when federal environmental protections
are disappearing, states should be free to do what's right, not hindered
by a "no more stringent" law. |
|